User talk:Mar4d/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mar4d. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

A beer for you!

Hi, I'm sick of our edit wars and useless debates, lets be constructive. Let's pledge that we will not involve in debate unless it is very very important and controversial subject. Wikipedia is not a battlefield and Wikipedia is not about "winning". Cheers.!! Human3015 talk • 12:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your gesture. But for this to work, you really need to restrain yourself from following me to articles, which has been happening too frequently in recent times. You have to avoid turning up and edit warring at articles which I have edited. If you can maintain this healthy distance, then hopefully we will not have to see too much of each other in conflict situations. Mar4d (talk) 13:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

You are still accusing me of following you? You are saying "recent times", I have came to Wikipedia in "recent times" itself. I have joined wikipedia just 4 months ago and became active since only 1.5-2 months, my more than 80% edits came in just last 2 months. I'm member of Wikiproject Pakistan since last 1.5 months when I became active on Wikipedia see here. Its just recently that I added that tag on my user page. I was always interested in Pakistan related pages, you have more than 50000 edits so probably you have edited all major Pakistan related pages.

Anyway, main thing we can do to avoid conflict and time consuming useless debates is to avoid POV negative editing. I have no negative POV for Pakistan, I can show you my so many positive editing on Pakistan related pages, I have reverted many vandalisms abusing Pakistan's name, reverted many edits from "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir" to "Pakistan administered Kashmir", given many contribution for Tourism related pages of Pakistan and I will keep on doing it, its just start. But you do have negative POV for India. I never delete well sourced anti-India matter. But having negative POV for specific country or religion will always bring debates. I expect from you too to leave negative POV regarding India and do healthy editing, which will avoid useless time consuming debates. Anyway, have good faith, cheers. Human3015 talk • 16:53, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not accusing (that word has a different meaning). I'm just stating the obvious. I have a list of around a dozen articles I edited recently, where you showed up immediately after me (not after a gap, which would make your words true), often just to revert my edits, opening up content disputes. And all these are articles you've never edited before. You can deny it, but it doesn't change my impression and if you don't believe me, the article histories show it. If you can avoid this type of behaviour, there would not be disputes in the first place. Mar4d (talk) 17:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

ITN credit

On 9 May 2015, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2015 Pakistan Army Mil Mi-17 crash, which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

ThaddeusB (talk) 04:04, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

List of British Pakistanis

Hi. Thanks for your help regardless on what happened to my account.

There are many unlinked names on the list of British Pakistanis, including MPs, mayors and many others. Can you create articles on some of them, especially those are very notable? Just a sentence would for each of them would OK. Thank you. -- $AHLM13$ talk 19:05, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I often create articles whenever I get time. But anyway, if you would like to take the initiative and start some of them, I would definitely like to pitch in and help where I can. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 04:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

British Kashmiri listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect British Kashmiri. Since you had some involvement with the British Kashmiri redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Human3015 Say Hey!! • 19:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Kashif Siddiqi, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Giant Snowman 12:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Mass unreferenced additions in violation of WP:BLP. Giant Snowman 12:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page. Please keep the discussion at one place. It does not violate BLP as these players have represented the Pakistan national football team at the international level. To be eligible to represent a national side as per FIFA eligibility rules, you need to be a citizen of the country or have a "clear connection" to the country. In the case of these players, who were all foreign citizens, this is achieved via their Pakistani heritage. Therefore, they hold citizenship of Pakistan and are deemed eligible to play for the country. For example, Zesh Rehman, who is British, plays for Pakistan and has a Pakistani passport [1]. The case holds true for all players. Hence, the category addition does not violate BLP. Hope this clears it up. Mar4d (talk) 12:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You'll need a reference for each one. If I had a Pakistani great-grandfather, I might object to someone labelling me as a Pakistani citizen. --Dweller (talk) 12:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

But we are talking about foreign-born football players here who played for Pakistan. It is not possible to play for Pakistan without nationality. Hence, the eligibility of these players to play for Pakistan is established through their Pakistani heritage. When they were born, they were not Pakistani citizens. Mar4d (talk) 12:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't matter - as Dweller stated we need to verify with reliable sources that these living people fit in the relevant category. Giant Snowman 17:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

