![]() | This user is a participant in WikiProject Pakistan. |
![]() | This user has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Hello, I'm
Smsarmad. I noticed that you made a change to an article,
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, but you didn't provide a
reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to
include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see
the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
SMS
Talk
16:52, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 03:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't see anything at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles. That's where the discussion should be taking place. CambridgeBayWeather ( talk) 02:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Check it now please Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 02:57, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noor Pur Baghan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dina ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Muhammad Ali Khalid ( talk) 12:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Its waste of time reverting back edits. Where is it mentioned in the given reference that "Pakistan has better roads than India"? If read properly, it states that India has better road density by population and also by area. And a sentence states that India lags behind other developing countries in terms of infrastructure ecept for Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Any trustworthy references are not available on search. Moreover, you compare it yourself if you want Indian Roads. Revert your edit yourself if you feel I am right. Chitransh Gaurav 12:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Chitransh,
Original edit was not done by me, it was done by someone else and I am sure it was added after doing a thorough research. When something is added to a document it should only be removed providing correct basis.
When the edit was reverted by you, I checked the reference document to find the basis for initial add and then I tried to find the basis for your revert, I found the basis for initial add but did not find the basis for your revert.
The basis I found for initial add was on page 4. There is a table there which has a column named "Paved roads %" and lists the comparison between the countries which shows that India has 62.6% of it's roads paved compared to Pakistan's 64.7%. Bangladesh and Indonesia has a lesser percentage than Pakistan as well. That table was the basis for initial add. I was just trying to preserve the integrity of the document. I do not think anything should be removed from the document unless there is something out there to counterfeit the claim.
The text in article "Pakistan" only talks about road system being better than India and not about the whole transportation system which is true considering the paved road comparison. More paved roads means better road system.
In the very next sentence it talks about what Pakistan lags behind of India and I think the whole text combined was best, fair and impartial assessment. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 17:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, But we cannot compare the roads on that basis alone. In the same reference in other tables, it is mentioned that road density by area and by population is better in India (Page no. 6). This is another vital indicator for road infrastructure. I forgot to mention this in the above post and that was the basis of my reply. But I am not an experienced, regular wikipedian, so I totally leave it up to you to remove it or not. But, if taken: paved roads means better roads system, then I agree with you. Regards. Chitransh Gaurav 08:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
hello, thank you for your message. The Mughal emperors link is already included at the bottom in the navigation link, therefore it does not have to be included again under see also. And I don't see what Mughal weapons have to do with Akbar himself, unless there is a specific weapon that can be attributed to him or his time. Gryffindor ( talk) 19:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sajjad -- I write about Wikipedia for the New York Times, and I am trying to look at how Wikipedia is incorporating editing via mobile phone. I noticed that you have edited exclusively via mobile phone. If you have the time and inclination to discuss your editing experiences can you drop me an email at noam@nytimes.com. Looking forward to speaking with you. chomsky1 16:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC) Chomsky1
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically
Pakistan, may fail our
non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our
Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the
Media copyright questions page.
Werieth (
talk)
11:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of people from Jhelum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gah ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
It's good that your editing fr/ your mobile device, BUT Noor Pur Baghan wasn't a good example to place in the NYTimes. Most of the information comes from an unverifiable primary source--yourself--which is against Wikipedia editing guidelines.
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources
Regards Tapered ( talk) 19:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
New York Times is an independent media and they make their own decisions.
Article by Noam Cohen does not talk about authenticity of article Noor Pur Baghan.
The mention of the article is in terms of a Wikipedian who mostly edits from his mobile device.
People can criticize Obama for going to war with Libya and people can criticize him for not going to war with Iran.
Opinions differ and we got to respect them.
Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 20:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi My name is Kenan. I am the mobile product manager for the Wikimedia foundation. I see that you have thoughts on mobile editing and I'd love to talk to you about your mobile editing habits and opinions. What is the best way for me to contact you? Thanks! -- KWang (WMF) ( talk) 01:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
@Sajjad Altaf dear very impressive work. I like to benefit from your experience of using wikipedia through mobile. Could you please email me at: attarasul@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by MalikAttaRasool ( talk • contribs) 06:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | Hello! You look like someone who might be interested in joining the Pakistan WikiProject and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you help us :-) Mar4d ( talk) 16:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC) |
Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm from WikiProject Pakistan. We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan.
There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an
edit summary with every edit. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history.
The edit summary appears in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Green Giant ( edits) ( talk) 01:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. While the content of your edits may be true, I have removed it because its depth or nature of detail are not consistent with our objectives as an encyclopedia. I recognize that your edit was made in good faith and hope you will familiarize yourself with
what Wikipedia is not so we may collaborate in the future. Thank you!
