This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Thanks for the . I believe you are from Pakistan. The article needs a Pakistani viewpoint, to balance it and to fill up gaps (especially in sections titled Pakistani response and Reaction in West Pakistan to the war). Can you lend a hand or get help from others (of course, the editor should not be too patriotic to outgun encyclopedic approach)? If we can have three editors from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to collaborate, may be we can ask for a bigger collaboration at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. This is one of the biggest events in Indian history, the biggest in Pakistani history, and the history for Bangladesh. I wonder at the little work it received so far. Aditya( talk • contribs) 05:14, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Civil war in Afghanistan (1992–1996)". Thank you. JCAla ( talk) 13:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Isn't this a violation of your interaction ban? Regardless of how you got there? You might want to undo your !vote. -- regentspark ( comment) 14:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I would note that assuming there is an iban between you and Darkness Shines, your vote at an AFD on an article he created might not look so good. [1] Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 15:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
TopGun, I found the recent thread on ANI to be quite illustrative of the entire case as a whole: Darkness Shines is obeying the letter of the rule while violating its spirit, Meanwhile, you make an edit because you think "well the other guy is allowed to do it, so I might as well too." There are a few problems that have cropped up in this:
Please avoid editing or nominating for deletion any articles started by Darkness Shines, and please avoid editing or removing any sections edited or added by Darkness Shines. That the interaction ban has been flouted in the past is immaterial: please don't violate it yourself anymore. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 11:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Removing first and then discussing would be a good idea, but you might have read that there are concerns about how the ban is being construed while it was not construed on the same before. I have no way of telling that I have violated when it was ok before even though there are no specific parameters. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 12:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there,
please note that I have already posted a note about this on the article's talk page. Unlike the IP, who didn't react to anything I wrote on his or her talk page. So careful with those templates, please. O.Koslowski ( talk) 13:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC) And since the IP never reacted and you seem to support the claim, consider yourself tasked with finding proper references that support the claim that the bombing is generally considered an act of state-sponsored terrorism. If you fail to do so in a timely manner, I will request dispute resolution. O.Koslowski ( talk) 13:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
TG, I notice you consider the renomination by DS disruptive. But, do bear in mind the note by the closing admin on the previous deletion discussion. the template has been renamed and revised during the discussion. Feel free to renominate it if you still feel it should be deleted. I'm not sure if arguing that the renomination is an instance of WP:POINT after such a clear invitation. I would let it go if I were you (but, of course, it's your call.) -- regentspark ( comment) 22:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
...And I'd welcome your input; please, see here. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:44, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
The information I removed over at the Pakistan article was not backed up by the given source. It said "recognized regional languages", but the just gave a census link to show that these languages are spoken there. If just being present in the census made something a "recognized regional language", then places like Australia and the US would have hundreds of them. saɪm duʃan Talk| Contribs 07:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
You seem to be the only one who wants to keep the 'militant' label, where as more than 3 editors in recent history including me have reverted to the 'terrorist' label. Keep in mind, the main articles of both the organisations, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, say they have been declared as terrorist organisations and even banned for that. Thanks! Anir1uph ( talk) 18:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
sure, I'll be glad to clarify, wherever I can, ciao -- Dℬig Xray 19:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Both Darkness Shines and JCAla have indicated that they are willing to cease disputes elsewhere. I trust that you also agree with this. I've asked the following question: "Would participants be willing to agree on specific examples of text within articles that we could take a look at with reference to the identified issues?" [2] Sunray ( talk) 22:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Please make a separate article for list of all Committees of national assembly because the page National Assembly of Pakistan is taking too much time to load on slow internet connections... and also remove the table for election results 2008 because results are already published under these articles Elections in Pakistan Pakistani general election, 2008 thank you... Tariq.Imran Talk —Preceding undated comment added 14:08, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
I just removed your template of DBigXray - as you can see, it's already been under discussion - no need to be rude and pile-on with a template ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Editwarring? One single revert to add back my own comment that was removed against the talkpage guidelines is not editwar. Go and read the policies. Don't think you're in the right to block me on adding back a civil comment given your treatment of actual personal attacks. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. (
talk→
BWilkins
←track) 17:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The blocking admin is a hypocrite who is prejudiced against me and doesn't think an IP who calls me the most "notorious editor on the wiki" along with other slurs is making personal attacks, didn't remove the comment of a person who called me an "idiot" on the talk page and yet blocks me for for reinstating my own comment only once that was not nearly a personal attack by his own judgement and vandalized by a user, and only reinstated and self reverted by an administrator. It's time Bwilkins should be desysoped for his stupid judgement repeatedly. Btw, I'm very well aware of WP:NOTTHEM and WP:NPA, and inspite of that I'm being forced to write this. So, coming to the actual reason for unblock... unblock me so that I can file an arbcom request against Bwilkins, there's no disruption going on currently for which I should stay blocked, I'll be filing an arbcom request whenever the block expires, an unblock will speed up the process. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 19:32, 10 June 2012 (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.
