Misplaced Pages

Please join the discussion

Please make your case why the encyclopedia is improved by violating the standard WP:SUMMARY style and other policies at Aligarh Muslim University by joining the discussion ]. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:44, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

The discussion began between you and me but it has been through the official process been broadened to invite opinions from the wider community. you can participate in that discussion Talk:Aligarh_Muslim_University#Request_for_comment_on_appropriate_summary_style or not as you wish. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:44, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

you have been replied to, multiple times, but you refuse to "get it" - the section of the the alumni list that you are cutting and pasting into the University page is NOT a summary of the Alumni page. If you refuse or do not understand basic summarization, my repeatedly writing responses for you to continue to ignore is not going to resolve the situation. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not "beating around the bush" - I am beating a dead horse who either refuses to understand basic summarization or is too dull to understand. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Get to the point! Faizan (talk) 14:31, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

the point is: a formal request to discuss how to apply Summary Style has been initiated. You have been notified. You can participate or not. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Mail

Sure brother! Faizan (talk) 05:39, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Hope you'll find the source useful for expanding the article. Mar4d (talk) 05:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Urdu Speakers

Wa'Alaikumas'Salam, I have fixed the infobox at Urdu article indicating total number of speakers, 'only Urdu' & 'including Hindi'. Was'Salam --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haiderc_s 07:08, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Instrument of surrender

Google search the actual copies of the Instrument of Surrender, and you will see how distorted the article is. Let me finish my edits with references.--ArmanJ (talk) 11:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Google search is not correct always, you have to see the reliable sources! That article is reliable! And the Constituion of Pakistan of 1962 originally said "Republic of Pakistan", but after it, due to public protests, it was changed to "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" Faizan (talk) 11:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

What I meant to say was that Google search is full of reliable sources which contradict the previous content. The version given from Story of Pakistan was distorted. The technicalities of the topic are important and sensitive, and its crucial that we get them right.--ArmanJ (talk) 15:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I didn't see any discussion on the talk page. But I've given my points there, please go and see.--ArmanJ (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Faizan Al-Badri; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:07, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, Thank you! Faizan (talk) 10:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Sialkot

Hello, I read you message on my talk page. I think, it is nice of you to inform me on this. But vickle1777 left a note in the talk page for Sialkot about the relevcance of the information removed. In no uncertain terms, the historians from both British and Muslim backgrounds have termed the Sikh rule as a constructive and open to the welfare of the entire Punjab. So, it is very difficult to conclude that Muslims faced restrictions during the Sikh rule. I have noticed a similar accusition in the page for Kashmir e.g. it says there was a death sentence as punishment for killing a cow. Well, I am sure the reference provided their belongs to a Hindu/Indian author. And for information, cow doesn't hold any specific position in Sikh culture apart from being a milch cattle.

I hope it makes some sense. Or otherwise, if you still believe the Sikh rule was oppressive upon Muslims, so what can be done about it? Of Teacher (talk) 06:31, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I would suggest you to read Punjabi-Poet Shah Mohammad. Of Teacher (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortuantely, the reference you have quoted belongs to an Indian Author and you can imagine it were the Indians who attacked our Sovereign Punjab to enslave it to the British. You must rather trust a Muslim author Shah Mohammad than an Indian viewpoint. This same author has written about the Death punishment, Ban on Namaz, and other things in Kashmir during the Sikh rule. But I hope you know, there was something very typically, during that period that Death Penalty was abolished. And as "Chitralekha zutshi", the author you have quoted said, there was death sentence for killing a cow, i think it goes against the evidence, because neither Sikhs deems cow like Hindus nor their was a death penalty during the Sikh rule. Also, there were Muslim regiments serving the Khalsa which means the Namaz also may not have been banned.... The[REDACTED] page of Shah Mohammad may give you an insight. But I guess, the Sikh rule having died nearly 160 years ago doesn't matter now. So, even if you don't agree to remove that sentence from Sialkot page it still wont matter. And I will not enter into an edit-war over it. Thank you for writing to me brother... Of Teacher (talk) 11:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh Brother, yes they were responsible for our defeat by the hands of the British. I surely trust Muslim or Sikh references more than Indian references. But the problem is that there is no live reference at Shah Mohammad. Sikh rule has not died, Al-Hamdulillah, The Khalistan movement is on its way. Anyway, thanks for your precious time! Faizan (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Baloch Nationalism

