Welcome! Hello, Noor Aalam, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Anupam^Talk 03:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, IP198, Where did user:Freedom skies say that you were my sockpuppet or vice-versa? At least on this page s/he is being only being coy and not naming anyone. No worries. If s/he has actually made this accusation somewhere, I'll be happy to challenge her/him to a check user ID check and have the loser donate $200 to Wikimedia foundation! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is "hindowakans?" (ie. the WP link)? Please provide links for both pages? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very suggestive; speaking things like "I do have high intelligence" and blanking discussion page at the first hint of allegations of unexplained expertise. Having multiple IPs at one's disposal is not uncommon. I'll wait and watch. My opinion, the overlaps will stop and the editing on other topics will continue. The pattern and nature of the edits will be similar though. The initial overlap seems to be good enough for future references though. _{Freedom skies| talk}  18:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be using the edits on Iqbal for references on probable future ocassions. _{Freedom skies| talk}  19:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP, I've been reading, in English, about clothing in South Asia and Afghanistan, for a long time. I had never heard of "Pathani suit" until you introduced the term. I googled for "Punjabi suit" (with the quotes -- that's important) and got 21,600 hits. I googled for "Pathani suit" and got 2,260 hits, most of which were tailor shops.

You may want English-speakers to adopt that term, but it simply isn't a common English term. If I were to google in Urdu, I might get a different result. Except that I only know a few words of Urdu :) and can't type in Nastaliq.

I'm sick and tired of Afghan-Pashtun-Indo-Pak nationalist squabbles being carried on over a simple piece of clothing. I wear the darn outfit and I'm not any of the above. The squabbles should be moved to a separate section of the article and OUT of the header. Zora 21:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pathani suit doesn't get equal billing with Punjabi suit because it isn't as common in English. The lead para talks about the names that an English-speaking reader might encounter. If they won't ever hear the name, there's no need to mention it.

You may feel strongly that Pathans are just as important as Punjabis, but that won't change the English language. As for assuming that I hate Pakistanis and Afghans ... that's nuts. Sheesh. I get Indian editors accusing me of being Pakistani and Pakistani editors accusing me of being anti-Pakistani. Zora 22:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP98, you want to add your "communal" comments to the sari article because you know that they're correct and everyone in Pakistan agrees with you. This is a pattern. You give no references, no quotes, nothing is verifiable, but you're sure that you're right and everyone agrees with you. But anyone can claim that! I argue all the time with Hindutvadis who claim that all Hindus agree with them. They also claim to be speaking for millions of people.

We can't write an encyclopedia that way. We do have a great many statements that aren't properly cited or verified but we should be trying to convert them into verified statements.

I'm going to edit down your comments again. If you want to add that "information", get a quote from a reliable source. If the source is in Urdu, give the quote in the original and then a translation, so that other editors can check to be sure that your translation is correct.

BTW, much of the rest of the sari article needs to be verified the same way. I think I could do a lot of it from my personal copy of Chantal Boulanger's book, which I recently purchases. I just haven't had time. Zora 20:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove templates before discussing on talk pages. This is against policy. If I am wrong and it has been discussed somewhere, please re-revert it with giving the appropriate link to Talk:Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, failure of which will result in reversion.--æn↓þæµß¶-ŧ-¢(I prefer replying to each other's talk pages.) 20:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The templates represent who want to contribute, and nothing else. Pakistani template was put by Pakistani editors, who wanted to add the article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan and collaborate. If they decide to remove it, they are free to do so. Whether he was an Indian or Pakistani is not determined by such templates, but what is mentioned in the article.--æn↓þæµß¶-ŧ-¢(I prefer replying to each other's talk pages.) 01:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP198, I've noticed your contributions to Pashtun related articles. I would like to invite you to join WikiProject Pashtun by adding your name here. Please consider joining if you would like. With regards, Anupam^Talk 03:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your'e quite welcome dear! I understand your time constraint and will be happy to discuss major changes in Pashtun-related articles with you. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors at Wikipedia. With warm regards, Anupam^Talk 00:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP198, I've been adding text and pictures to the History of Pakistan, which, I know, you've contributed to before. Could you take a look at my post: Two Pages?? Would be great to get your feedback. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:History of India. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. . And ohh.. btw, this is what I'm talking about. Cheers and happy Ugadi :) Sarvagnya 23:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, the Wiki is too PC. Nevertheless, I respect its rules so thanks for bringing that to my notice. I will let your changes stand and modify the articles in keeping with the MoS. Max ^{- You were saying?} 15:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP198,
It seems we have a disagreement on our hands about whether to link the terrorism template to Terrorism in India or not. Allow me put forth my arguments, and pardon me if I sound antagonistic. I don't mean to. Your objection to qualifying a group as "terrorist" was acknowledged, but objecting to linking to a valid Wikipedia article just because it contains the word "terrorism" seems to stretch it too far. I see no violations of wiki policy in linking to an article that is relevant to the groups mentioned on the template. Please take a look at the Al-Qaeda page. There is a template about War on Terrorism at the end. Will you object to using that too?