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I did address the reason for block. Bwiklins has handed out a dumb bureaucratic block calling a single revert of my own comment editwarring and disruptive while it should have been handed out to the user who removed my comment; my comment was not at all disruptive either, if not constructive. There's no policy that asks for removal of some one's comments because they are scrutinizing another editor's past actions. Removing that was disruptive to start with.... and I'll like to contest it at arbcom hopefully where he will get equal scrutiny on his current and past actions rather than here. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 20:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Since the message above doesn't seem to have sunk in, I'll just be blunt; read WP:NOTTHEM and WP:EBUR. Making threats to the blocking admin is about the best possible way to ensure you won't be unblocked. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 22:12, 10 June 2012 (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.
TopGun, you're going to lose this battle. ArbCom will absolutely not take it up, and even if it did, it wouldn't even censor BWilkins. Please: swallow your pride a bit and admit the comment was an unnecessary ad hominem, forget about what everyone else said, take a few deep breaths, and move on. Sometimes crappy things happen. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 22:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The block is a bad block, I do admit my comment might not be constructive to content discussion and that I've been blocked for reinstating it (after a user wrongly blanked it), and I rejected the basis of this block and contest those as I did nothing wrong in reinstating my comment... not remotely a disruptive comment - certainly not blockable disruption. The reviewing admin should check my comment at Talk:Battle of Chawinda before reviewing this block. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 06:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This looks like a sensible block to me. Your abusive comment [3] was entirely unhelpful, and you'd been asked to remove it. In the future please take steps to deescalate disagreements rather than throw more fuel on the fire like you did here. Nick-D ( talk) 07:41, 11 June 2012 (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.
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Not abusive per blocking admin, unlike the decline reason. [4]. See last request for the rest. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 5:06 am, Today (UTC−4)
Accept reason:
TG, I'm unblocking you but am also putting you on notice that you'll be blocked for longer durations - without warning - if you persist in templating established users. This wasn't the first time that you've done that. Treading carefully is generally good advice, especially when you're facing the prospect of a site ban. regentspark ( comment) 13:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Can some one change my comment about the ban to 'support banning both' with the same reasoning on at WP:ANI on the ban proposal...? Looks like that's the way to go now. If banning me bans another disruptive editor and that's the only way, I should support it. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
What on earth are you thinking taking the heap for something you have nothing to do with? DID YOU HOUND DS NO YOU DID NOT so do not agree to this dumb ban. These retarded admins want to drag you into the muck with DS because they know your CIVIL and POLITE and to make DS ahppy why the hell should you suffer for a abusive hounder whos block log prooves his intentions remind the admins that yoU never hounded anyone dont be used as a sacrificial lamb just because admins dont have the balls to block DS indefinately and instead put you into the cell to appease his aggressive attitutde maggog has given in hes shattered under DSs claims of his bias DONT GIVE UP ! 31.52.189.53 ( talk) 17:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Smash!
You've been
squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.
“ | Never argue with fools; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. -- Hieronymous Anonymous | ” |
Have this cup of coffee and relax. Don't stress :) Mar4d ( talk) 07:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
Got an article to keep you busy, Economy of Rawalpindi :) Sadly, my knowledge of Rawalpindi is quite limited. But being the fourth largest city of Pakistan, I feel that this subject area needs more focus and is currently under covered on Wikipedia. More Rawalpindi articles might be on their way soon. Since you're a Rawalpindian, feel free to improve and expand them. I'm looking for some good sources for the economy article at the moment. Mar4d ( talk) 15:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
I am blocked till night so I can't go and report, but I'll like to report this IBAN violation... and I hope that this time admins decide to put up an escalating block unlike the last 3 violations that occured in last 2 days. [7] [8] (and many more before - See Magog the Ogre's talk page). -- lTopGunl ( talk) 09:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
admin help}}
So I'd be blocked on
reporting the vios, and DS is allowed to chat with his friends about me. making direct references to me?