My account is hacked

Dear Mar and User:Ravensfire, this is my actual second account that I created. User:1137AHFA and others are not me, they are just spoiling your trust on me. I ask User:Mike V and other checkusers if they can proof that those users are not me. Trust me. Thanks. --Ahlm85 (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

1) It is a violation of WP:SOCK for you to create any new account until your original account is blocked. You need to contact the admins by email to resolve your case. 2) I'm still not convinced because there are too many strange things happening. Your account was used for vandalism twice. Only you are supposed to have access to your account. You've not explained how it is possible that someone broke into your account. Why should anyone believe what you are saying? (This is a rhetorical question; not necessarily from me personally, but definitely on the minds of others). Mar4d (talk) 14:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: This is really starting to convince me that something is fishy. There's been a spate of new sock accounts and proxy IPs acting as AHLM13. The new accounts all have one thing in common, and that is tossing out racial and religious slurs, the proficiency of English, random vandalism and other characteristics that seem very un-AHLM13. And then AHLM13 denying everything. I'm not saying AHLM13 is a perfect editor, but these sort of things do seem to indicate something fishy. AHLM13 is Pakistani, and this edit was also very strange. AHLM13 also accused a Bengali editor of hacking his account, and this IP not only speaks Bengali and is (apparently) tossing out uncivil language, but also bears uncanny resemblance to the vandal which took over AHLM's account and other recent socks. I'd say it would be reasonable to assume that there's suspicious things happening behind the computer screens and that more than one character is involved in this mess. Mar4d (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like someone needs to run a CU, and see what is going on with the IP history of AHLM's account. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:47, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Lukeno94: Running a CU would be a good idea, but I would say that even CU results should be treated with discretion. These new socks and IPs posing as AHLM13 are operating from proxies. One was from Singapore, another from Canada, and this one's from India. We also need to be open to the possibility (I emphasise that word) that we could be dealing with a very skillful hacker, given the assumption that AHLM13's account could have been hacked and compromised. This is because an admin at ANI said checkuser suggested the vandalism from his account happened from his own computer. There is a wild possibility that AHLM's PC got hacked and is remotely controlled from someone who could be sitting in another part of the globe, who broke into his account. It sounds wild, but remote controlling a PC is possible, and the behavioural evidence implicated here is just strange. Mar4d (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Very true, but I'm more thinking along the lines of where the AHLM13 account originally edited from. If it was Pakistan all the way through until the weirdness started, but there's some random Bengalese IPs in there - or if some of the socks ping back to Bengal - then it may go some way to exonerating AHLM13. My personal advice to them, if they are telling the truth, is to go through WP:CLEANSTART, after backing up and reformatting their computer if possible - because who knows what else the hacker may be doing on there. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Agree that there's something odd here, but there was a CU run after the first incident which showed that the edits came from AHLM13's computer (or one of his normal computers). In other words, AHLM13's Wikipedia account was not hacked remotely. At worst, they have more significant issues in that their main computer has been hacked and they haven't dealt with that. At best, there is some deception happening here from AHLM13.