Would be interested to know your views. Regards, Max ^{- You were saying?} 17:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP198,

Thanks for your response (and for not reverting the template :-)). You said, Terrorist commit terrorism, not militants. Going by your logic, there is no terrorism in the world, only militant resistance and "freedom struggle". That's fine, you're entitled to your personal opinion, but evidently the countries that have declared the organizations in question as terrorist groups do not share your point of view. Also, unfortunately, no independent, reliable source describes the activities of LeT and JeM as actions of a "freedom struggle" so you cannot hope to create an article by that name and link to it from the template.

As an aside, articles such as Terrorism in India, Terrorism in the United Kingdom, Terrorism in the United States or even Terrorism in Pakistan have the word "terrorism" in their titles for a reason. If they were against wiki policy, these articles would certainly have been renamed by now. Anyway, the bottom line is that I have linked to a legitimate article with an accepted title that is completely relevant to the template in question. That's all. There's no hidden agenda behind it. I daresay that you may be reading a little too much into the matter, but I can see where you're coming from so I don't blame you.

I would be glad to hear what WP:VP has to say. I would be interested in hearing comments from other editors.

Thanks for your time, Max ^{- You were saying?} 19:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting it on WP:VP. Let's see what the community has to say. I will respect consensus too. Max ^{- You were saying?} 06:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, no one seems to have had an opinion about this, so yeah, you can take the post off VP.

Coming to your suggestion about another template, I'm not comfortable linking to the category namespace from a template. All templates I've seen link to specific articles in the main namespace about the subject in question. Plus, if we create a separate template for militant groups in J&K, there's always the article on Terrorism in Kashmir to link it to :-)

In any case, let's not go through the hassle of preparing another template and then editing relevant articles to put it there. Instead, I propose a compromise. For the time being, let's remove the link on the template and rename the title to Organizations listed as terrorist groups in India. I will try to get more comments and information from other places (e.g. helpdesk) about how wiki policy should be interpreted regarding the Terrorism in India link. I will let you know what I find. If you agree with the temporary solution, please go ahead and edit the template. Thanks, Max ^{- You were saying?} 07:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposal looks interesting, but I have a couple of concerns. First, won't a separate template for organizations in Kashmir be too small? The current template has only 5 or 6 names listed under Kashmir. A small template with a big title will look a bit uneven. Second, I think it might be kinda klutzy to link each word to a different article, and the reader may end up confused. For example, you suggested linking "organizations" to Kashmir conflict but the word and the linked article do not seem related in any way.

I'm also curious as to why you agree to link to Terrorism in Kashmir in your proposed template, but object to linking to Terrorism in India in the current one :-)

I agree with you that some of the organizations in the current template are not active but they were a formidable threat when they were active, and are still are banned as terrorist groups. As for the names that don't have links (groups from North-East India), someone can at least start a stub about them and then we can link to them from the template. I'll see what I can do about this, but unfortunately I don't have much time to spend on the wiki nowadays.