[11]. Revoke their talkpage access or increase the block length if you really do mean to enforce the ban. It's time you know who's the one making violations on regular basis even within the blocks. --
lTopGunl (
talk) 09:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
chill out mate. i know it's difficult but that's my best advice. go out, drink some beers and pick up some women. it really helps :P altetendekrabbe 09:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC) |
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
regentspark (
comment) 21:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)Well, you're quoting the wrong part. This comes under reporting the IBAN and contesting it. I reported it, DS appealed it at the ANI. I clarified my report and lack of enforcement and asked to take action, in this case it was an escalated ban. There's no violation there. If you read my comment, it is still the same as it was before except the bolded part, and none of it comes under a violation. It will be against natural justice if I'm not allowed to talk about the IBAN and the other editor when every thing under that section is a discussion of IBAN. I'll note another thing though, why wasn't this block a 24 hr block to start with, instead of a week's, given this was my first block for the IBAN? DS was given such escalation, wasn't he... so to speak of double standards. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Discussion of IBAN in an IBAN discussion (in this case escalating the ban on DS) is not a violation!! Have you read WP:IBAN? Regentspark is wrong. This comes under reporting previous ban violations and escalating due to that. As previously clarified at ANI, supper injunctions are not in the scope of IBAN! This block should be reverted as "not a vio". I find it ironic that DS always comes up with a pointing finger at me, first reporting me and then calling it a vio when I contest... this is the same thing done now, he reported this "vio" on his talk page even though I clarified before hand at ANI that my participation in that discussion was not a vio, and yet that is left as ok... which ofcourse makes me assume that there is a silent consensus for that to be OK. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 04:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
IBANned users may not comment on each other or on each other's actions, except to report a violation of the ban itself or to defend themselves when reported; in this case, you were quite clearly commenting on DS, but you were neither reporting him nor being reported. This block is, therefore, reasonable and warranted. Salvio Let's talk about it! 08:52, 13 June 2012 (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.
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I was actually reporting him - reported him to an admin. He appealed the sanction he was given... I was in the right to further support action which was as a result of the violation. In anycase why is my block not following the same escalation that was given to DS? Why am I blocked for a week right away on the first violation even if we consider it one? -- lTopGunl ( talk) 09:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Accept reason:
The edit in question may have been a violation of the interaction ban. Perhaps it was. It probably was. But it was entirely reasonable to believe that it wasn't, or at least not a violation that would lead to a one-week block. Note that this is not a license to try to discover how close to the fence you can go without being electrocuted. I'm sure admins in the future will be less forgiving toward actions of this nature, given even the brief amount of history between you and DS that I cared to read. From now on, if you think it might be a violation of your interaction ban, consider it one. The vast majority of articles and discussions on Wikipedia have not been edited by DarknessShines. Try contributing to one of those. -- tariqabjotu 20:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Would you be interested in continuing the mediation? If you were to agree to not edit the topic while mediating and mediate in good faith, I could propose this to the blocking admin. Sunray ( talk) 07:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there,
it's been two weeks now, and I have yet to see a valid reference for the claim you supported re. the American bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki being considered an act of state-sponsored terrorism. Would you mind if I considered your deafening silence an agreement to removing that absurd statement from the article?
Regards, O.Koslowski ( talk) 05:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
There is a ref link. Please click the IMF (International Monetary Fund) link you would have seen those updated figures. Not only that you should refer to the recent Pakistan economic survey at finance.gov.pk for outgoing FY 11-12.