Baloch nationalism stems from lingual roots which is more concentrated in Brohi, Sulemani Makrani and Rukhshani speaking areas of Province Baluchistan. Sindhi (Jadgali Dialect), Saraiki(Khetrani dialect), Dehvari, Pashto, Hazargi and Mix (Punjabi Settlers) belts population dont suppourt Baloch Nationalism which accounts for 50 % of population of Baluchistan Province. So the map puts the background loud and clear for the Baloch nationalism state in Province of Baluchistan. Maria0333 (talk) 08:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Sister! You did not wait for my reply and reverted my edits, which is in-appropriate. Your reason of "AS DISCUSSED WITH FAIZAN AL_BADRI" is also invalid, as the discussion had not ended in consensus. Where the map mentions that in this area of language, Nationalism is more prominent? The map just tells about languages, it does not tell that which ethnicity is more bending towards nationalism, lets discuss it first, then make changes in any of the pages! Faizan (talk) 09:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

So you better add the my above paras in the main article while map will remain along side. Actually people out side Baluchistan think that all Baloch are anti Pakistan but that is not the case in the areas referred above. so map is very very important. Maria0333 (talk) 11:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok you give me a reference or link about it, so that I add content wiith image telling the world that not all Balochs are traitors, I am also a Pakistani! You are? Faizan (talk) 11:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Reply:Muhammad in Islam

Wa alaikum Assalam, thank you brother for your interest in the article! Actually the content I shortened was created by myself. Now come to the main point: when I started editing this article, almost no important material or information was there. I started improving this article by providing the biographic information, and created sections from lead to Badr war. but soon realized that this article requires to show what the Muslims think about our great prophet Muhammad (SW). Biographic information, it was suggested on its talk page, was already included in the Muhammad article. Now the main question is what should be the aim and scope of this article. This is the thing we have to agree on on its talk page. Unfortunately now nobody participates in it.

I've decided to shorten the biographic info created by myself as much as possible, and add Muslim perspectives on our Prophet. I request you to put your comments, on its talkpage, on how this article should be. --AsceticRosé 17:28, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Samar 18:26, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

THANKS

Thanks brother ye hm punjabiyon k dushman haen. hr wqt hm ko tortay haen..ab mea in ko aps mea torungi ta kay aenda kbi PAK zr zameen ko tornay ka na sochen Maria0333 (talk) 13:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Samar 19:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Muhammad bin Qasim

Hello. I removed the comment regarding Pakistan from the article, and really don't think it ought to be added to the lead again. There are several reasons why. Pakistan did not exist, so there were no Pakistanis for many centuries after bin Qasim. Pakistan itself was never thought of as an actual entity until the Partition in the late 1940s. Calling him the first Pakistani is like calling Christopher Columbus the first citizen of the Dominican Republic. Thanks, dci | TALK 14:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

dci | TALK 16:12, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Keep a surveillance on Muhammad in Islam

Hello brother, recently an unknown user named Kabalakhbar is constantly vandalizing this article. Most of the time I remain off-line. If possible, keep a watch on this article! Thanks. AsceticRosé 17:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure Brother! Faizan (talk) 10:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

hello again

First, apologies for the whole instrument of surrender episode.

Regarding the Caliphate edits, Chittagong was a major port for the Arabs like Canton in China, Cochin in Kerela and the ports of Somalia. If China, and Somalia can be included on that basis, why not Bangladesh?--ArmanJ (talk) 13:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The founder of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam said that:

And as far as the Umayyad Caliphate is discussed, The countries of China, Somalia, etc should be discussed on the Article's talk, as they are inappropriate. Faizan (talk) 09:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

You're qouting Jinnah? Didn't he say that Pakistan was a mistake?

My edits were constructive and referenced, you should debate before reverting them.

Re the caliphate again, if China, India and Somalia remains, so should Bangladesh. Moreover caliphates aren't only about territorial empires, they're also suppose to cover the entire Muslim ummah. So if Islam was present in parts of China, India, Somalia and Bengal during the Umayyad Caliphate, then they should be included.--ArmanJ (talk) 02:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

What nonsense you are talking about The great leader? When he said that The Islamic Republic of Pakistan was a mistake?? You now have to provide reference for this blasphemy! Reply now, or accept your mistake and ask for forgiveness! Did I talk like that about your Sheikhs?

