User talk:Ahmadalikasuri

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Kasur. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --Nlu (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 2007

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. Chris 08:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ahmad Ali Kasuri

A tag has been placed on Ahmad Ali Kasuri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ttonyb (talk) 05:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr. Kasuri, I am sorry to report that your page was deleted (incorrectly, I think) as a copyright violation. As it appears you do hold the copyright it is permissible to upload that work to Wikipedia (unless you are lying about your identity, however I have no reason to suspect that :). The deleting admin did not notice that and instead saw that the article was also present on another website and in admirable haste to clean Wikipedia up, overlooked the authorship claim, sorry. Before you re-post the article I would urge you to reconsider though, Wikipedia is generally not the place for university papers, regardless of there merit. WP regulations prohibit "original research". Sorry for the trouble, please contact me if you have any questions. Icewedge (talk) 05:30, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]