Super48paul (
talk)
11:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maula Jatt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rangeela ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Noor Pur Baghan shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Sitush ( talk) 12:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again for your post and i look forward to working with you to improve Wikipedia. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 17:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
help
Can u help me in editing ghulam Ahmad (engineer) apparently SMS thinks everything is incorrect, just like he did with daily darting
Heman 18:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adnan1216 ( talk • contribs)
Can u kindly hep on this article SMS has made changes which are quite disturbing, need your help
Heman 18:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adnan1216 ( talk • contribs)
I'm not sure if you are watching but I've replied to your !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jat clans of Multan Division. You do not need to respond but I'd imagine that you'd want to address the point that I raise. - Sitush ( talk) 01:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Dulla Bhatti. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sitush ( talk) 12:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Dulla Bhatti shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. SMS Talk 23:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Now you are doing it on yet another article. If you revert me anywhere in the next week without first discussing the matter then I'm going to escalate this issue. You need to slow down a bit and learn. I have no doubt that you are well-intentioned but you are being disruptive also. - Sitush ( talk) 01:49, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:12, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
I have just blocked Muhammadshahzadkhan. If I were going purely by number of reverts, I could easily have blocked you as well and I really don't like blocking one party to an edit war and not the other. Only the aggressiveness of his editing and reverting persuaded me that his conduct was at greater fault. Please don't get drawn into edit wars like that in future——the first step is always to try to discuss things on the talk page; if that fails, you can go to any number of noticeboards ( WP:ANI, WP:ANEW, WP:RFPP for examples) to ask for help or admin intervention. Please be aware that if the edit warring resumes after Muhammadshahzadkhan's block expires, I'll block both parties. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, can you please provide a source for 2000 death - the ur.wp article has no date of death. Urdu language source is acceptable. Thanks In ictu oculi ( talk) 01:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive about
ownership of articles, which you showed at
Professor Iqbal Azeem. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Anything to do with Pakistan seems to cause you to promote an almost-nationalist agenda and you don't seem to let it go. Various behavioural issues have been explained to you by various people - you really, really need to get a grip now. Sitush ( talk) 15:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Instead of repeatedly moving Ghazanfar Ali Khan to Raja Ghazanfar Ali Khan, you should seek consensus via the requested move process because it was challenged on policy grounds, ie: WP:HONORIFIC. You are, yet again, being disruptive and I've got to figure out how to correct your poor efforts. - Sitush ( talk) 13:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Dominion of Pakistan,
LGBT rights in Pakistan,
List of Pakistan Movement activists,
Asma Jahangir,
Lahore,
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, amongst many more over the course of the past few days, without addressing any concerns in
WP:Talk Page, (especially when you were told to stop numerous times as you are unable to provide
WP:Reliable source examples and
WP:WIKISTALKING]], you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. lilpiglet 10:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lilpiglet (
talk •
contribs)
Hi Sajjad, your edit summary here is concerning me a little. You've had a lot of policies explained to you or linked recently and I find it difficult to believe that WP:CONSENSUS has not been among them. Consensus on Wikipedia is not related to numeric majority: it is a more subtle thing, based primarily on substantive policy arguments. It has to be, otherwise articles would be steamrollered by pressure groups etc and neutrality would go out of the window. Interpreting consensus on Wikipedia can be a tricky thing and generally comes through experience. Please try to find some time to read the linked policy because it is right at the core of how Wikipedia works and if you do not understand it then you're going to continue to have problems here. - Sitush ( talk) 21:55, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for
sock puppetry per evidence presented at
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sajjad Altaf. Note that multiple accounts are
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans
may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here. ~~~~}} below, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Callanecc (
talk •
contribs •
logs)
05:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC) |