My opinion is that we should go ahead with the current template for the time being and modify the title according to our consensus. That said, I'm not totally averse to your idea of a Kashmir template, but maybe you can create it as a rough draft in your user area first (e.g. in User:IP198\Kashmir_Template) and we can see how it looks. Does this sound okay?

Thanks, Max ^{- You were saying?} 19:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP198. Thanks for your comment on my talk page. My edit which changed Hindi to Hindustani was entirely appropriate because the point of the paragraph is to show that words in the Hindi-Urdu (Hindustani) language show some variability in pronunciation. In Lucknow or Karachi, for example, the word will be pronouced as shalwar whereas in Amritsar, the word may be pronouced as salwar. The paragraph is basically conveying the point that Hindustani words may be pronounced differently if one is speaking towards the Urdu or towards the Hindi. Regarding the Salwar Kameez reference: The link no where claims that the shalwar kameez originiated in North India but only says that is is popular there, especially in the Punjab region. As a result, I feel that there is no need to remove the reference as it appropriately buttresses the preceding statement and is useful in providing information on the dress. As a result, I have restored the reference although I am open to more discussion on the topic. Thanks once again for bringing the issue up. I highly appreciate you for it. With regards, Anupam^Talk 03:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a second look at the reference, I see where your'e coming from. Since the article primarily concerns the presence of the Shalwar Kameez in India, I think that it is trying to communicate the fact that after the Shalwar Kameez was introduced in Northern India, it spread to other parts of the country. However, I could be wrong. Your valuable comments would be highly appreciated. Thanks, Anupam^Talk 03:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding my point regarding the English spelling section. I will not mind if you change Hindustani to Hindi-Urdu which is equally an acceptable academic term. In my opinion, the mentioning of Punjabi suit should be in the introduction as it is a common term for the dress. After reading the reference you kindly provided, I also feel that Pathani suit should be in the introduction as well. However, if you still disagree, I will not mind if you move the terms to another section of the article. Thanks again, Anupam^Talk 19:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your comments. I have added the additional term in the introduction with the reference you provided me. If Fowler&fowler still objects to this consensus, he can discuss the issue with us further. In my opinion, they are both notable terms and deserve a place there. You can go ahead and make the change in the language term under the English spelling section if you would like. Thanks again, Anupam^Talk 20:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP198, I was wondering if we should make a push towards making the History of Pakistan article an FAC. It still needs a lot of work: it needs to be pruned, the post-1947 history needs to be cleaned up, etc. but I don't see any reason why we can't work towards FA status. What do you think? Who are some other people who have worked on that page? User Tombseye comes to mind. Any others you can suggest? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sunnis are recognised a mile away. No one is as prejudiced (not to mention corrupt) like them in the world. Examples are; Sunni majority countries like Paki Sunnistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria etc. All are among the most corrupt and most prejudicial societies in the world. This is exactly in line with the teachings of terrorist Sunni Mullahs and their terrorist Sunni religion. Guess which country exports the most terrorism to the world? Sunni majority Paki Sunnistan. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.243.211.101 (talk) 20:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Now that you got that off your chest, why dont you work on work on articles dealing with the persecution of Ahmadis. Their is plenty of information available on this topic. Just make sure you follow Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. IP198 15:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible to do while you Sunnis are muscling in on everything your own POV just like in real life specially Ragib, you and WebKami. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.243.114.105 (talk) 15:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I dont know what i did to you, but if you feel strongly about this i suggest you file a complaint at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. btw is their any reason why you reverted me in this article Zhob. Surely that article had nothing to do with anti-Ahmadi prejudice. IP198 15:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think I would rv your POV edits. Wiki Admins are all too busy already.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.243.114.105 (talk) 15:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I think this the problem. By behaving like a vandal, you allow others not only to revert your edits but also potentially insert their own pov into the articles. What will you accomplish by behaving like a troll?IP198 16:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All POV has come from Sunnis who are used to railroading everyone else in their countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and other Sunnis majority countries. They are not comfortable with letting others show the independent picture that show Sunnis in the correct light ie the atrocities Sunnis have committed and continue to commit against non-Sunnis; Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus, Christian and even Sunni women - from day one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.243.114.105 (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Their has been discrimination, and persecution of minorities in Pakistan. But inshallah, as their is more awareness about these issues, they will stop. This is the my last response to your complaints. Allah Hafiz. IP198 16:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I qualified the sentence in the India article to clarify the fact that the deal is not yet "finalized" (diff). Please check to see if the edit is sufficient in your opinion. If required, this citation can be added to the article. Abecedare 20:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per this report, you have been blocked for 48 hours. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