And I already told you that discuss those countries which have been wrongly inserted in the caliphate's infobox at the Article's Talk!, and if consensus is reached there, you are eligible to remove China, India, Somalia, etc. Hope you got it! Faizan (talk) 13:33, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Several Pakistani historians have spoken about how Jinnah regretted the violence and chaos of partition, especially in the book The Sole Spokesman by Ayesha Jalal. And more importantly, today's pakistan is not jinnah's pakistan since he wanted democracy and separation between politics and religion.

And you yourself have no respect for Misplaced Pages:PA do you? You're accusations of "blasphemy" constitute personal attack. So did your previous comments like "use english" and "dont use native language", which were highly uncalled for since my edits were referenced and more neutral.--ArmanJ (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

When I said use english" and "dont use native language"?

Which Pakistani Historians you are talking about? They may be bangladeshi or indian historians! And First of all! Was Jinah Responsible for violence and chaos of partition? Did he told hindus to kill Muslims migrating to West and East Pakistan? Don't talk such crap again! Really I was amazed at this, if he had not made Pakistan, then your Bangladesh had not been independent! GOT IT? Your forefathers of East Pakistan loved him, but now.......... Go and study your Sheikhs first, and you will meet the reality! And as far as Misplaced Pages:PA is concerned, it deals with "Comment on content, not on the contributor.", My comment about blasphemy was clearly about your crap not about you. Faizan (talk) 07:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

You of all people do not have to teach me history. Your comments at the edit logs of Instrument of Surrender (1971), "don't use native words, use english" was a personal attack.

My comments were not any criticism of Jinnah. In response to your quotation nonsense, I was simply pointing out what a Pakistani historian Ayesha Jalal said, that apparently Pakistan in the 1947 form was an accident. The Lahore Resolution originally called for two states in east and west, not one state. My forefathers took part in the Pakistan movement, but they also protested Jinnah's speech in Dhaka in January 1948 when he refused to make Bengali a state language despite it being the language of the majority. Pakistan would not have been born without Bengalis!

Do more study at Misplaced Pages:PA! And Remember that even if you try to censure Jinnah or any other respectable leader, you cannot tarnish him! Anyway, now we should leave it! Our countries are different but we both are Muslims first of all and then Pakistani, or Bangladeshi. Isn't it?Faizan (talk) 12:46, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Update the image at Instrument of Surrender (1971) with the correct licence, it has been deleted! Faizan (talk) 12:53, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Just thought I'd point out; Muhammad 'Ali Jinnah, Quaid-e-Azam was not the founder of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (although of course he did found Pakistan itself), which was founded in 1956, 8 years after his death. Of course, he had a great part to play in inspiring and laying a foundation for the later Islamic Republic, but he himself was Governor-General of the Dominion of Pakistan from independence in 1947 to his death in 1948. Constitutionally, he was the representative of the King of Pakistan at the time, George VI.JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 13:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Whatever he maybe, the people of The Islamic Republic of Pakistan love their Fist Governor General and Founder of Pakistan. Constitutionally only, he may be the representative of the King George VI, but by heart, he was a representative of the people of Pakistan! He was at the same time the founder and first governor general of Pakistan, and you know that is possible! Faizan (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Read these references also! 1 and 2 Hope you got it! Faizan (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Warning

Next time keep your nonsense out of my talk page. Ghadaar Maria0333 (talk) 15:36, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

What? This is personal attack, you are clearly violating WP:PA, please go through it! Faizan (talk) 09:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk Page Revert

You should not have reverted Maria0333's blanking of her talk page. She is permitted to do that and it is taken as an acknowledgement that she has read the content that she removed. - Sitush (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

So should I revert my edit? Faizan (talk) 15:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted mine edits! Thanks! Faizan (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

She blanked the entire page herself. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC))

Yeah! She removed your comments too Lowkeyvision! Faizan (talk) 15:37, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Well she reserves rights over her talk page. We have nothing to do with it. Faizan (talk) 15:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

HAHAHA :) Yep! (Lowkeyvision (talk) 15:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC))

And she's now blocked! Faizan (talk) 15:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

How did you get that? (Lowkeyvision (talk) 15:45, 23 March 2013 (UTC))

