A fact from Sadiq Sanjrani appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 April 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This page is about an active
politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of
biased editing, talk-page
trolling, and simple
vandalism.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
In my opinion the ordinal number do not need to appear again and again in the article, info box is good enough but I let it stay after comparing with other articles such as
Donald Trump, for example.
Sheriff |
☎ 911 |
11:54, 17 March 2018 (UTC)reply
Un-encyclopedic?
Hi @
SheriffIsInTown: This is concerning your removal of some
edits. One lesser-known politician with no prior legislative experience becomes Chairman of the Senate out of nowhere. I'm curious why is that not encyclopedic? Maybe wording was not perfect? In my opinion, this passage easily passes
WP:10YT and is informative from encyclopedic POV. Whats your thoughts? --
Saqib (
talk)
10:51, 17 March 2018 (UTC)reply
We do not go by examples here on Wikipedia. By the way, Why don't you stop socking and ask your original account to be unblocked? --
Saqib (
talk)
08:45, 20 June 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Ridhej.dhhes:Donald Trump is not a good example here,
Barack Obama and
Nancy Pelosi are (check those), every two individuals are different, if you can better explain your objection to describing him as a politician then I might be able to give a counter argument otherwise removal of information just on the basis of another article is not a good idea. Can you please stop removing that same information from other articles as I might tend to report you for disruptive editing.
Sheriff |
☎ 911 |
10:23, 20 June 2018 (UTC)reply
A fact from Sadiq Sanjrani appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 April 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This page is about an active
politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of
biased editing, talk-page
trolling, and simple
vandalism.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
In my opinion the ordinal number do not need to appear again and again in the article, info box is good enough but I let it stay after comparing with other articles such as
Donald Trump, for example.
Sheriff |
☎ 911 |
11:54, 17 March 2018 (UTC)reply
Un-encyclopedic?
Hi @
SheriffIsInTown: This is concerning your removal of some
edits. One lesser-known politician with no prior legislative experience becomes Chairman of the Senate out of nowhere. I'm curious why is that not encyclopedic? Maybe wording was not perfect? In my opinion, this passage easily passes
WP:10YT and is informative from encyclopedic POV. Whats your thoughts? --
Saqib (
talk)
10:51, 17 March 2018 (UTC)reply
We do not go by examples here on Wikipedia. By the way, Why don't you stop socking and ask your original account to be unblocked? --
Saqib (
talk)
08:45, 20 June 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Ridhej.dhhes:Donald Trump is not a good example here,
Barack Obama and
Nancy Pelosi are (check those), every two individuals are different, if you can better explain your objection to describing him as a politician then I might be able to give a counter argument otherwise removal of information just on the basis of another article is not a good idea. Can you please stop removing that same information from other articles as I might tend to report you for disruptive editing.
Sheriff |
☎ 911 |
10:23, 20 June 2018 (UTC)reply