User talk:RanaShoaibRana

RanaShoaibRana, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi RanaShoaibRana! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. KH-1 (talk) 13:32, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Khadim Hussain Rizvi, you may be blocked from editing. Mattplaysthedrums (talk) 11:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 14:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

Please don't remove content from articles, as you did at Orya Maqbool Jan. I see you have been warned about this before, above. In both cases you removed negative content that was well sourced and relevant from biography articles. Please recollect that Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia; both positive and negative facts have their place, and removing only the negative can be characterised as tendentious editing and whitewashing. Next time you dislike some content in an article, please don't remove it, but discuss possible removal on that article's talkpage. This is a final warning. Bishonen | tålk 14:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

For the record, you have removed well-sourced negative content following this final warning see Special:Diff/1093143219. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 21:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, CX Zoom. RanaShoaibRana, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Orya Maqbool Jan because of your persistent disruptive editing despite warnings. You can request unblock by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} on this page. Bishonen | tålk 21:33, 14 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, I have removed the content because when I tried to open the supported refecrnce number 11 https://nation.com.pk/29-Jun-2016/the-movement-of-female-anatomy-isn-t-endangering-our-culture-orya-maqbool-jan-your-sick

It gives 404 ( Page not found ) error RanaShoaibRana (talk) 22:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You say you removed a good chunk of the short article because the references were dead? (I see both of them, 11 and 12, were actually dead. Linkrot happens a lot, unfortunately.) That's pretty bad. Firstly, that's not the reason you gave in your edit summary, which said "Wikepida is not a place to mention all personal [statements] of a person". The link problems appear to be an afterthought. Secondly, if references are dead, you mark them as such, or remove them and post "citation needed" at the statements they supported; it's not an excuse for removing the entire text. You have completely ignored what I said in my warning: "Next time you dislike some content in an article, please don't remove it, but discuss possible removal on that article's talkpage". Thirdly, it's not like that was the first time you removed embarrassing content from the article. What is your relation to Orya Maqbool Jan, since you're so interested in removing negative content from this particular article? Do you have a conflict of interest regarding him, such as being related to him, friends with him, or employed by him? Are you getting paid for editing his article? Please reply below to these questions. Bishonen | tålk 22:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

No I am not related to Orya Maqbool Jan in any sense. Next time I will dicuss on talkpage before making any changes. RanaShoaibRana (talk) 23:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can use the talkpage now, as well as all the rest of Wikipedia — you are only blocked from the actual article. I'm sorry it took a block to persuade you to use an article talkpage (you literally never have). If you manage to form a consensus for a change on talk, somebody else will make the edit on the article for you. Could you please tell me what the reason is for your great interest in making Orya Maqbool Jan, and, earlier, Khadim Hussain Rizvi look better, if you have no conflict of interest such as paid editing? I'm afraid I won't lift this block, as you have edited the article so aggressively, always with the same tendency of removing negative content, but offering various irrelevant reasons. Here, for instance, you gave the reason "Avoid adding your personal thoughts to Wikipedia articles", though the removed content was well-sourced facts, not personal thoughts.

However, you can appeal this block to an uninvolved admin. If you add {{unblock|your reason here}} below, it will call a different admin to this page. It's best to read the Guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | tålk 07:16, 15 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Ok, I don't want to play blame game but why your are not taking notice of other biased edits on this article let me give you few exmples

1: There is an line on this article "Jan has been repeatedly criticized for being an extremist" yes this line is supported by refrence of few news websites who decalred him an exremist but I am pretty sure there are other news websites who write good about him. You can say "Some people consider him an extremist" but you can't charge an person by saying "being an extremist". No news website or anyone has an aturotiy to daclare someone extremist thats just their point of view.

2: there is hading on the article "Links with Pakistan Army". According to refrence Jan has just narrated an dream of Unknow Professor who saw a dream in which Prophet Muhammad gave an unknow thing in hands of Gen. Bajwa. this narration of dream does not prove any "Links" with army.

3: There were an eralier edit on this article in which someone wrote that he crtisized Pakistan Womens Cricket team. But according to refcrence he just shred his objection on an TV

commercial by Q Mobile in which a women wants to become crickter. Which I edited and crrocted

( I am not defeding by block by saying all this. I just want to say your actions should be across the board RanaShoaibRana (talk) 10:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia goes by reliable sources only, not by your opinion or my opinion or by what you're "pretty sure" of. It's quite useless to say "I am pretty sure there are other news websites who write good about him". What would be meaningful would be to say "Here are some reliable sources that write good things about him: example 1, example 2, example 3, example 4", all with links to the in-depth coverage of Orya Maqbool Jan by these sources. You see? Bishonen | tålk 15:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

And he also is on record as saying women shouldn’t play cricket Doug Weller talk 16:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I endorce him on this. RanaShoaibRana (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RanaShoaibRana Women should not play cricket? Really? Doug Weller talk 18:21, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've edit since, are you going to answer me? Doug Weller talk 13:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]