Watchlist! Faizan (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

How do you see that?(Lowkeyvision (talk) 15:48, 23 March 2013 (UTC))

lol! what you want to ask? Faizan (talk) 15:49, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Nvm. I found the block list. Man that sucks for her. I really think Misplaced Pages has this antagonist view towards new editors. I think just to survive you have to have thick skin. I think that is the explanation why 95% of editors are dudes. And then you throw dudes into an online website with anonymity and you get stupid stuff like this. I hope she learns from this but doesn't quit. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 15:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC))

Yes hope the same for her! Faizan (talk) 09:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Lowkeyvision, the longer someone has been here, the thicker their skin often needs to be. I've had death threats and all sorts of rubbish from newcomers who simply refuse to understand that we have policies etc. You'll never see that sort of behaviour from an experienced user. Fortunately, experience tends to thicken the skin anyway. If it didn't, I would have reported you some time ago. - Sitush (talk) 15:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

IP:39.47.79.63

I am on internet cafe. Block kr do Faizan uncle. Kal kisi or net cafe ko bi close krwa dena. City me 10,000 internet Cafe hain ha ha ha 39.47.79.63 (talk) 13:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

(Translation) I am on internet cafe, Block me but there are 10,000 cafes in the city! Do close other internet cafes in the city too later! Translation by Faizan (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure Maria! Faizan (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Re

Pseudoephedrine

The changes you reverted of mine were me reverting somebody else's changes where they added a one line "use to make methamphetamine" section with no punctuation or capitalization and also pasted the same line under the existing "Sports" section as a sentence fragment. The changes were clearly below the min-bar quality level I expect from Misplaced Pages. I'd recommend putting my changes back. 204.14.159.137 (talk) 16:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

 The un-referenced text there has been removed! Thanks! Faizan (talk) 08:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

39th Century

Hey, You keep putting the birth of Seth as being in 3874, but according to the Torah, the universe and this Adam and Eve were not created until 3761. Seth could not have been born before his parents were made, so the date given is not possible according to Judaism. Thus the source for the 3874 date is either wrong or it is a non-Jewish source, in which case, cite it and link to the proper article, as it is part of a different tradition of biblical exogenisis. (Which is an article I'd want to read.) I'm going to remove the date again, for the reasons above given.

Besides the factual inconsistency, the real issue here is sourcing. I don't care that there are differences of opinion, but I want to see where those ideas come from, not so I can discount them, but because I want to know the history of thought on the subject. Clearly we've stumbled upon area of exogenisis with different traditions, so lets explore where this difference comes from. All the best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.142.109 (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

The Warren School

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to The Warren School. This contravenes Misplaced Pages's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Stifle (talk) 22:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I am really sorry for it! Faizan (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Dougweller (talk) 14:44, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Saraiki language

Dear, Saraiki is a language, it is not a dialect. Riasti dialect, Shah puri dialect,Multani dialect, Multani language, Thalochi dialect, Thalochi ,Derawali dialect articles. I suggest merging these articles , as the all these are same. And also be Redirected to Saraiki language. Also Jhangvi dialect is dialect of Saraiki. Kindly See these External Links #1 and #2.

• Department of Saraiki, Islamia University, Bahawalpur was established in 1989 and Department of Saraiki, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan was established in 2006. Saraiki is taught as subject in schools and colleges at higher secondary, intermediate and degree level. Allama Iqbal open university Islamabad, and Al-Khair university Bhimbir have their Pakistani Linguistics Departments. They are offering M.Phil. and Ph.D in Saraiki. Five TV channels and Ten Radio Stations are Serving Saraiki language. Saraiki is taught as compulsory subject in Dera Ismaeel khan and Tank.182.186.47.188 (talk) 14:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan

Hi, I'm in discussion at User talk:The Rambling Man#Misplaced Pages:Today's featured list/April 22, 2013, please have your opinion there. Zia Khan 19:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Re:Your use of multiple Misplaced Pages accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Misplaced Pages account, which contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Maria0333, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Misplaced Pages administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Misplaced Pages policy), please go to the investigation page and admit to it now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Misplaced Pages community.

Sir, What is this ? Please Explain it to me.

Kindly block him 182.186.68.81 (talk) 13:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Dominion of Pakistan

Hello Faizan; I hope you are well :)

-What you stated on my talk page is incorrect. There is absolutely no constitutional difference between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1956-1971 and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1971-the present day, it just happens that 1956-1971, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan included East Pakistan, whereas know it does not. There was no such constitutional entity as 'Pakistan(United)', this was an informal designation that did not officially exist.