daliil. IP198 00:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Wikipedia can sometimes by stressful to edit and it is nice to know that editors care about how you feel and want you to feel good. Have a nice week and God bless:)--James, La gloria è a dio 21:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal sandbox must be within your user space. The sandbox you created was a stand-alone article. I have moved it to User:IP198/Sandbox. Please see Wikipedia:Subpages for more information on sub-pages. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 21:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; I'm glad I could help. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 21:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I thought you may be interested in joining WikiProject Dravidian civilizations. We work on creating, expanding and making general changes to Dravidian related articles. If you would be interested in joining feel free to visit the Participants Page! Thank You.

Wiki Raja 06:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what evidence do you have that User:Thegoldenageoftheflyingspaghettimonster is a sock of User:Hkelkar? Lv comments at: Wikipedia:Changing_username#Thegoldenageoftheflyingspaghettimonster_.E2.86.92_Fsm2007. Rlevse 21:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP198, I definitely support only including Urdu on Jammu and Kashmir, because J&K is a state, and the official language of the state is Urdu. However, Jammu only refers to the region, not to the state. Another example is the Punjab region. Both Punjab (India) and Punjab (Pakistan) only have their respective names in the official languages. But the Punjab region has many more languages.

From what I understand, the region doesn't only refer to region nowadays. On the common Punjab page, it includes the history of Punjab a long time ago, such as Indus Valley Civilisation, whose people spoke a very different language! Similarly, Ladakh is part of J&K, but contains the Tibetan and Ladakhi script because the region still contains a majority of Tibetan and Ladakhi speakers even though officially there is only Urdu.