At this point, the best option is for us to point AHLM13 to what they've been told on their talk page - they need to use the UTRS. We need to consistently point them to this as we don't have the knowledge and tools to help with this. It is very clear that their account is WP:COMPROMISED (in a best case) and that mean certain things WILL happen. The account will almost certainly never be unblocked. And until AHLM13 gets their security issues resolved and convinces admins and CU's that they have fixed those problems, any new accounts they create will be blocked as socks of a compromised account. AHLM13's general tone and nature can make this difficult. They need to resolve this through UTRS which is an e-mail based system with knowledgeable admins and CU's that have the tools needed for this. I think there is at least one serial troll who's taking advantage of this situation, but AHLM13's past behavior (see the insults) really hurts him here and the continuous claims that a specific editor here hacked them is both a personal attack and totally unwarranted. That alone is probably enough to cause admins to reject an unblock request. That needs to stop. Ravensfire (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Ravensfire, User:Mar4d, User:Lukeno94, thanks a lot. You undestood something. MAR4D, you are right why should everyone believe to me? But i am alone, i do not know what to do. I contacted many admins via email or even appealed block via email, but they need a proof that I am AHLM13. Even RAvensfire is right, once it can happen that a hacker log in into my account, but twice not. But the truth is that i do not what is going there. ONE THING THAT IS TRUE THAT SINCE I VOTED AND COMMENTED IN THIS ARTICLE "TALK:BENGALI PEOPLE", from that time sockpuppet UNDERT... or something like that, started to vandalize everyone's accounts, including 115ash, babitaroora (which i do not now who is) and other south asia. Pleas ehelp me. Thanks to everybody. 78.149.127.141 (talk) 19:51, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have found some evidence which shows that AHLM13 and Undertrialryryr could be innocent only for their latest misdeeds. I am not asking for their unblock as both are bad faith editors, but some people are taking advantage of their murky past. I don't like both of them but comparing the previous edits of AHLM13 and ZORDANLIGHTER; they can't make such extremely offensive comments about Babitaarora and Anna Frodesiak. The above comment is made by AHLM13 as the standard of English proves it. Anyone interested.? C E (talk) 09:12, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the above IP is AHLM. But I can say with a high level of accuracy that the other troll IPs/sock accounts are not. I would agree that AHLM is not the perfect example of a good editor and may have attitude issues. But that is something that could also improve over time. He needs to be instructed and guided firmly. There's a high possibility that his account is compromised and he's been shut out for the wrong reason (not that it excuses his other actions). I have been long enough on Wikipedia to see newby editors maturing over time and later becoming very constructive (and even an asset) to Wikipedia, in their areas of interest. That is why I would be willing to lend some good faith to AHLM. But before that, AHLM has to 1) sort out the behaviour issues; and 2) use the correct procedure and that is already specified. He also needs to sort out the security-related issues with his account and computer if someone else is messing around. Mar4d (talk) 09:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

If you notice, there are some other weird things happening which makes my old doubt true but not just AHLM13, even Undertrialyr could have been fixed by an expert.C E (talk) 10:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

A very clear note to this IP: Whoever you are and whatever you do, you meanwhile need to stop your use of proxies, incessant trolling and deception, and posting nonsensical things on people's talk pages while posing as AHLM13. Wikipedia is not your personal playground. It is quite clear you have a thing or two with AHLM13, and you're here on an agenda. Whoever you are, and using whatever illegal means you've hacked into someone's account, you're going to be exposed and your trolling will not be allowed to continue. Also, please stay away from my talk page. Mar4d (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

MARD i am writing this in a hurry. whoever he is, he is one of those guys with whom we had problems in Bengali people talk page. And his Ips are proxies with various locations, a bit different than those singapore, canada, kolkata proxies which showed a single location. Anyway take a look at the editing of suspected undertrial socks which came after this কসমিক এম্পারার. The editing is different from undertrial and blackwizard, those accounts opened in 2013. And i want to tell the ip troll who commented in my talk page. i know you will comment here again. You are not that clever.

And someone is logging me off, even if i am signing in. I think my account is going to be hacked. So if today or tomorrow i post offensive comments,. it's not me. C E (talk) 11:25, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

You are right. This in particular (account was blocked as a sock of Undertrial) is the most convincing evidence that there is one person who is calling the shots. We need to revisit whether all the accounts blocked as socks of AHLM and Undertrial are really those two users. Also, this discussion needs to be brought to the notice of admins. I'm wondering if ANI would be the correct venue. Mar4d (talk) 11:41, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@CosmicEmperor:And btw, this is strange but my account was logged out once today while I was in the middle of editing an article. I don't recall clicking the log out button, nor do I see how the session would have expired for the account to automatically log out. I might be paranoid, but just to be extra sure, I've changed my account password. Maybe you should do the same. Mar4d (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@AsceticRose: Nafsadh has confirmed his account was going to be hacked here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mike_V&diff=prev&oldid=662795781.