Sajjad Altaf ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Speedy Unblock, Removal of Block Tags I was not notified of an ongoing investigation and was not given a chance to defend myself which i believe i should have been given a chance. Judgement was passed without hearing me. Moreover, i was not aware of the policy on sockpuppetry altogether until i was blocked. That being said, i will like to request to be unblocked without going into nitty gritty details of how same NATted IP address can be used by multiple users and how typography can look similar since people type on the keyboard and do not use handwriting. Also as the policy itself says, there is hard to tell for sure whether person behind two account was the same or different and there is always room for doubt. I will also like to go to the assumption of all these accounts belonging to same person just to help deciding admin easier to make a decision. Even if all these accounts belonged to the same person, i don't see them being used for abuse or disruption. I don't see them voting multiple times, i don't see them working together to build a consensus. I was still learning and still not aware of many policies but i was improving and my future goal was to work on the path to make all pages in my watch list a featured article. I will also like to add that this is my first block and i think it is harsh to make first block as indefinite. I should be given a second chance especially when there is a doubt present. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 12:52 pm, Today (UTC+0)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock appeal because you have not actually responded to the allegations of sockpuppetry, instead claiming that you were not aware of the policy and that the process is (in your opinion) flawed. Did you or did you not use other accounts to support your position on articles such as Noor Pur Baghan, Dulla Bhatti and Jhelum? Yunshui 雲 水 13:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Sajjad Altaf ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
In response to first decline decision and second unblock request: i was reading the unblocking policy and it said something to that affect that do not claim innocence while requesting an unblock and that is why i did not want to claim innocence instead i just wanted to request an unblock. As to answer Yunshui, no i do not have any relation to those other accounts. I am not sure how CheckUser process works. There could be a possibility of same NATted IP showing up for any of those other users if there is same IP showing up. It is a possibility that they might be using same mobile carrier but since i do not have those details and i do not know how it was concluded that those accounts were related to me, i can not tell for sure what might be the case here, is it possible that IP logs can be shared with me. Also regarding Noor Pur Baghan, Jhelum and Dulla Bhatti, i do not see any policies being violated to change the concensus even if you consider all these accounts belonging to me. All the edits from those other two accounts do not support me or my point of view anywhere. At Noor Pur Baghan, Bhatti Rajpoot provided sources while i was insisting on unsourced content which i don't think called as endorsing each other. There was no dispute going on at Jhelum but it was in my watchlist and i have seen recent edits by DJ Baghi so since there was no dispute on that page between me and any other editor so edits by DJ Baghi can hardly be called to change a consensus there or supporting me in any sense. I only see one incident happening where Bhatti Rajpoot might have changed the output on Dulla Bhatti but those changes were immediately reverted by Sitush so there in no long term effect there as well. Although i do not own those accounts but consider this, if i owned those accounts, still the policy says that you can have multiple account but not use them for illegitimate reason and i don't see these accounts being used for any illegitimate reasons. What i can assure is to stay away from contributing to any pages to which those other two accounts make any future contributions so just to make sure that there is no doubt of creating a fake consensus or fake voting result in case those other accounts are unblocked as well. I can definitely assure that i can be a productive contributor and this was only my starting point and people make mistakes in the start but learn from the process. Also i would definitely not want to make any blunders under my real name. I hope you review your decision and unblock or maybe reduce the block term from indefinite to a lesser period. Let me know what assurances you need from me for the future and we can further talk to resolve this matter. Offcourse, There is always a choice of blocking me again, if you can block me once, you can block me again. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 20:10, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Per review of SPI and discussion below. — Daniel Case ( talk) 21:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Sajjad Altaf ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Final Request: This request supplements the above two requests and should be considered along them and not alone. I am not the owner of those other two accounts but I also promise not to create any additional accounts in future and not to edit any pages to which Bhatti Rajpoot and DJ Baghi might make any future contributions. I also want to state that even if you consider that those two accounts are mine, still only additional accounts should be blocked and primary account should be allowed to edit, in this case I will request that my own account which is this account should be allowed to make edits considering if any of those two guys also did not make any unblock requests but if they make any unblock requests then the decision would be up to you. I took some time to check the contributions of those other two users for purposes of this request and I found staggering differences in interests and the pages they made contributions to, only few of them being similar to me. I am posting the contribution pages for all three accounts including mine to show you why I think and you should think too that these accounts belong to different people since their editing trend and pages interest does not match at all. They only have few pages in common: === Bhatti Rajpoot’s Contribution Pages=== Narisara Nuvadtivongs Dulla Bhatti Noor Pur Baghan Major de Sarrià Panama Bay Next Future Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Ferik (village) Ali Ashour Baleshwari River List of mosques in Hong Kong === DJ Baghi’s Contribution Pages=== Helen Watson (cricketer) Giddha Jhelum Noor Pur Baghan Chur railway station OSMET IRCHA Dok Khamtai District Turpin, Oklahoma Katowice urban area Oberalp Pass William John Edwards 2006 shelling of Beit Hanoun Habibabad District Ronnie Simpson Baraka Pakao Jhelum District Babur Baburnama Jhelum Tehsil Wagh === Sajjad Altaf’s Contribution Pages=== Aamir Liaquat Hussain Akbar Akbar II Allahabad Address Asma Jahangir Ayub Khan (President of Pakistan) Bahawalnagar Bahawalpur Baker Hughes Balti language Chak Jamal Chotala Daily Dharti Rawalakot Dera Ghazi Khan Dera Ghazi Khan District Dominion of Pakistan Dulla Bhatti Findlay, Ohio Findlay City School District Ganga Ram Gharmala Ghazanfar Ali Khan Ghazwatul