| Revision as of 14:52, 30 September 2014 editWiki id2 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,112 edits →"WP: Vandalism" ?!?: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:55, 30 September 2014 edit undoWiki id2 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,112 edits →"A place to discuss rigging": new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 532: | Line 532: | ||
| (<font face="Forte">]]</font> 14:52, 30 September 2014 (UTC)) | (<font face="Forte">]]</font> 14:52, 30 September 2014 (UTC)) | ||
| == "A place to discuss rigging" == | |||
| The article is a place to discuss Nawaz Sharif. | |||
| Nawaz Sharif has to face a huge scandal regarding rigging allegations for last years elections. | |||
| Ergo, discussing rigging relevant to Mr Sharif, is not in violation of WP rules regarding relevance. | |||
Revision as of 14:55, 30 September 2014
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Signpost: 23 July 2014
Five wickets on debutGreat work on this article. Thanks! Lugnuts 16:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 27Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Test cricketers who have taken five wickets on debut, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fred Martin. 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) 08:58, 27 July 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement (week 31, 2014)
The Signpost: 30 July 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 32, 2014)
DYK for List of Test cricketers who have taken five wickets on debut
Richie BenaudI was only looking at that article this morning! Yes, will have a look. Thanks. Lugnuts 11:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
FLC review requestHi, hope you're well. I was wondering if you had some time to review another film accolades list that Sock and I have nominated? FLC:Misplaced Pages:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Her (film)/archive1, Article: List of accolades received by Her (film). Cowlibob (talk) 11:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 August 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 33, 2014)
Aamir khan filmographyWhy you have deleted 'no. of fils with leading actors' in Aamir khan filmography? Abhi11193 (talk) 09:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)Abhi11193
Disambiguation link notification for August 13Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of bowlers who have taken a wicket with their first ball in international cricket, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Crawford. 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) 09:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement (week 34, 2014)
The Signpost: 13 August 2014
The Signpost: 20 August 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 35, 2014)
The Signpost: 27 August 2014
WikiCup 2014 August newsletterThe final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:
We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog. There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC) This week's article for improvement (week 36, 2014)
FLC requestHi, can you review this when you find time. —Vensatry (ping) 17:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
September 2014
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:47, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 03 September 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 37, 2014)
Disambiguation link notification for September 8Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2002 ICC Champions Trophy Final, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Shepherd. 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) 09:22, 8 September 2014 (UTC) 2002 ICC finalFor info, the BBC link I've added has links to three more articles - one each for the two matches and a third regarding the Indian team wanting the rules to be changed about the washout. If I get chance, I'll try to expand the article with the latter. Be good to find something with reactions about the situation too. Lugnuts 19:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 10 September 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 38, 2014)
ReviewRequest you to come here and give your review. I don't know why am I here when you've not been commenting on these kinds of pages but it's been almost a month since its nomination but has not got a review. If not, you can ignore my comments, thanks. --FrankBoy (Buzz) 16:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 17 September 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 39, 2014)
FLC RequestHey. Do you reckon you could look at, this FLC for List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Mitchell Johnson when you get some time? -- NickGibson3900 03:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 23Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 Champions League Twenty20 squads, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mohammad Saeed and Imran Ali. 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) 09:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC) The Signpost: 24 September 2014
This week's article for improvement (week 40, 2014)
Re: Nawaz SharifOh sorry for not reading that earlier. Usually I don't read talk pages :P Jackninja5 (talk) 06:54, 29 September 2014 (UTC) PM SharifThe stuff might be mentioned below. But so is the work on Syed Sajjad Ali Shah. But just because it is mentioned below does not mean you delete from the top. You have removed the references. No para, top or in a section can be left unreferenced. Small repetition is not a bad thing. The name Nawaz Sharif or Sharif is mentioned hundreds of times in the article. Also, it is worth mentioning in the summary, what the observers think. A quick sentence and three to four references are not a big deal. The stuff being covered below does not justify removing references and a one-liner on FAFEN. Removing references, as you have done, by reverting my edit is inaccurate. (Wiki id2(talk) 19:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)) "Unable to prove the allegations""ECP member is unable to prove the allegations" That is you're own intepretation. You are in no position as there is no reference as to whether the allegations are true or false. Supporters can argue that he as a witness to the process is credible. A witness of course has legal value. He doesn't need to bring thumprints or a contraption but himself. What he observed is enough. While critics argue through denial. Which you have mentioned. Either need references. And "unable to prove the allegations" is an interpretation you are making, not a fact. It belongs on a political forum, not on wikipedia. (Wiki id2(talk) 19:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC))
"WP: Vandalism" ?!?I am willing to take this case to the higher ups. I have added six references!! Six references from a variety of Pakistani news sources. And it is one line saying that "this is what the election comnission thinks . I have not committed any act of vandalism or bias etc. All six refrences are from credible pakistani news source. Express, ARY, Dunya News and Samaa TV. Who are you to remove them? And revert to an outdated edit when things are moving at a fast pace? Your revert is weak!! It leaves the paragraph with no references at all! That is in violation of[REDACTED] convention regarding references! You have one whole paragraph and not a single refrence. How do we not know that this is a story you have made up?! Listing[REDACTED] policies and accussing me of violating them does not justify your position. You cannot remove a content regarding news by the election comission which has been refercenced six times by me! It is completely invalid of you to do so and is in violation of[REDACTED] policy. Not only that, but then you accuse me of "Vandalism". I haven't written "Nawaz sharif is sh** " now have I?! How can you possibly accuse me of vandalism. All I have said is what the election comission and FAFEN think. The accusations you tried to blow up in my face are all lies. If you feel like this, contact a senior administrator. The burden of proof lies on you. You have made the accusations. And you are removing a well-referenced paragraph for an unreferenced one. It is completely invalid of you to do so. Not only that, but I provide in the description, details of the referenes. I remove the depth on FAFEN for the main section and leave it for the subsection. I only mention FAFEN by name and the ECP. Not the 61 seats etc. Just the one liner on what FAFEN and the ECP thinks. PLUS SIX REFERENCES! You cannot remove that with amateur[REDACTED] junk. It doesn't have a single reference in you're current form! I have tried my best to resolve this matter between us. I will revert it to my edit. Because it has references, and six of them. Which are uptodate and not from a known government propaganda outlet such as state TV. Take this case to the higher ups in wikipedia. Prove to them that I'm committing "Vandalism?!" surely, that's is defined as removing references relevant to Nawaz Sharif. (Wiki id2(talk) 14:52, 30 September 2014 (UTC)) "A place to discuss rigging"The article is a place to discuss Nawaz Sharif. Nawaz Sharif has to face a huge scandal regarding rigging allegations for last years elections. Ergo, discussing rigging relevant to Mr Sharif, is not in violation of WP rules regarding relevance. |
Done--
Hello, I'm 