And also read what i wrote here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Vanjagenije#Original_sockmaster C E (talk) 06:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. This indeed confirms that there's weird things happening and we're not imagining it. Thankfully, none of us have been hacked as of yet. All the involved editors just need to stay alert and look out for anything strange, and they should be fine. The only thing I want at ANI is some mechanism on how to deal with these future socks and proxies, where and who to report them to for prompt action, and also CU results clarifying that the socks tagged under AHLM13 and Undertrial are actually those of the impersonator. Mar4d (talk) 09:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

CosmicEmperor, you said on ANI that when you edited the page Baby (2015 film), i came across a new user Aceticrpose mard aurat. But you were the only one who welcomed the user almost immediately after the account was created. Why did you do this when you clearly saw that the account is a fake one impersonating my one? However, thanks for your listing of socks at ANI page. You have done a nice job. I also received a threat here. Yes, we have to remain alert. We need to periodically change our password and clear the cookies. Try to set a very strong password.

I strongly hope no more account from ours will be a victim of hacking. I strongly hope God will protect us from this problem-user, and will give him guidance. -AsceticRosé 16:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@AsceticRose: When i checked the contributions of others I saw that they have created so many User:talk pages by becoming the first person to edit the talkpage of new user. So, I gave welcome message to create that page. Then the number of talk pages that i created will increase. I am younger than most WP editors. I can't behave like 30+ people.C E (talk) 16:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately I will not get credit of creating that page, as he was the first one to edit that page.Actually when i was checking the revision history of Baby , due to Twinkle(I have just started using it for few weeks) ,I saw a orange/red message of welcome new user. So I clicked the welcome sign.I was in a hurry and posted welcome message, i thought i created a user:talk page and I am the first one to edit the page. When i saw the page, it was blank. But now i checked that there are edit history before my edit.C E (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I just suddenly automatically logged out when I was writing this reply. After reading Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Constantly_being_logged_out, it seems that wikipedia is experiencing a technical problem regarding this logging outs. So CosmicEmperor and Mar4d and my logging outs may be the same issue, and it is somewhat a relief from the concern of a hacker-action. Still, we are not totally sure. So, remain alert.

Ok CE, I'm assuming good faith here. Because of your hasty welcoming, I even thought that you created that fake account. And I'm also young. Wishing everyone happy editing. -AsceticRosé 16:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Yup, just had a look at the Village pump. Looks like a technical glitch, so no need to freak out I suppose (yet) :p As far as the troll is concerned, I reckon we should all just take a step back now and resort to the most useful tactic WP:DENY. If there's further disruption, we'll continue bringing it to the notice of admins. Just keep reverting and reporting. No need to discuss. Eventually, even the troll will get bored of it. Mar4d (talk) 16:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

This - best advice given here. Probably annoying for a week or two, then so long as they aren't getting any reaction from people, it will slow and stop. Ravensfire (talk) 17:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Two more advices to all: 1. always use secure connection (from preference tab, check the box Always use a secure connection when logged in if you haven't done yet). 2. Never click any external link if you are provided any; that may install kealogger/malware. -AsceticRosé 04:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

@HACKER, We do not approve of Sock Puppetry here in Wikipedia because of your reasons: "Christians fighting off Pakistans". No, that isn't allowed. Even if you use VPNS to hide your identity and change your IPs, we will still block you regarding your purpose whatsoever. We will still find you. You cannot hide from us, and also, trying to humiliate others with your language cannot change anything. This IS Wikipedia, it's members has good-faith. Civility on others, we tend to create a peaceful environment and an encyclopedia. Not a flame-war about religions. Everyone has a perspective that they can use for their will, and threatening them won't change a thing. You must stop, also stop these hacking threats on others. Whoever does the good-faith will win otherwise. Either way, you must stop this, this isn't gonna get you anywhere more higher than anyone here, and you will not have a point regarding your own opinion. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a chat for humiliation and unnecessary threats. CryOCed (talk) 22:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

:: CryOCed your account is very new.C E (talk) 04:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

@User:CosmicEmperor Yes, I am new actually, I've edited other Wikias in the past, but I find Wikipedia not that hard, especially with parameters. CryOCed (talk) 14:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi to everyone and the new User:CryOCed. I am ahlm13. Unfortunately I am still blocked and alone. Dear CryOCed, were you talking with me or the hacker? "Christians fighting off Pakistans". What does this mean? Whick sockpuppetry are you talking about?When do I hyde myself?So far I created only one new account, which is ahlm85 and I always have this ip and another Ip, that's it. Also, which my own language are you talking about? Please before saying anything, try to research on everything. Those are vandals and sockpuppets of BengaliHindu or someone else. Everyone knows that I am innocent. You will understand this. ALSO PLEASE EVERYONE TRY TO VOTE HERE.