Hind Ghulam Ahmad (engineer) Haneef Shareef Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry Imran Khan Independence Day (Pakistan) Iqbal Azeem Jhelum Jhelum District Kalash language Kalash people Khukhrain LGBT rights in Pakistan Lahore List of Indian poets List of Pakistan Movement activists List of Pakistani poets List of people from Jhelum Maula Jatt Mian Nawaz Sharif Monarchy of Pakistan Multan Noor Pur Baghan Pakistan Pakistan Declaration Sanghoi Sohan Halwa Sunil Dutt Syed Hasnain Raza Naqvi Tarana-e-Pakistan Now if you go through the list of these pages, how can you say that these three users share the same interest, there won’t be even quarter of percentage similarities? If you compare the differences vs. similarities in interests there, you can straightaway tell these are all different people. Moreover I participated in voting on Talk: Iqbal Azeem and voting at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Pakistan and if those accounts were mine, I would have used them to influence the result but those people did not participate in those voting. I also had disputes with Sitush and Lilpiglet on quite a few pages but those accounts did not participate to influence the consensus but if those were mine I must have used them to my benefit. You should consider these facts. Here is the list of pages where I had dispute with Lilpiglet and Sitush, you can check talk pages for more information on those: Talk:Tarana-e-Pakistan Talk:Pakistan Talk:Pakistan Declaration Talk:Monarchy of Pakistan Talk:LGBT rights in Pakistan Talk:Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Talk:Ghazanfar Ali Khan Talk:Ayub Khan (President of Pakistan) Talk:Allahabad Address You can also see the personal insults hurled at me by Lilpiglet at Talk:LGBT rights in Pakistan and my calm and cool responses to those insults. I am just using this as an example of a good behavior which you can consider as well. So this is my final request with a promise not to create any future duplicate accounts and stay away from any pages where those other two accounts make any future contributions. Thanks for consideration Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 19:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Holy crap, please read WP:TLDR and WP:GAB for future unblock requests. You have been advised of the standard offer, which may be your best case here. Note: unblock in 6 months is not guaranteed - we actually recommend you go do some work elsewhere to prove yourself. However, your last post to this page directed to Sitush has shown me that you're not ready to even think about rejoining the community - that was an unacceptable use of this talkpage while blocked. You seem to continue to hold a WP:BATTLE mentality, which is not welcome. D P 16:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Per lilpiglet. And it's recommended that you should take advantage of the
WP:STANDARDOFFER, after 6 months or 1 year. You can request unban unblock, it should be evident that you wouldn't repeat this mistake, you can request either here or through the
Ban Appeals Subcomittee. There are many other wikipedias, such as
[2], wikicommons, etc, where you can contribute.
OccultZone (
Talk)
07:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi User:Sitush, i will like to request you to stop mentioning me on Wikipedia especially in derogatory terms like you did here. I have been very nice with you even though i was blocked partially because of your efforts, i even thanked you while accepting the ban no matter how unfair i believe it was.
You are saying that those votes are from a sockpuppet but no where you can pinpoint a vote from my accused sockpuppets. This is a proof in itself that those accounts were not mine otherwise i would have used them to influence those votes. My keep votes there were totally based on reliable sources which you consider to be not as reliable. It totally comes down to opinion vs. opinion. In your opinion, they are not reliable, in my opinion they are. Whose opinion wins? The one who has more votes and there were clearly more "keep" votes for AFDs which DGG and User:Rich Farmbrough also objected to. They were poorly decided to be deleted.
Moreover, if was to sockpuppet, i can still do so, there is no stopping me from creating another account or making IP edits but i have accepted the ban and decided not to create an account or do IP edits while i am seeing all sort of crap being added to the pages in my watchlist and no one is questioning that or even looking on those pages. If i was there, that crap would not have stayed there. I would have organized those pages in the past week when i was blocked but i am happy to see that there are sensible people like DGG and User:Rich Farmbrough who are reviewing deletions that happened mostly out of personal prejudice against some newcomers who did not accept authority of Sitush and a few others and in return the pages they created were taken to AFD and those newcomers being banned citing one policy or the other.
I also appreciate Justice007 keeping a check on rogue editor's edits based on her extreme personal viewpoints about topics related to Pakistan but there are many which still went unchecked.
It's totally unfair to keep mentioning someone in derogatory terms while knowing all that time that that person cannot respond to you. There were few occasions before. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 15:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sajjad Altaf!
Wiki Loves Monuments, the world's largest photography competition, will be taking place in Pakistan this September. The competition is all about capturing the cultural monuments and heritage sites of Pakistan and uploading these images on Commons to create an online repository which will be freely available to all.
Start taking photos of the sites enlisted here and upload them in September to be eligible for national and international prizes.
Email: contact@wikilovesmonuments.pk
Official website:
wikilovesmonuments.pk
Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/WikiLovesMonumentsPK
Posted by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Pakistan
Hi Sajjad Altaf!
Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan is organizing an edit drive for Pakistani Wikipedians on Pakistani Cultural Heritage throughout the month of July.
Top three contributors will be given a gift pack containing Wikipedia merchandise.