Having said that, I now think Hindi perhaps should be removed from Jammu because it is not the native language of the region. I think Urdu can stay, but Hindi should be replaced with Dogri language. What are your thoughts? Thanks and have a nice day! Gizza^{Discuss ©} 01:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - but the official language of the Wikipedia isn't Urdu. Here we can and should include every example. --AStanhope 01:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I said, for the region pages. Only countries and states have "official" languages. Regions don't. There is no official language of China. There is only an official language for the People's Republic of China (PRC) and Republic of China (ROC). Gizza^{Discuss ©} 02:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP198. I hope you are doing well. Could you please explain your reasons for deleting Hindi from Jammu and Kashmir. Hindi is the official language of the entire Union of India (source). I have restored the deleted script. Thanks, Anupam^Talk 18:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation. With regards, Anupam^Talk 02:07, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware of user Otterlemur somethingorother who is adding subsections willy nilly to South Asia pages. He did it to the India page, which led to it getting locked down. He has now done it to the Pakistan page, resulting in subsections of three lines. I have reverted his edits. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:30, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, this is a spam note to anyone who has ever moved List of massacres committed during the Second Intifada. A discussion is ongoing on the talk page, which currently appears to endorse a move to "List of attacks on Israeli noncombatants during the Second Intifada". Consider making your views known. <eleland/talkedits> 17:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you will have to enable an email in order to allow my opinion based discussion. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 09:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you have a new name on wikipedia ....hope that the noumber of contributions you make from sourced texts adding to the content of wikipedia is going to be far greater than the Deletions , you make of sourced content from articles.
There is joy in contribution ,over deletions and technical complaints perhaps you may consider adding this as a facet , I have seen very few contributions from IP198 perhaps Noor Alaam will .
Intothefire 18:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you participated in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Pakistani sentiment. The article Anti-Pakistani sentiment was eventually moved to Pakistanphobia. Now Pakistanphobia has been nominated for deletion. I thought you might be interested in participating in the AfD debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistanphobia. Feel free to come by and contribute your thoughts.Bless sins (talk) 05:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware of User:Nikkul who is deleting the mention of foreign relations in introduction paragraph willy nilly from country-pages which border India. He did it in People's Republic of China page, please see the edit history of that article. He was engaged in a debate on this in Talk:People's Republic of China#Emerging Superpower in Intro. He also added the Tank Man image in PRC page which draw a bad image for PRC. But he ultimately failed in doing so. Now he has come in Pakistan page and continuously deleting the sentence "Pakistan was a founding member of the OIC, SAARC, D8 and ECO. It is also a member of the UN, WTO, G33, G77 and is a nuclear power" from the lead. He also edited the Infobox Country in Pakistan page and changed the Government type from "Islamic Republic" to "Military dictatorship" (see this [1]). If you check the contributions of User:Nikkul, you will be able to understand easily the motivations behind such edits. This User:Nikkul was also blocked once for sockpuppeteering [2], [3]. I have reverted his edits for now. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 11:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this userbox from your user page per Wikipedia:UP#Inappropriate content. It is likely to give offence to many editors. Please do not reinsert it. Thanks. Sandstein (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is offesnive, the wording, i can change that. Other users have Likud userboxes [4], are you going to remove those as well? Other users have this userbox as well. Noor Aalam (talk) 23:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a battleground. Unlike Likud, Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organisation by many, and voicing support for it or its activities is needlessly inflammatory. As noted above, our policies prohibit having content that is likely to give widespread offense on one's user page. If you re-add this box, I will block you from editing Wikipedia. If other editors have a similar userbox, please provide links to their user pages, and I will proceed as here. Thanks, Sandstein (talk) 23:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In solidarity with Noor Aalam, I will be adding that userbox to my page shortly. <eleland/talkedits> 23:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) You may find it instructive to consider Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Billy Ego-Sandstein as well. Sandstein (talk) 23:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

6 countries consider it a "terrorist" organization, which means that the overwhelming majority of the world does not. I can rename it to "This user supports Hezbollah", and cut the rest out if you want. Also supporting Likud as well as the Republican party is also equally inflammatory. You must be delusional to think that i will give you the links of other editors who have similar boxes. If you want to delete those look for it yourself. Noor Aalam (talk) 23:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that Likud or the (U.S.?) Republican party are not considered terrorist organisations by any country. I'm of the opinion that userboxes that support Hezbollah violate our policy no matter what the wording, but I will ask other administrators at WP:ANI to provide input. Sandstein (talk) 23:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thats a much more reasonable course of action that behaving like a dictator, and threatning those who you disagree with. Noor Aalam (talk) 23:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

The aforementioned template was deleted three times as a violation of Wikipedia's prohibition against divisive and inflammatory templates. Substituting it on a user page does not change its inappropriateness. Please do not restore it. -- Avi (talk) 03:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it was all three times deleted under CSD T1 which only applies to templates in the Template: namespace, and can thus have nothing at all to say about whether the content itself is appropriate. If it is inappropriate, this needs to be demonstrated by community consensus, rather than by administrative fiat. <eleland/talkedits> 04:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the templates were substituted instead of transcluded is irrelevant, I am afraid. -- Avi (talk) 05:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not restore the Hezbollah or Bush vandalism boxes. They are violations of wikipedia policy. Repeatedly ignoring wikipedia policy will result in measures being taken to protect the project. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 03:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Noor Aalam (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I undid my edit on user Avraham pg in less than a minute. This is not a fair block.