Barnstar by Anupam copied to user page. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 09:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
A long deserved barnstar for User:TopGun! Thanks for all your contributions to South Asian related articles on Wikipedia! May God bless you and your family in abundance! Your friend, Anupam Talk 08:31, 17 June 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for the welcome message I got when editing "History of Pakistan". I do write, mostly minor edits, under 'Wiki_dr_mahmad' but am too lazy to login at times. Sorry for this. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.218.211.53 ( talk) 18:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the invitation. I will gladly join Wiki project Pakistan and contribute as much as I can. :) Pk-user ( talk) 23:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar by Dave1185 copied to user page. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 13:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
For the kind words on ANI, thank you. Also, the reason why I had been trying to help you and Raj to get along was due to a real life scenario of my two friends - one was from Pakistan and the other was from Punjab, but I won't go into detajls. Maybe another time, yeah? For now, I just want to say "thank you". And I assume that Raj is reading this, I forgive you and won't retaliate against you for whatever you did to me on ANI and on WP. FWIW. Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 12:39, 19 June 2012 (UTC) |
Barnstar by Essaa Khan copied to user page. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 10:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Great Works you have Done here !! EssaKhan ( talk) 04:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC) |
Hi TG! I have declined deletion of this because it was leading to a page so G8 was not eligible. Cheers! →TSU tp* 10:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
FYI. -- regentspark ( comment) 17:29, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there! Sorry but I have removed your vote from this. At deletion process, nom is itself considered as a delete vote and if you add again then it becomes double. The thing is different at RfAs where nominators can support the candidate but not here. Cheers! :) →TSU tp* 03:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi I found Rawalpindi page without any montage.So, I created this one.:) As I'm not a native..I'm not sure of any more important landmarks etc..Please inform me if any other exists.I shall update the image.Please consider placing the image in the article.Regards TheStrike Σagle 10:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I had already responded on talk page, and please do not revert, as it cannot be generalize to all the Muslims in India, Just for instance if any non-muslim in Pakistan raised slogan of any other country, does it applies to all the non-muslims. Regards :)-- Omer123hussain ( talk) 14:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi TonGun. Just to let you know, you reported User:92.4.184.70 to AIV for vandalism when the issue was a content dispute. I blocked the user for 24 hours for violating 3RR, but WP:EWN would have been a better place to report. Thanks for your efforts, ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 12:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The article Rape in Northeast India has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Magog the Ogre (
talk) 22:44, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rape in Northeast India is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape in Northeast India until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. KTC ( talk) 21:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Thanks for the . I believe you are from Pakistan. The article needs a Pakistani viewpoint, to balance it and to fill up gaps (especially in sections titled Pakistani response and Reaction in West Pakistan to the war). Can you lend a hand or get help from others (of course, the editor should not be too patriotic to outgun encyclopedic approach)? If we can have three editors from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to collaborate, may be we can ask for a bigger collaboration at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. This is one of the biggest events in Indian history, the biggest in Pakistani history, and the history for Bangladesh. I wonder at the little work it received so far. Aditya( talk • contribs) 05:14, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Civil war in Afghanistan (1992–1996)". Thank you. JCAla ( talk) 13:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Isn't this a violation of your interaction ban? Regardless of how you got there? You might want to undo your !vote. -- regentspark ( comment) 14:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I would note that assuming there is an iban between you and Darkness Shines, your vote at an AFD on an article he created might not look so good. [1] Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 15:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
TopGun, I found the recent thread on ANI to be quite illustrative of the entire case as a whole: Darkness Shines is obeying the letter of the rule while violating its spirit, Meanwhile, you make an edit because you think "well the other guy is allowed to do it, so I might as well too." There are a few problems that have cropped up in this:
Please avoid editing or nominating for deletion any articles started by Darkness Shines, and please avoid editing or removing any sections edited or added by Darkness Shines. That the interaction ban has been flouted in the past is immaterial: please don't violate it yourself anymore. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 11:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Removing first and then discussing would be a good idea, but you might have read that there are concerns about how the ban is being construed while it was not construed on the same before. I have no way of telling that I have violated when it was ok before even though there are no specific parameters. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 12:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there,
please note that I have already posted a note about this on the article's talk page. Unlike the IP, who didn't react to anything I wrote on his or her talk page. So careful with those templates, please. O.Koslowski ( talk) 13:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC) And since the IP never reacted and you seem to support the claim, consider yourself tasked with finding proper references that support the claim that the bombing is generally considered an act of state-sponsored terrorism. If you fail to do so in a timely manner, I will request dispute resolution. O.Koslowski ( talk) 13:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