You can read the event details
here.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
11:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a member of
WikiProject Pakistan
Sajjad Altaf. The Ban Appeals Subcommittee has agreed to unblock you under the standard offer, with a restriction to a single account, this one. I have therefore unblocked you. WormTT( talk) 10:08, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 02:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Pakistani Barnstar of National Merit | |
Fantastic job on the articles about Pakistani villages! It's an often overlooked topic, and your contributions as an editor are greatly appreciated. Keep up the good work! Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC) |
Hello, Sajjad Altaf. Thank you for your work on Malhu. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
IMO this clearly should be merged into the Sanghoi village article. Clearly does not have GNG sources or the type of content that could be derived from them. The NGeo SNG clearly says that abstract divisions like this do not have presumed notability. I think that the creator would be a good one to do the merge. Happy editing!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
North8000 ( talk) 15:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This user is a participant in WikiProject Pakistan. |
![]() | This user has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Hello, I'm
Smsarmad. I noticed that you made a change to an article,
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, but you didn't provide a
reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to
include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see
the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
SMS
Talk
16:52, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 03:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't see anything at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles. That's where the discussion should be taking place. CambridgeBayWeather ( talk) 02:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Check it now please Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 02:57, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noor Pur Baghan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dina ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Muhammad Ali Khalid ( talk) 12:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Its waste of time reverting back edits. Where is it mentioned in the given reference that "Pakistan has better roads than India"? If read properly, it states that India has better road density by population and also by area. And a sentence states that India lags behind other developing countries in terms of infrastructure ecept for Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Any trustworthy references are not available on search. Moreover, you compare it yourself if you want Indian Roads. Revert your edit yourself if you feel I am right. Chitransh Gaurav 12:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Chitransh,
Original edit was not done by me, it was done by someone else and I am sure it was added after doing a thorough research. When something is added to a document it should only be removed providing correct basis.
When the edit was reverted by you, I checked the reference document to find the basis for initial add and then I tried to find the basis for your revert, I found the basis for initial add but did not find the basis for your revert.
The basis I found for initial add was on page 4. There is a table there which has a column named "Paved roads %" and lists the comparison between the countries which shows that India has 62.6% of it's roads paved compared to Pakistan's 64.7%. Bangladesh and Indonesia has a lesser percentage than Pakistan as well. That table was the basis for initial add. I was just trying to preserve the integrity of the document. I do not think anything should be removed from the document unless there is something out there to counterfeit the claim.
The text in article "Pakistan" only talks about road system being better than India and not about the whole transportation system which is true considering the paved road comparison. More paved roads means better road system.
In the very next sentence it talks about what Pakistan lags behind of India and I think the whole text combined was best, fair and impartial assessment. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 17:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, But we cannot compare the roads on that basis alone. In the same reference in other tables, it is mentioned that road density by area and by population is better in India (Page no. 6). This is another vital indicator for road infrastructure. I forgot to mention this in the above post and that was the basis of my reply. But I am not an experienced, regular wikipedian, so I totally leave it up to you to remove it or not. But, if taken: paved roads means better roads system, then I agree with you. Regards. Chitransh Gaurav 08:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
hello, thank you for your message. The Mughal emperors link is already included at the bottom in the navigation link, therefore it does not have to be included again under see also. And I don't see what Mughal weapons have to do with Akbar himself, unless there is a specific weapon that can be attributed to him or his time. Gryffindor ( talk) 19:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sajjad -- I write about Wikipedia for the New York Times, and I am trying to look at how Wikipedia is incorporating editing via mobile phone. I noticed that you have edited exclusively via mobile phone. If you have the time and inclination to discuss your editing experiences can you drop me an email at noam@nytimes.com. Looking forward to speaking with you. chomsky1 16:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC) Chomsky1
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically
Pakistan, may fail our
non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our
Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the
Media copyright questions page.
Werieth (
talk)
11:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of people from Jhelum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gah ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
It's good that your editing fr/ your mobile device, BUT Noor Pur Baghan wasn't a good example to place in the NYTimes. Most of the information comes from an unverifiable primary source--yourself--which is against Wikipedia editing guidelines.
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources
Regards Tapered ( talk) 19:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
New York Times is an independent media and they make their own decisions.
Article by Noam Cohen does not talk about authenticity of article Noor Pur Baghan.
The mention of the article is in terms of a Wikipedian who mostly edits from his mobile device.
People can criticize Obama for going to war with Libya and people can criticize him for not going to war with Iran.
Opinions differ and we got to respect them.
Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 20:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi My name is Kenan. I am the mobile product manager for the Wikimedia foundation. I see that you have thoughts on mobile editing and I'd love to talk to you about your mobile editing habits and opinions. What is the best way for me to contact you? Thanks! -- KWang (WMF) ( talk) 01:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
@Sajjad Altaf dear very impressive work. I like to benefit from your experience of using wikipedia through mobile. Could you please email me at: attarasul@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by MalikAttaRasool ( talk • contribs) 06:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | Hello! You look like someone who might be interested in joining the Pakistan WikiProject and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you help us :-) Mar4d ( talk) 16:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC) |
Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm from WikiProject Pakistan. We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan.
There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an
edit summary with every edit. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history.
The edit summary appears in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Green Giant ( edits) ( talk) 01:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. While the content of your edits may be true, I have removed it because its depth or nature of detail are not consistent with our objectives as an encyclopedia. I recognize that your edit was made in good faith and hope you will familiarize yourself with
what Wikipedia is not so we may collaborate in the future. Thank you!
Super48paul (
talk)
11:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maula Jatt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rangeela ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Noor Pur Baghan shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Sitush ( talk) 12:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again for your post and i look forward to working with you to improve Wikipedia. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 17:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
help
Can u help me in editing ghulam Ahmad (engineer) apparently SMS thinks everything is incorrect, just like he did with daily darting
Heman 18:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adnan1216 ( talk • contribs)
Can u kindly hep on this article SMS has made changes which are quite disturbing, need your help
Heman 18:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adnan1216 ( talk • contribs)
I'm not sure if you are watching but I've replied to your !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jat clans of Multan Division. You do not need to respond but I'd imagine that you'd want to address the point that I raise. - Sitush ( talk) 01:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Dulla Bhatti. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sitush ( talk) 12:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Dulla Bhatti shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. SMS Talk 23:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Now you are doing it on yet another article. If you revert me anywhere in the next week without first discussing the matter then I'm going to escalate this issue. You need to slow down a bit and learn. I have no doubt that you are well-intentioned but you are being disruptive also. - Sitush ( talk) 01:49, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:12, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
I have just blocked Muhammadshahzadkhan. If I were going purely by number of reverts, I could easily have blocked you as well and I really don't like blocking one party to an edit war and not the other. Only the aggressiveness of his editing and reverting persuaded me that his conduct was at greater fault. Please don't get drawn into edit wars like that in future——the first step is always to try to discuss things on the talk page; if that fails, you can go to any number of noticeboards ( WP:ANI, WP:ANEW, WP:RFPP for examples) to ask for help or admin intervention. Please be aware that if the edit warring resumes after Muhammadshahzadkhan's block expires, I'll block both parties. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, can you please provide a source for 2000 death - the ur.wp article has no date of death. Urdu language source is acceptable. Thanks In ictu oculi ( talk) 01:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive about
ownership of articles, which you showed at
Professor Iqbal Azeem. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Anything to do with Pakistan seems to cause you to promote an almost-nationalist agenda and you don't seem to let it go. Various behavioural issues have been explained to you by various people - you really, really need to get a grip now. Sitush ( talk) 15:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Instead of repeatedly moving Ghazanfar Ali Khan to Raja Ghazanfar Ali Khan, you should seek consensus via the requested move process because it was challenged on policy grounds, ie: WP:HONORIFIC. You are, yet again, being disruptive and I've got to figure out how to correct your poor efforts. - Sitush ( talk) 13:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Dominion of Pakistan,
LGBT rights in Pakistan,
List of Pakistan Movement activists,
Asma Jahangir,
Lahore,
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, amongst many more over the course of the past few days, without addressing any concerns in
WP:Talk Page, (especially when you were told to stop numerous times as you are unable to provide
WP:Reliable source examples and
WP:WIKISTALKING]], you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. lilpiglet 10:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lilpiglet (
talk •
contribs)
Hi Sajjad, your edit summary here is concerning me a little. You've had a lot of policies explained to you or linked recently and I find it difficult to believe that WP:CONSENSUS has not been among them. Consensus on Wikipedia is not related to numeric majority: it is a more subtle thing, based primarily on substantive policy arguments. It has to be, otherwise articles would be steamrollered by pressure groups etc and neutrality would go out of the window. Interpreting consensus on Wikipedia can be a tricky thing and generally comes through experience. Please try to find some time to read the linked policy because it is right at the core of how Wikipedia works and if you do not understand it then you're going to continue to have problems here. - Sitush ( talk) 21:55, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for
sock puppetry per evidence presented at
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sajjad Altaf. Note that multiple accounts are
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans
may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here. ~~~~}} below, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Callanecc (
talk •
contribs •
logs)
05:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC) |
Sajjad Altaf ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Speedy Unblock, Removal of Block Tags I was not notified of an ongoing investigation and was not given a chance to defend myself which i believe i should have been given a chance. Judgement was passed without hearing me. Moreover, i was not aware of the policy on sockpuppetry altogether until i was blocked. That being said, i will like to request to be unblocked without going into nitty gritty details of how same NATted IP address can be used by multiple users and how typography can look similar since people type on the keyboard and do not use handwriting. Also as the policy itself says, there is hard to tell for sure whether person behind two account was the same or different and there is always room for doubt. I will also like to go to the assumption of all these accounts belonging to same person just to help deciding admin easier to make a decision. Even if all these accounts belonged to the same person, i don't see them being used for abuse or disruption. I don't see them voting multiple times, i don't see them working together to build a consensus. I was still learning and still not aware of many policies but i was improving and my future goal was to work on the path to make all pages in my watch list a featured article. I will also like to add that this is my first block and i think it is harsh to make first block as indefinite. I should be given a second chance especially when there is a doubt present. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 12:52 pm, Today (UTC+0)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock appeal because you have not actually responded to the allegations of sockpuppetry, instead claiming that you were not aware of the policy and that the process is (in your opinion) flawed. Did you or did you not use other accounts to support your position on articles such as Noor Pur Baghan, Dulla Bhatti and Jhelum? Yunshui 雲 水 13:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Sajjad Altaf ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