Anyway, a quick hello and thanks again to everyone who tried to help me. See you!! 78.145.24.185 (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

That was meant for the hacker, 78.145.24.185, not you, Did I offend you or anything? I apologize if I did. ~CedricK (Talk to me!) 11:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry my friend User:CryOCed, I misunderstood you, I apologise. 78.145.29.224 (talk) 13:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Films directed by Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy

Category:Films directed by Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Umais Bin Sajjad (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Republic of Khalistan listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Republic of Khalistan. Since you had some involvement with the Republic of Khalistan redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Human3015 Say Hey!! • 19:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

One messed up topic area

Just FYI. This is one messed up topic area; Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OccultZone. Looks like the likes of me can never keep their hands clean (well this time my blocklog didn't get anything in it, so that's an improvement in dealing with sockers). Hope this also adds to the administrators' learning curve and realize perhaps I was "casting aspirations" from my then recent experience of another similar case. So many volunteer hours wasted on this that could have gotten much improvement, FACs and likes in the topic area we were planning (I guess cheers for the 1 DYK we got through inspite of it). --lTopGunl (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Like the saying goes, those who play with fire are bound to get burnt. I think this whole matter was a little more than just WP:AGF and naivety on the part of everyone. It's yet another striking example of all the unknown that goes on beyond our perception, and where we never really manage to read deep between the lines, despite the obvious being out in the open. I suppose we can just move on... and also keep an eye open for the rest of the sh*tload that happens.. as much as possible :) Mar4d (talk) 18:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

That, I agree with. Time to move to other articles that needed much attention. --lTopGunl (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

		The Purple Barnstar
		So, I guess this is well deserved, for staying resolute and standing up for NPOV in face of undue hardship and incessant harassment by long term disruptive sockpuppets like DS, OZ et al. lTopGunl (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Need your comments

Sir, your comments required on Talk:Mukti_Bahini#recent_additions PakSol (talk) 18:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Baluchis

Salam. I strong recommend to move Baloch people to "Baluchis", and Balochi language to "Baluchi language". "Baluchis" (and "Baluchi language") appears to be far more common in usage as per Google Ngram. Khestwol (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

It would be better to have an RFC on this. I don't think Baloch people should be moved to plural, because the word Baloch does not have any linguistically correct plural. Usually, the word Baloch is used in plural too. As for the spelling, I am not sure and it would be better to seek third opinion on it. In most Pakistani official usages for example, the preferred spelling is 'Balochistan' over 'Baluchistan', and Wikipedia favours the common spelling first. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 08:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I think this Google Ngram is clear on "Baluchis" being the WP:COMMONNAME. The plural "Baluchis" is more common, not only than the current title "Baloch people", but even the singular term "Baloch". Plus, "Baluchis" is totally unambiguous, so I see no problem with moving to "Baluchis". Khestwol (talk) 08:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:Samee

One Vandal namely User:Samee nominated article namely Rehmat Aziz for deletion. After consensus the decision was strong keep. Now the Vandal Samee removed all content from article Rehmat Aziz, deleted all references, all photos, all sources, all external links for his personal enmity with the renowned personality Rehmat Aziz. It is pertinent to mention here that he is the confirmed vandal in urdu wikipedia and the administrator of urdu wikipedia revoked his admin rights due to his vandalism in Urdu Wikipedia and his username has been banned. He is a confirmed sock puppet of User:Farhad Uddin, User:Deepak Chitrali and User:Najaf ali bhayo and they have moved article Rehmat Aziz Chitrali to Rehmat Aziz without any reason. The three users are the same person. User:Samee has been blocked for his vandalism by the administrator of Urdu wiki. Please blockUser:Samee and remove his adminship access and block him for abuse of admin access. I don't think he is qualified for admin or any access in Wikipedia. Please revert all his edits done by the vandalUser:Samee and restore all article to their original position--Abdulqayyumfsc (talk) 13:32, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