TG, I notice you consider the renomination by DS disruptive. But, do bear in mind the note by the closing admin on the previous deletion discussion. the template has been renamed and revised during the discussion. Feel free to renominate it if you still feel it should be deleted. I'm not sure if arguing that the renomination is an instance of WP:POINT after such a clear invitation. I would let it go if I were you (but, of course, it's your call.) -- regentspark ( comment) 22:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
...And I'd welcome your input; please, see here. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:44, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
The information I removed over at the Pakistan article was not backed up by the given source. It said "recognized regional languages", but the just gave a census link to show that these languages are spoken there. If just being present in the census made something a "recognized regional language", then places like Australia and the US would have hundreds of them. saɪm duʃan Talk| Contribs 07:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
You seem to be the only one who wants to keep the 'militant' label, where as more than 3 editors in recent history including me have reverted to the 'terrorist' label. Keep in mind, the main articles of both the organisations, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, say they have been declared as terrorist organisations and even banned for that. Thanks! Anir1uph ( talk) 18:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
sure, I'll be glad to clarify, wherever I can, ciao -- Dℬig Xray 19:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Both Darkness Shines and JCAla have indicated that they are willing to cease disputes elsewhere. I trust that you also agree with this. I've asked the following question: "Would participants be willing to agree on specific examples of text within articles that we could take a look at with reference to the identified issues?" [2] Sunray ( talk) 22:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Please make a separate article for list of all Committees of national assembly because the page National Assembly of Pakistan is taking too much time to load on slow internet connections... and also remove the table for election results 2008 because results are already published under these articles Elections in Pakistan Pakistani general election, 2008 thank you... Tariq.Imran Talk —Preceding undated comment added 14:08, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
I just removed your template of DBigXray - as you can see, it's already been under discussion - no need to be rude and pile-on with a template ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Editwarring? One single revert to add back my own comment that was removed against the talkpage guidelines is not editwar. Go and read the policies. Don't think you're in the right to block me on adding back a civil comment given your treatment of actual personal attacks. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. (
talk→
BWilkins
←track) 17:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The blocking admin is a hypocrite who is prejudiced against me and doesn't think an IP who calls me the most "notorious editor on the wiki" along with other slurs is making personal attacks, didn't remove the comment of a person who called me an "idiot" on the talk page and yet blocks me for for reinstating my own comment only once that was not nearly a personal attack by his own judgement and vandalized by a user, and only reinstated and self reverted by an administrator. It's time Bwilkins should be desysoped for his stupid judgement repeatedly. Btw, I'm very well aware of WP:NOTTHEM and WP:NPA, and inspite of that I'm being forced to write this. So, coming to the actual reason for unblock... unblock me so that I can file an arbcom request against Bwilkins, there's no disruption going on currently for which I should stay blocked, I'll be filing an arbcom request whenever the block expires, an unblock will speed up the process. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 19:32, 10 June 2012 (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.
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I did address the reason for block. Bwiklins has handed out a dumb bureaucratic block calling a single revert of my own comment editwarring and disruptive while it should have been handed out to the user who removed my comment; my comment was not at all disruptive either, if not constructive. There's no policy that asks for removal of some one's comments because they are scrutinizing another editor's past actions. Removing that was disruptive to start with.... and I'll like to contest it at arbcom hopefully where he will get equal scrutiny on his current and past actions rather than here. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 20:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Since the message above doesn't seem to have sunk in, I'll just be blunt; read WP:NOTTHEM and WP:EBUR. Making threats to the blocking admin is about the best possible way to ensure you won't be unblocked. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 22:12, 10 June 2012 (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.
TopGun, you're going to lose this battle. ArbCom will absolutely not take it up, and even if it did, it wouldn't even censor BWilkins. Please: swallow your pride a bit and admit the comment was an unnecessary ad hominem, forget about what everyone else said, take a few deep breaths, and move on. Sometimes crappy things happen. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 22:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The block is a bad block, I do admit my comment might not be constructive to content discussion and that I've been blocked for reinstating it (after a user wrongly blanked it), and I rejected the basis of this block and contest those as I did nothing wrong in reinstating my comment... not remotely a disruptive comment - certainly not blockable disruption. The reviewing admin should check my comment at Talk:Battle of Chawinda before reviewing this block. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 06:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This looks like a sensible block to me. Your abusive comment [3] was entirely unhelpful, and you'd been asked to remove it. In the future please take steps to deescalate disagreements rather than throw more fuel on the fire like you did here. Nick-D ( talk) 07:41, 11 June 2012 (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.