East Pakistan and West Pakistan were merely Provinces of Pakistan; they were not sovereign states in their own right, and thus should not be listed as successor states.

Furthermore, Pakistan became a republic in 1956, but the provinces of East Pakistan and West Pakistan were created in 1955. So that means that East Pakistan and West Pakistan could not possibly succeed the Dominion of Pakistan because not only did they exist whilst Pakistan was still a monarchy and dominion, they were parts of it.JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 13:38, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done Well I agree with your points, I have replaced the Successor state with Pakistan, and in the infobox I have added "Today part of" with Bangladesh and Pakistan! Faizan (talk) 13:48, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar!

Thank you brother for your recognition! --AsceticRosé 15:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh Brother don't mention it! Thats ok, Just keep up the good work! Faizan (talk) 06:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Help request

Hi Faizan. I saw your contributions and they look good, so I need your help to watch these articles. Would you please?:

• Delhi Sultanate, Great Seljuq Empire, Ghaznavids, Timurid dynasty, Khilji dynasty, Tughlaq dynasty, Mamluk Sultanate (Delhi), Kara-Khanid Khanate

Thanks. Zheek (talk) 17:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah Zheek, vandalism is really a problem in these articles, I was watching a few of them already, but now I have added all of them to my Watchlist, Anyway, Thanks! Faizan (talk) 06:02, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Great. Zheek (talk) 08:48, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

request for talk-page participation

please participate here of Muhammad in Islam article. --AsceticRosé 03:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Farooq Umar

I'm not involved on BLP or other Biography articles very much. Most of my edits on Biography articles are minor. Your article is at a good state, but add 2-3 more sources (at least). You can improve it by comparing to the similar articles. Add necessary sections and relevant templates. Also use "ref name" feature for the parts with the content from same source. More details for your sources (using cite web/cite template) and etc. Anyway, I will watch it. Zheek (talk) 09:02, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

E.G. this is not a good cite: . Use a specific link or page from this website. Another suggestion is Google Books. It's very helpful. Also I recommend using "archiveurl" feature for your sources. I will add one and write the diff on here. Zheek (talk) 09:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

WebCite is currently down and I can't access it, your can learn about it and "archiveurl" on Using WebCite. Not necessary for all of sources but it's a good way to prevent future link rot/dead links. Zheek (talk) 09:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Added archiveurl for 2 of your sources. See this diff. Zheek (talk) 09:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

participation request

Hello brother, about Muhammad in Islam, a similar discussion is going on. Your participation is expected. Check here . (I proposed that the texts in section “Notable early events” should come under sub-sections like “orphanhood: a divine plan”, “God’s protection”, “early sign of Prophethood” etc. But another user (User_talk:Kiatdd) told they look like POV. Check this also for a complete understanding) --AsceticRosé 11:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

clarification about recent reverting

Dear Faizan brother, it seems that there was a misunderstanding about the moving of content. Actually a new Opposition section will be created, but there is already a section named "Opposition and persecution". That's why, first we need to remove the in-between biographic info, and then carefully move the sub-sections with some amendments, and not before that, to avoid confusion. I've reverted recent edit and hope you will not misunderstand me. I'll do that manually.
It is me who created biographic-releted mess, and perhaps it is me who now have to clean all those carefully. And for further improvement, I must need your help. Hope, you will be with me for the sake of our beloved prophet-related important article. And thanks for talk-page participations. That helped a lot. --AsceticRosé 17:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Hi Faizan Al-Badri. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! INeverCry 19:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages User Scripts

See WP:JS and read my comment on my talk page. Zheek (talk) 21:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello, there is currently a discussion at AN about a disruptive IP editor with whom you have been involved.Jeppiz (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Mukti Bahini

Dear Faizan Al-Badri, You have put only Pakistani view and info on this article. It does not support WP:NPOV. As many of Mukti Bahini members are alive now, it is also WP:BLP vio. You are emphasizing on Bihari issue, but never put a word about Pak army's mass killing. Most of your reference are non-accessible or circularly quoting R.J. Rummel. Please provide me the text, which actually those reference says, as I can verify them. Untill then, I am reverting your edits. Thank you.--FreemesM 11:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Freemesm! You notified me on my talk about

As the discussion is in progress, don't revert my edits again. Faizan (talk) 12:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

1. IUB.
2. Multan
3. AIOU