IP 82.11.33.86

Hello. I noticed that you issued a level-4 warning for genre warring ({{uw-genre4}}) to the IP, but when I took a quick look at their contributions I couldn't see any edits at all of that type among them, so what edits were you referring to? Thomas.W ^talk 19:34, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Aah, must've jumped the gun with Twinkle. It was meant to be an edit-war warning. Thanks for the notification. Mar4d (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

There's a very big difference between a 3RR-warning and a level-4-warning for anything. And they're not even on the same tab in Twinkle, so there's no way anyone can accidentally click on {{uw-genre4}} instead of {{uw-3rr}}... Thomas.W ^talk 19:55, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, they're on different tabs. Which is how I missed it. The genre template located under behaviour on articles says "frequent or mass changes to genres without consensus". I missed the genre part. The error is regretted. I'll use the 3RR template next time. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

On a side note, I'm not a big fan of Twinkling users, but when a user simply does not want to listen to you and is bent upon pushing in their perspective, as well as filing bogus reports at WP:AN3, it can be easy to get caught up in the mess. So I'd suggest it would be better to deescalate for the moment instead of firing shots all over. The IP was ruthless with quite a few editors and across many articles, as is evident. I was not involved with the IP until the noticeboard comment issue, but having reviewed the mess, I will be monitoring all edits now. Mar4d (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Non-muslims listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Non-muslims. Since you had some involvement with the Non-muslims redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Hello, this is to show willingness to collaborate and appreciation to your work and efforts, let me know if you need any help anytime. Uaearthub (talk) 09:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

--Tag Teaming (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Note I have removed this section from ANI due to it being posted through the inappropriate use of an alternate account. Whoever "Tag Teaming" is can use their regular account to make such posts. Chillum 04:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Another Indian sock infestation

Hey Mar4d I know you dont know me but you have dealt with allot of these Indian pov socks and sadly there at it again this time tag teaming [2] I understand how hard it is to control this pov as there is a small army of Indian pov pushers pumped out every other week 1.2 billion after all keep strong the chips are stacked against you as your a muslim/pakistani user and the admins will naturally side with the majority Indian pov users but keep fighting to keep this wikipedia neutral friend I have tried my best but look at my talk page they will always blame us and try to get you banned. Best wishes. Zadon19 (talk) 13:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Kashmir conflict

Hello Mard4d please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Kashmir_conflict. May be you as an volunteer can give your valuable input to all of us to resolve a dispute.39.47.101.1 (talk) 19:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Abbas Ali Khan (singer)

Hello!
You're requested to participate in discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abbas Ali Khan (singer)._Musa ^{^Talk} 04:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

British Mirpuri

Regarding your latest "move", better you move page to British Mirpuris in consistency with British Pakistanis. It should be plural. I tried to move but its not working as redirect already exists. We can copy paste all article to British Mirpuris and can make British Mirpuri as redirect. --Human3015 knock knock • 17:29, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

This is something that would need to be discussed on the talk page. I am personally not sure why British Pakistanis is in plural, unlike British Indian or British Bangladeshi. It should be in singular form for consistency, so a page move there might be needed. Regarding copy-pasting, please refer to the copyright measures listed in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Mar4d (talk) 17:47, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

abuse of rollback

Your this edit at Siachen conflict showed that you abused rollback. Kindly read WP:Rollback for guidelines. You used rollback for removing references and restoring "citation needed" tag, it was not vandalism to use rollback for that. Rollback is only for obvious vandalism. Hope you will take care in future. Thank you. --Human3015 knock knock • 16:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