In response to first decline decision and second unblock request: i was reading the unblocking policy and it said something to that affect that do not claim innocence while requesting an unblock and that is why i did not want to claim innocence instead i just wanted to request an unblock. As to answer Yunshui, no i do not have any relation to those other accounts. I am not sure how CheckUser process works. There could be a possibility of same NATted IP showing up for any of those other users if there is same IP showing up. It is a possibility that they might be using same mobile carrier but since i do not have those details and i do not know how it was concluded that those accounts were related to me, i can not tell for sure what might be the case here, is it possible that IP logs can be shared with me. Also regarding Noor Pur Baghan, Jhelum and Dulla Bhatti, i do not see any policies being violated to change the concensus even if you consider all these accounts belonging to me. All the edits from those other two accounts do not support me or my point of view anywhere. At Noor Pur Baghan, Bhatti Rajpoot provided sources while i was insisting on unsourced content which i don't think called as endorsing each other. There was no dispute going on at Jhelum but it was in my watchlist and i have seen recent edits by DJ Baghi so since there was no dispute on that page between me and any other editor so edits by DJ Baghi can hardly be called to change a consensus there or supporting me in any sense. I only see one incident happening where Bhatti Rajpoot might have changed the output on Dulla Bhatti but those changes were immediately reverted by Sitush so there in no long term effect there as well. Although i do not own those accounts but consider this, if i owned those accounts, still the policy says that you can have multiple account but not use them for illegitimate reason and i don't see these accounts being used for any illegitimate reasons. What i can assure is to stay away from contributing to any pages to which those other two accounts make any future contributions so just to make sure that there is no doubt of creating a fake consensus or fake voting result in case those other accounts are unblocked as well. I can definitely assure that i can be a productive contributor and this was only my starting point and people make mistakes in the start but learn from the process. Also i would definitely not want to make any blunders under my real name. I hope you review your decision and unblock or maybe reduce the block term from indefinite to a lesser period. Let me know what assurances you need from me for the future and we can further talk to resolve this matter. Offcourse, There is always a choice of blocking me again, if you can block me once, you can block me again. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 20:10, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Per review of SPI and discussion below. — Daniel Case ( talk) 21:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Sajjad Altaf ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Final Request: This request supplements the above two requests and should be considered along them and not alone. I am not the owner of those other two accounts but I also promise not to create any additional accounts in future and not to edit any pages to which Bhatti Rajpoot and DJ Baghi might make any future contributions. I also want to state that even if you consider that those two accounts are mine, still only additional accounts should be blocked and primary account should be allowed to edit, in this case I will request that my own account which is this account should be allowed to make edits considering if any of those two guys also did not make any unblock requests but if they make any unblock requests then the decision would be up to you. I took some time to check the contributions of those other two users for purposes of this request and I found staggering differences in interests and the pages they made contributions to, only few of them being similar to me. I am posting the contribution pages for all three accounts including mine to show you why I think and you should think too that these accounts belong to different people since their editing trend and pages interest does not match at all. They only have few pages in common: === Bhatti Rajpoot’s Contribution Pages=== Narisara Nuvadtivongs Dulla Bhatti Noor Pur Baghan Major de Sarrià Panama Bay Next Future Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Ferik (village) Ali Ashour Baleshwari River List of mosques in Hong Kong === DJ Baghi’s Contribution Pages=== Helen Watson (cricketer) Giddha Jhelum Noor Pur Baghan Chur railway station OSMET IRCHA Dok Khamtai District Turpin, Oklahoma Katowice urban area Oberalp Pass William John Edwards 2006 shelling of Beit Hanoun Habibabad District Ronnie Simpson Baraka Pakao Jhelum District Babur Baburnama Jhelum Tehsil Wagh === Sajjad Altaf’s Contribution Pages=== Aamir Liaquat Hussain Akbar Akbar II Allahabad Address Asma Jahangir Ayub Khan (President of Pakistan) Bahawalnagar Bahawalpur Baker Hughes Balti language Chak Jamal Chotala Daily Dharti Rawalakot Dera Ghazi Khan Dera Ghazi Khan District Dominion of Pakistan Dulla Bhatti Findlay, Ohio Findlay City School District Ganga Ram Gharmala Ghazanfar Ali Khan Ghazwatul Hind Ghulam Ahmad (engineer) Haneef Shareef Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry Imran Khan Independence Day (Pakistan) Iqbal Azeem Jhelum Jhelum District Kalash language Kalash people Khukhrain LGBT rights in Pakistan Lahore List of Indian poets List of Pakistan Movement activists List of Pakistani poets List of people from Jhelum Maula Jatt Mian Nawaz Sharif Monarchy of Pakistan Multan Noor Pur Baghan Pakistan Pakistan Declaration Sanghoi Sohan Halwa Sunil Dutt Syed Hasnain Raza Naqvi Tarana-e-Pakistan Now if you go through the list of these pages, how can you say that these three users share the same interest, there won’t be even quarter of percentage similarities? If you compare the differences vs. similarities in interests there, you can straightaway tell these are all different people. Moreover I participated in voting on Talk: Iqbal Azeem and voting at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Pakistan and if those accounts were mine, I would have used them to influence the result but those people did not participate in those voting. I also had disputes with Sitush and Lilpiglet on quite a few pages but those accounts did not participate to influence the consensus but if those were mine I must have used them to my benefit. You should consider these facts. Here is the list of pages where I had dispute with Lilpiglet and Sitush, you can check talk pages for more information on those: Talk:Tarana-e-Pakistan Talk:Pakistan Talk:Pakistan Declaration Talk:Monarchy of Pakistan Talk:LGBT rights in Pakistan Talk:Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Talk:Ghazanfar Ali Khan Talk:Ayub Khan (President of Pakistan) Talk:Allahabad Address You can also see the personal insults hurled at me by Lilpiglet at Talk:LGBT rights in Pakistan and my calm and cool responses to those insults. I am just using this as an example of a good behavior which you can consider as well. So this is my final request with a promise not to create any future duplicate accounts and stay away from any pages where those other two accounts make any future contributions. Thanks for consideration Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 19:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Holy crap, please read WP:TLDR and WP:GAB for future unblock requests. You have been advised of the standard offer, which may be your best case here. Note: unblock in 6 months is not guaranteed - we actually recommend you go do some work elsewhere to prove yourself. However, your last post to this page directed to Sitush has shown me that you're not ready to even think about rejoining the community - that was an unacceptable use of this talkpage while blocked. You seem to continue to hold a WP:BATTLE mentality, which is not welcome. D P 16:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Per lilpiglet. And it's recommended that you should take advantage of the
WP:STANDARDOFFER, after 6 months or 1 year. You can request unban unblock, it should be evident that you wouldn't repeat this mistake, you can request either here or through the
Ban Appeals Subcomittee. There are many other wikipedias, such as
[2], wikicommons, etc, where you can contribute.
OccultZone (
Talk)
07:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi User:Sitush, i will like to request you to stop mentioning me on Wikipedia especially in derogatory terms like you did here. I have been very nice with you even though i was blocked partially because of your efforts, i even thanked you while accepting the ban no matter how unfair i believe it was.
You are saying that those votes are from a sockpuppet but no where you can pinpoint a vote from my accused sockpuppets. This is a proof in itself that those accounts were not mine otherwise i would have used them to influence those votes. My keep votes there were totally based on reliable sources which you consider to be not as reliable. It totally comes down to opinion vs. opinion. In your opinion, they are not reliable, in my opinion they are. Whose opinion wins? The one who has more votes and there were clearly more "keep" votes for AFDs which DGG and User:Rich Farmbrough also objected to. They were poorly decided to be deleted.
Moreover, if was to sockpuppet, i can still do so, there is no stopping me from creating another account or making IP edits but i have accepted the ban and decided not to create an account or do IP edits while i am seeing all sort of crap being added to the pages in my watchlist and no one is questioning that or even looking on those pages. If i was there, that crap would not have stayed there. I would have organized those pages in the past week when i was blocked but i am happy to see that there are sensible people like DGG and User:Rich Farmbrough who are reviewing deletions that happened mostly out of personal prejudice against some newcomers who did not accept authority of Sitush and a few others and in return the pages they created were taken to AFD and those newcomers being banned citing one policy or the other.
I also appreciate Justice007 keeping a check on rogue editor's edits based on her extreme personal viewpoints about topics related to Pakistan but there are many which still went unchecked.
It's totally unfair to keep mentioning someone in derogatory terms while knowing all that time that that person cannot respond to you. There were few occasions before. Sajjad Altaf ( talk) 15:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sajjad Altaf!
Wiki Loves Monuments, the world's largest photography competition, will be taking place in Pakistan this September. The competition is all about capturing the cultural monuments and heritage sites of Pakistan and uploading these images on Commons to create an online repository which will be freely available to all.
Start taking photos of the sites enlisted here and upload them in September to be eligible for national and international prizes.
Email: contact@wikilovesmonuments.pk
Official website:
wikilovesmonuments.pk
Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/WikiLovesMonumentsPK
Posted by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Pakistan
Hi Sajjad Altaf!
Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan is organizing an edit drive for Pakistani Wikipedians on Pakistani Cultural Heritage throughout the month of July.
Top three contributors will be given a gift pack containing Wikipedia merchandise.
You can read the event details
here.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
11:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a member of
WikiProject Pakistan
Sajjad Altaf. The Ban Appeals Subcommittee has agreed to unblock you under the standard offer, with a restriction to a single account, this one. I have therefore unblocked you. WormTT( talk) 10:08, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 02:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Pakistani Barnstar of National Merit | |
Fantastic job on the articles about Pakistani villages! It's an often overlooked topic, and your contributions as an editor are greatly appreciated. Keep up the good work! Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC) |
Hello, Sajjad Altaf. Thank you for your work on Malhu. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
IMO this clearly should be merged into the Sanghoi village article. Clearly does not have GNG sources or the type of content that could be derived from them. The NGeo SNG clearly says that abstract divisions like this do not have presumed notability. I think that the creator would be a good one to do the merge. Happy editing!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
North8000 ( talk) 15:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)