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Not abusive per blocking admin, unlike the decline reason. [4]. See last request for the rest. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 5:06 am, Today (UTC−4)
Accept reason:
TG, I'm unblocking you but am also putting you on notice that you'll be blocked for longer durations - without warning - if you persist in templating established users. This wasn't the first time that you've done that. Treading carefully is generally good advice, especially when you're facing the prospect of a site ban. regentspark ( comment) 13:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Can some one change my comment about the ban to 'support banning both' with the same reasoning on at WP:ANI on the ban proposal...? Looks like that's the way to go now. If banning me bans another disruptive editor and that's the only way, I should support it. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
What on earth are you thinking taking the heap for something you have nothing to do with? DID YOU HOUND DS NO YOU DID NOT so do not agree to this dumb ban. These retarded admins want to drag you into the muck with DS because they know your CIVIL and POLITE and to make DS ahppy why the hell should you suffer for a abusive hounder whos block log prooves his intentions remind the admins that yoU never hounded anyone dont be used as a sacrificial lamb just because admins dont have the balls to block DS indefinately and instead put you into the cell to appease his aggressive attitutde maggog has given in hes shattered under DSs claims of his bias DONT GIVE UP ! 31.52.189.53 ( talk) 17:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Smash!
You've been
squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.
“ | Never argue with fools; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. -- Hieronymous Anonymous | ” |
Have this cup of coffee and relax. Don't stress :) Mar4d ( talk) 07:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
Got an article to keep you busy, Economy of Rawalpindi :) Sadly, my knowledge of Rawalpindi is quite limited. But being the fourth largest city of Pakistan, I feel that this subject area needs more focus and is currently under covered on Wikipedia. More Rawalpindi articles might be on their way soon. Since you're a Rawalpindian, feel free to improve and expand them. I'm looking for some good sources for the economy article at the moment. Mar4d ( talk) 15:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
I am blocked till night so I can't go and report, but I'll like to report this IBAN violation... and I hope that this time admins decide to put up an escalating block unlike the last 3 violations that occured in last 2 days. [7] [8] (and many more before - See Magog the Ogre's talk page). -- lTopGunl ( talk) 09:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
admin help}}
So I'd be blocked on
reporting the vios, and DS is allowed to chat with his friends about me. making direct references to me?
[11]. Revoke their talkpage access or increase the block length if you really do mean to enforce the ban. It's time you know who's the one making violations on regular basis even within the blocks. --
lTopGunl (
talk) 09:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
chill out mate. i know it's difficult but that's my best advice. go out, drink some beers and pick up some women. it really helps :P altetendekrabbe 09:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC) |
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
regentspark (
comment) 21:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)Well, you're quoting the wrong part. This comes under reporting the IBAN and contesting it. I reported it, DS appealed it at the ANI. I clarified my report and lack of enforcement and asked to take action, in this case it was an escalated ban. There's no violation there. If you read my comment, it is still the same as it was before except the bolded part, and none of it comes under a violation. It will be against natural justice if I'm not allowed to talk about the IBAN and the other editor when every thing under that section is a discussion of IBAN. I'll note another thing though, why wasn't this block a 24 hr block to start with, instead of a week's, given this was my first block for the IBAN? DS was given such escalation, wasn't he... so to speak of double standards. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 17:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Discussion of IBAN in an IBAN discussion (in this case escalating the ban on DS) is not a violation!! Have you read WP:IBAN? Regentspark is wrong. This comes under reporting previous ban violations and escalating due to that. As previously clarified at ANI, supper injunctions are not in the scope of IBAN! This block should be reverted as "not a vio". I find it ironic that DS always comes up with a pointing finger at me, first reporting me and then calling it a vio when I contest... this is the same thing done now, he reported this "vio" on his talk page even though I clarified before hand at ANI that my participation in that discussion was not a vio, and yet that is left as ok... which ofcourse makes me assume that there is a silent consensus for that to be OK. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 04:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
IBANned users may not comment on each other or on each other's actions, except to report a violation of the ban itself or to defend themselves when reported; in this case, you were quite clearly commenting on DS, but you were neither reporting him nor being reported. This block is, therefore, reasonable and warranted. Salvio Let's talk about it! 08:52, 13 June 2012 (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.