No, I did not "abuse" rollback, as: 1) I was reverting a disruptive and banned sock under the WP:ARBIPA topic area; 2) I did not "remove references and restore a citation needed tag", as indicated, I was reverting edits of the said user; 3) if a lack of edit summary made it look confusing, then Twinkle is preferable, but it's a grey area because a sock is a sock. Mar4d (talk) 13:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Our one fellow editor is topic banned for 6 months for "reverting socks". There was an argument that even if edits are done by socks still we should go for merit of the edit instead of blanket revert. Discretionary sanctions are also applied on you and me too, not only on socks. The edit you reverted was not vandalism, that sock didn't add any new info or fact to infobox, he just added citations where "citation needed" tag was placed. These days you are busy in restoring "pre-sock better version" or "procedural revert" etc, but do take care that the version you are restoring should really have better quality than earlier version. --Human3015 knock knock • 19:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'm not going to comment on roll-back since I haven't seen it, but do be careful when reverting, Top Gun was topic-banned for six months for blindly reverting to "pre-sock" versions of articles. Please read what the blocking admin says in the link I provided. Every editor is responsible for all material he/she adds, even if it is "only" a revert to an older version, so reverting from one biased/POV version to another counts as adding POV. Just a friendly reminder. Thomas.W ^talk 19:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. While there are plenty of reasons over which I don't agree with that topic ban (it's full of loopholes and comes across as unnecessarily punitive in my opinion), I'd like to stand by my earlier position, which is that we deal with a sock-infested topic area that is subject to sanctions, and sockmasters would need to shed off the impression that they can flout the system, insert unabashed POV into articles and get away with it. Perhaps the use of rollback was excessive here; but when a sock is found adding uncompromising POV and causing disruption across several articles, they will be reverted correctly. Thanks, Mar4d (talk) 00:10, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Balti wine edit

Hello user, Your this edit on Balti wine shows your WP:POV pushing, when source was not even having word "South Asian restaurants" then what was the need of removing sourced word "Indian restaurants"? And your edit summary says that you done it "per source". You have to stop your POV pushing on Wikipedia as I spotted you many times doing so, otherwise you will end up at Arbitration Enforcement. Thank you.--Human3015 knock knock • 04:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@Human3015: Stop falsifying my edits, the source linked clearly makes reference to Asian products (one Manchester entrepreneur is capitalising on the nation's love affair with everything Asian.. Ashraf says he learnt a very valuable lesson in terms of branding from his Xes experience, and decided his next move would be to cash in on the growing market for branded Asian products... The potential is huge - what with the takeaway market as well as more people cooking Asian food at home. There are only a handful of major ethnic brands in the UK, and Balti Wine will become one of them. It is fantastic wine which goes beautifully with spicy food." Moreover, that edit was for clarity and not factually incorrect, as the wine's founder is a self-identified British Pakistani, and Balti food (for which the wine was branded and invented) originates from Pakistan. The term "Asian" is quite frequently used in the UK for things pertaining to South Asia, and Balti is most definitely an Asian food, not just limited to Indian restaurants. As for your hollow personal attacks, accusations and threats (like always), I'm not going to pay heed. So feel free to file an arbitration complaint or whatever; just beware of WP:BOOMERANG though. Mar4d (talk) 06:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, but in your old edit on same page you again removed word "India" from article. So your all edits on that article intended to remove word "India" while source itself was having word "India" several times but you don't want to see word "India" in article. Anyway, source don't use word "British Pakistani" clearly, still you added it, why you don't added word "British South Asian" or "British Asian" for him? This time you like to add word "British Pakistani" even if source doesn't mentions it clearly. Source always mentions "restaurants" as "Indian restaurants", not a single time it mentions "South Asian restaurants". --Human3015 knock knock • 09:40, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, relax, you guys! We are all members of the India-Pakistan Wikipedian Cooperation Board. Let us have some give and take from all sides. The term "Indian restaurant" is used in Britain as a hangover from British India, but a great majority of them are actually run by Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. Changing it to "South Asian restaurant" is perfectly acceptable in my opinion. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk)

Caution

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Balti wine. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Human3015 knock knock • 12:07, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Re-adding

Hello dear Mar4d,

I've noted two times I think by now that you added British Iranians to the British Pakistani "related" section. I would like to politely ask you to cease with this, on the grounds that;
1) British Iranians are not counted as Asians, while Pakistanis obviously are
2) they don't share any ethnic ties save for the Baloch which make up 1-2% of Iran's population. The rest of its ethnic groups (Persians, Azerbaijanis, Kurds, etc) are completely and utterly dissimilar.
3) Pakistan is an Indian Subcontinent nation, while Iran is obviously not.