Decline reason:

Regardless, it was clear vandalism and a WP:POINT violation, and you got caught. Please take the next 24 hours to cool down and return to edit constructively then. --Kinu ^t/_c 04:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

I have noticed that you have on your user page a quote from Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. I would ask that in the spirit of not making controversial political statements on user pages per WP:UP#NOT that you would please remove this statement. The statement refers to jihad, a topic that is very hurtful to many people, and I would ask in the spirit of being politically neutral and well-meaning to other editors that you could please consider my request. Thank you. EJF (talk) 15:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, this is a divisive offensive statement and should be removed otherwise many other things could appear on other users pages which you might not like to see. This site is not for this kind of stuff. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 18:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jihad is a sacred duty in Islam. If that is indeed what the quote refers to, EJF, it's close minded of you to be offended by it. -- Kendrick7^talk 20:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, alright, I have always wanted to have something on my userpage before too. At times, I've had to remove it. I'll try now to find something parallel which is not inflammatory but reflects my ideas. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Kendrick: (I was trying to remain NPOV but I feel I didn't put my point across).I am not referring to the Muslim duty but the term used to describe the butchering of civilians in Israel. I know that many Palestinians have been murdered by the Israeli army but really any reference that could be construed as a glorification of a figurehead of a terrorist organisation should not appear on userspace. EJF (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to see the quote in context to get all that. Do you have a link to the full speech? -- Kendrick7^talk 16:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The importance of the statement is that it is effectively incitement to violence, he was the head of a terrorist organisation, let's not suggest he was supporting non-violent Jihad. This was played on loudspeakers in the Terrorities after he was killed, most likely as incitement to revenge and to stir up anti-Israeli feeling (search on Google, some reliable sites state this). Again, Wikipedia is not a soapbox, which states quite clearly that WP is not a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. EJF (talk) 13:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, your making a assumption that you can't provide any evidence for. -- Kendrick7^talk 20:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter anyway, content is now deleted. Have a nice day! EJF (talk) 19:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Noor Aalam, I just wanted to let you know that I reverted those changes you made to Pakistan. They weren't vandalism, but after a scan of your change, I determined that the abbreviations that you made would make the article harder to understand. You might recognize the abbreviated forms of those things perfectly; however this article and every other is made to be perfectly understandable to people of all knowledges. This is a place to learn, after all! Thank you for your helpful edits. (To learn more about how to edit the right way on Wikipedia, refer to the manual of style here that all of us good editors follow :) --Belinrahs (talk) 19:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• More specifically, here is a quote from the correct manual of style section regarding this:

"...Editors should almost invariably give the full name of something to be abbreviated the first time it is used, unless it is part of everyday speech and writing (such as "e.g.", "2 a.m.", etc.). For example, 'The World Intellectual Propery Organization (WIPO) is heavily involved with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). WIPO's long-standing ICANN role...'"

I have started a deletion review of this category and userboxes. Though you might be interested in participating. The deletion review of this category and accompanying userboxes is here.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to personally thank you, Noor, for your participation in my recent RfB. As you did not voice a specific concern, I am uncertain if your issues were those of a percieved lack of participation in RfA, or a more general dislike for me dur to my stance on userboxes. Regardless, if you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. -- Avi (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,
I noticed your edits on the page on the Caste system among South Asian Muslims. I live in Russia, and I am interested in the history of Asia. This article was a discovery for me, since I have never heard before about this caste system.
I’d appreciate if you can answer my question. Now Al Qaeda is active in some regions of Pakistan. What is Al Qaeda’s intention towards the caste system among Pakistani Muslims: do they support it, ignore, condemn or simply do not want to intervene? --Dmitri Lytov (talk) 12:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Al Qaeda is popular among only Pashtun caste systems/ tribes. They (including Talibans) are usually very hostile towards Hazara/ Shiite tribes. --Scieberking (talk) 12:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Daily Al-Qamar, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daily Al-Qamar. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Scieberking (talk) 12:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have somewhat enhanced the article Illegal immigration in India. Please review and comment on the talk page if the NPOV banner can be removed.

Thanks --Iball (talk) 16:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Sajjad Lone requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Wgolf (talk) 02:54, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]