TopGun/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I was actually reporting him - reported him to an admin. He appealed the sanction he was given... I was in the right to further support action which was as a result of the violation. In anycase why is my block not following the same escalation that was given to DS? Why am I blocked for a week right away on the first violation even if we consider it one? -- lTopGunl ( talk) 09:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Accept reason:
The edit in question may have been a violation of the interaction ban. Perhaps it was. It probably was. But it was entirely reasonable to believe that it wasn't, or at least not a violation that would lead to a one-week block. Note that this is not a license to try to discover how close to the fence you can go without being electrocuted. I'm sure admins in the future will be less forgiving toward actions of this nature, given even the brief amount of history between you and DS that I cared to read. From now on, if you think it might be a violation of your interaction ban, consider it one. The vast majority of articles and discussions on Wikipedia have not been edited by DarknessShines. Try contributing to one of those. -- tariqabjotu 20:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Would you be interested in continuing the mediation? If you were to agree to not edit the topic while mediating and mediate in good faith, I could propose this to the blocking admin. Sunray ( talk) 07:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there,
it's been two weeks now, and I have yet to see a valid reference for the claim you supported re. the American bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki being considered an act of state-sponsored terrorism. Would you mind if I considered your deafening silence an agreement to removing that absurd statement from the article?
Regards, O.Koslowski ( talk) 05:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
There is a ref link. Please click the IMF (International Monetary Fund) link you would have seen those updated figures. Not only that you should refer to the recent Pakistan economic survey at finance.gov.pk for outgoing FY 11-12.
Barnstar by Anupam copied to user page. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 09:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
A long deserved barnstar for User:TopGun! Thanks for all your contributions to South Asian related articles on Wikipedia! May God bless you and your family in abundance! Your friend, Anupam Talk 08:31, 17 June 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for the welcome message I got when editing "History of Pakistan". I do write, mostly minor edits, under 'Wiki_dr_mahmad' but am too lazy to login at times. Sorry for this. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.218.211.53 ( talk) 18:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the invitation. I will gladly join Wiki project Pakistan and contribute as much as I can. :) Pk-user ( talk) 23:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar by Dave1185 copied to user page. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 13:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
For the kind words on ANI, thank you. Also, the reason why I had been trying to help you and Raj to get along was due to a real life scenario of my two friends - one was from Pakistan and the other was from Punjab, but I won't go into detajls. Maybe another time, yeah? For now, I just want to say "thank you". And I assume that Raj is reading this, I forgive you and won't retaliate against you for whatever you did to me on ANI and on WP. FWIW. Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 12:39, 19 June 2012 (UTC) |
Barnstar by Essaa Khan copied to user page. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 10:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Great Works you have Done here !! EssaKhan ( talk) 04:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC) |
Hi TG! I have declined deletion of this because it was leading to a page so G8 was not eligible. Cheers! →TSU tp* 10:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
FYI. -- regentspark ( comment) 17:29, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there! Sorry but I have removed your vote from this. At deletion process, nom is itself considered as a delete vote and if you add again then it becomes double. The thing is different at RfAs where nominators can support the candidate but not here. Cheers! :) →TSU tp* 03:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi I found Rawalpindi page without any montage.So, I created this one.:) As I'm not a native..I'm not sure of any more important landmarks etc..Please inform me if any other exists.I shall update the image.Please consider placing the image in the article.Regards TheStrike Σagle 10:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I had already responded on talk page, and please do not revert, as it cannot be generalize to all the Muslims in India, Just for instance if any non-muslim in Pakistan raised slogan of any other country, does it applies to all the non-muslims. Regards :)-- Omer123hussain ( talk) 14:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi TonGun. Just to let you know, you reported User:92.4.184.70 to AIV for vandalism when the issue was a content dispute. I blocked the user for 24 hours for violating 3RR, but WP:EWN would have been a better place to report. Thanks for your efforts, ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 12:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The article Rape in Northeast India has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Magog the Ogre (
talk) 22:44, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rape in Northeast India is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape in Northeast India until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. KTC ( talk) 21:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)