Afghanistan I can understand, which has very strong ties with Pakistan, and it's largest ethnic group the Pashtuns mostly live in Pakistan, outnumbering those in Afghanistan, as well that it's often counted as a South Asian nation, amongst other reasons. But Iran, just absolutely no way. Might as well add British Mongolians to the British Russians group and vice versa, as they neighbour each other and certain small ethnic groups live in both nations. Or British Greeks and British Turks, which actually holds more ground but you never see that either for obvious reasons. Or even China, which borders Pakistan and its people are counted as Asian everywhere in the world just like Pakistanis.

Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 09:18, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments regarding this. TBH, I don't think it is worth reading into that deeply, as I added the link simply for navigational purposes per WP:SEEALSO. Iran is indeed a neighbouring country, and the Baloch ethnic group straddles both sides of the border, hence there is an ethnic connection and someone reading the article would be interested to read the corresponding articles on neighbouring groups (British Indians and British Afghans are listed too). As for your explanation on ethnicity, ultimately, the western half of Pakistan consists of Iranian peoples (Pashtuns, Baloch etc.) like the ethnic groups of Iran, so it would not be true to say there are no demographic links. I'm not sure why you would compare this to Russia and Mongolia or any other random example though. Cheers! Mar4d (talk) 13:56, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

sup

Hey, I saw on your main page that you are a civil engineer. I am also a civil engineer, so i just wanted to say hi :). Balakrishnan Koran (talk) 15:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. It seems that you are a new user, therefore it would be good if you can read some guidelines and rules of Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Five pillars would be a good place to start. While constructive contributions are appreciated, I had to go back and revert some of your edits as they were unsourced or were made without due discussion on the talk pages of the respective article. Feel free to ask questions and happy editing, Mar4d (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

WP:DRN notice

There is discussion involving you at WP:DRN [3]. Thank you. --Human3015^{Send WikiLove} 12:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hamid Gul

Sorry about reverting you then: I was restoring a version without vandalism. Somebody else has restored the category. --Rubbish computer 19:19, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: That article desperately needs protection. The news itself is less than an hour old and already there is so much article traffic. Mar4d (talk) 19:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

@Mar4d: No problem, I'll request it. In a few days they will lose interest. --Rubbish computer 19:21, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "British Pakistanis". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 23 August 2015.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 16:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Request for mediation accepted

The request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning British Pakistanis, in which you were listed as a party, has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. The case will be assigned to an active mediator within two weeks, and mediation proceedings should begin shortly thereafter. Proceedings will begin at the case information page, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/British Pakistanis, so please add this to your watchlist. Formal mediation is governed by the Mediation Committee and its Policy. The Policy, and especially the first two sections of the "Mediation" section, should be read if you have never participated in formal mediation. For a short guide to accepted cases, see the "Accepted requests" section of the Guide to formal mediation. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the internal Procedures of the Committee.

As mediation proceedings begin, be aware that formal mediation can only be successful if every participant approaches discussion in a professional and civil way, and is completely prepared to compromise. Please contact the Committee if anything is unclear.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	"The Barnstar of Diligence is awarded in recognition of a combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service." Excellent work on Shuja Khanzada! Please continue your sedulous contributions. Faizan (talk) 16:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Mar4d (talk) 16:42, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Good Work

		The Pakistan Star
		Creating Pakistan related articles Action Hero 11:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
		_{this WikiAward was given to Mar4d by Action Hero on 11:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}

Cheers! Thanks for the appreciation. Mar4d (talk) 13:21, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

2015 Attock bombing and Shuja Khanzada

I know there were casualties in the bombing, but is merger possible? The bombing occurred at the late politician's home. --George Ho (talk) 23:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

@George Ho: Up to you to start that discussion. My personal opinion would be against a merger though, as even though it appears Khanzada was the main target of the attack, around two dozen other people also died, making it one of the largest terror attacks recently as well as quite notable. Also, if we merge, it might create issues with WP:WEIGHT. The attack article itself can have dedicated sections on the perpetrators, reactions to the attacks, police investigations/security forces arresting the perpetrators, political reactions etc. while if we merge it into the former, I'm not sure if we'll be able to retain all that information (as the former is an article on the person, not just the attack). Regards, Mar4d (talk) 06:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC)