:What's the verdict so far. Was there a Pakistan TF formed or not. Please update us on it. Although, I am not much into military stuff, I feel that there certainly is a need for that. <span style="color:steelblue;border-bottom:1px solid green;">Arun Reginald</span> ([[User talk:Arunreginald|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Arunreginald|contribs]]) 19:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
:What's the verdict so far. Was there a Pakistan TF formed or not. Please update us on it. Although, I am not much into military stuff, I feel that there certainly is a need for that. <span style="color:steelblue;border-bottom:1px solid green;">Arun Reginald</span> ([[User talk:Arunreginald|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Arunreginald|contribs]]) 19:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
::At least 8 members need to vote there and till now only 5 votes are in favor. --[[User:Smsarmad|<span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span><span style="background:white;color:DodgerBlue">'''M'''</span><span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Smsarmad|Talk]]</sup> 20:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
::At least 8 members need to vote there and till now only 5 votes are in favor. --[[User:Smsarmad|<span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span><span style="background:white;color:DodgerBlue">'''M'''</span><span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Smsarmad|Talk]]</sup> 20:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
== Claim of sectarian based editing posted to WP:ANI ==
Please see [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive413#User:Smsarmad|this archived complaint.]] I allowed this to be archived before bringing it up here as I didn't want the same sort of reaction that is unfortunately common regarding Eastern Europe and other similar topics on the admin noticeboards - and I also feel that the majority of en-WP admins and editors do not have sufficient knowledge in these subjects to make judgements on the accusations of "vandalism". I hereby bring this matter to the attention of this WikiProject, who I assume to have both the knowledge and the neutrality to assess these claims.
Should it be found that admin intervention is required, and that no such admin can be found or is willing to act (since there is no need to escalate potential conflict) within the project, please feel free to contact me again - or any other help as required. Cheers. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 22:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I will allow use of information and images from UPK to help enrich the Pakistani article pages with information and media. We have lots of images of some of the most isolated and little known about regions of the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.160.7 (talk) 04:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
According to the UK Government's Burns Inquiry, open coursing (UK style) takes place in Spain and park coursing (Irish style) takes place in Portugal. Coursing also takes place in Pakistan. Hare coursing is illegal in most other European countries. — [[User:Quotated from another article]]
Can anyone in this wikiproject find any sources describing the existence, notability or debate on hare coursing in Pakistan? Thank you. MikeHobday (talk) 11:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Criticism on the Institute of Business Administration
A blog apparently has surfaced and appears to have valid criticism on how the university is being run. i think it should be reviewed for addition under the section "Institute of Business Administration, Karachi" either as an external link or under a new heading "Criticism"
I agree with UzEE as this blog it seems is written by a student and projects views that are biased. Some blogs however can be trusted and may be used as references. For instance, take into account All Things Pakistan or Taza Kino where reliable journalism is the key to their success. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 22:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
New article needed attention
I cleaned up the Islamabad article and moved the long list of places to List of Notable Places in Islamabad. The new list fairly underdeveloped and could use some copy editing to make it look better. I'm not from Islamabad so I cannot add a lot of valuable information to it. I would welcome anyone who could contribute to the article to make it more meaningful. Otherwise I would put it up for deletion after a few days. UzEE05:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have classified the article as a list article and have declared its importance as mid. Recently enough, the article on List of Pakistanis was nominated for deletion and that was just because it had importance set to high/top. Furthermore, your article had been declared a stub. As this topic in all its true nature serves the purpose not of an article but of a list, it's class should be list. As long as you don't have many red links there, everything should be fine. Cheers. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 06:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could an Urdu-speaking editor kindly see if any sources can be found for Devta? It sounds as though it may be notable as an extremely long-running story, but English-language sources are pretty much non-existent. Jfire (talk) 06:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I tried googling online and did not find anything of worth. However, I did come to know that Devta is the longest running story ever and that Mohiuddin has written several other stories. Try searching for Mohiuddin Nawab and you might come up with something. Request for help if you need the article to be expanded. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 14:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I was just doing some cleanup on 139/RB-Ghammi chattha and wanted to make sure that I was not changing the meaning by changing the grammar. Could someone please check over my edits?
I also wanted to check before making too large a change in the Health section. Would the following be accurate?
In 1988, the Punjab government established the Dehi Markaz hospital which has 10 beds.
Thanks for bringing this talk back to life. You know for some time I had been thinking of creating a task force that deals with the field of medicine in Pakistan. A place where we can create templates for Pakistani hospitals, e.g., a {{Infobox Hospital Pakistan}} template. This task force may deal with various epidemics and diseases like AIDS and issues surrounding their awareness in Pakistan. I know lots of doctors including my parents who regularly check Wikipedia. Lets do them a favour. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 02:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Request for Correcting Spelling
Several times, the word civilization has been misspelled as civilisation in the article. I'd appreciate it if it would be fixed. Thanks. Wikkidog (talk) 06:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This makes me wonder, should we be using the British spelling or the American spelling. If you ask me I would go for the British spelling as that's what is being taught at schools in Pakistan. I remember we were always told to spell colour and not color. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 18:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
– Article reached the level of Featured Article fulfilling the concerns
Sassanid Empire has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 05:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the time I read this, the article had already stepped onto as a Featured Article. Great going there. Any other article that you think relates to Pakistan and is worth working on to get the status of a featured article, please let us know. Thanks. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 14:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles that have been created or expanded in the last 5 days are eligible for Main Page inclusion at Template:Did you know, so if you find an interesting fact in any of these articles, you can nominate it at Template talk:Did you know. Another place to list interesting facts from new articles is at Portal:Pakistan/DYK
For some time, I had been wondering why there are zillions of ways of navigation on WikiProject Pakistan. One being the template on the right hand side of each and every page, second the big chunky tabs on the top of each and every page. Frankly, that's just too verbose a navigation. We should just revamp the pages without the tabs. I know that some Wikipedians would argue that the tabs are useful enough to navigate quickly to the resource required, but I differ on that. Note that none of the other WikiProjects have tabs. I remember the first time I saw this WikiProject, I was clueless as to what the tabs did. It just adds confusion to the whole easy-to-use user interface that Wikipedia already provides. I think we should stick to standards and not use the tabs. If there are no comments, I might chuck the tabs in a week's time. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't see any problem with tabs as long as they link up to key pages. Recently I resolved some confused links in between. There is nothing wrong in having a unique interface. It's much better than having to port code. Let's see what other editors say. It’s good to see you diligently improving lots of content here. Just make sure that all changes are consistent. And keep it up.--IslesCapeTalk16:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If we were to keep the tabs, I would say we make them into a template like {{WP Pakistan Tab Navigation}} so that only one line can be added to the top of the page rather than all that bulky code and that one change can make tabs on all the other pages available as changed. That'd surely make life easier for the lot of us. By the way, I removed the to do list from the {{WP Pakistan Navigation}} because of the template loop that occurred. I would suggest that the main page of the project be as the community portal main page. All your suggestions are welcome and I will include them in here. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 16:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have created the above-mentioned template ({{WP Pakistan Tab Navigation}}edit) and it's up on all the pages now. Check to see if it works for you and tell me if I should get rid of the previous code that I now have commented inside the template code somewhere. I have removed all other stuff around the template and it seems to work fine. Please report if you are having troubles with it. Cheers. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 21:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The tabs works on the Firefox 3 Beta 5, but I will make it so that it is understood on others. The tabs use complicated CSS 2.0 (i.e., display:table-cell) and Wiki parse functions. If your browser doesn't support them, you don't see them. I will add backward compatibility as well in the case that no one has the latest browsers. Cheers. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 14:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have included an updated version of the tab navigation. It has a smaller font and is in more robust tabular form. Please check to see if your respective browsers are behaving well with this change. It still uses the new functionalities that were added in the previous attempts but also lags on to older technologies. The rounded border functionality is exclusive to Firefox only. The use of parser functions was enhanced slightly with the newly added #ifeq constructs. I have given it enough time to see that it works on Mozilla Firefox (2.x, 3b5) and Internet Explorer (7, 6). I need help on Opera, SeaMonkey, Netscape and Safari. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 16:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is looking better than before, but still one tab (i.e. New Articles ) is out of proportion in size, may be only my browser still is not showing it correctly. --SMSTalk17:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the issue. It's just a matter of changing the size of the enclosing table-cell. Fixed it, but I'd rather wait to see what the others are saying about it. I also saw that you have modifying content on the members page which I really appreciate. Keep up the good work. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 17:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I slightly reduced tabs' width as they seemed to be going out of standard WP screen on IE. Hope it works for other browsers as well.--IslesCapeTalk15:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For some time, I have taken care of the Hyderabad article and I feel like I have a strange attachment to it. While editing the article today, I came up with an idea I'd called Adopt-an-Article. It goes by saying that a user is required to adopt an article and see after its growth. The more articles a user can adopt the better. This way that one user can review the article every time a change is made and act accordingly. If things are done this way, we may be assured that more good articles and featured content would be produced efficiently. Would you agree to it or should it just be left untended inside the closet? Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suggested this with accordance to a recent change on the WikiProject India. They started a thing called Adopt-a-Category where a user would adopt a category and look after it in such a way that they manage all the links present under the category to be relevant to the category, but I thought that the Article Adoption may prove a step further where you actually copy edit content to make it more readable and accurate. I would most definitely add the Article Adoption to the navigation on the right where anyone can access and start adopting articles. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 16:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good Idea, but it should be made sure that adoption should not lead to ownership, that will defy the Wiki policies. --SMSTalk17:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Adoptions as I think should only be to the point of administrating an article where the person adopting the article would tend to look for NPOV violations, non-wikified text and so forth. And yes, multiple people can adopt the same article. I'd give you a little idea. For instance, I have been taking care of this project and its talk pages and introducing newer concepts like archiving boxes and others while keeping in mind that other's need to have their say on what they want to be done. I believe adoptions should be a similar case. Nevertheless I will make an option for adoption available and let's give it a chance. If the whole thing just wouldn't work, we can look at the other options. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 18:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No objections. It would be better if all the pages are tagged as that'd include friendly and helpful UI to newcomers. I would surely appreciate that. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 16:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What about having B - class criteria in the talk page banner of the project, like many other project at Wikipedia already have. It will give editor some information about what is missing from the article. And we can have assessment drives to update these check lists after some time. Any ideas? --SMSTalk17:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is a particularly good option. I would suggest that you go ahead with the changes as long as no one else comments here for a while. Hopefully that'd be in the betterment of the project. However, I'd suggest that you give an example of what you just explained. In other words, can you give an example of a project using the talk page banner. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 17:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I kind of get what you mean. Is it the list of criteria that is listed when you expand the template and you see lots of checks. If you are saying so, then I think that's a good idea. Oh, by the way, I changed the tab template. Check for bugs. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 15:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work with the nav bar uptil now, it is commendable, that someone is here to make this project active. We will also need your help in adding B - class criteria in the talk page banner after community consensus. --SMSTalk17:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Work started on the template. I have started the work on the {{WP Pakistan}} criterion list. Please suggest the criteria list for both A-class and B-class. At the moment, I haven't delved deep into the semantics of using the additional information for specifically these two classes. The collapsible bar shows nevertheless for whatever is there. I will fix it in later versions. Cheers. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 20:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the template so that if you include the class=B, you get an options list where you can use B-Class-1=yes|no, B-Class-2=yes|no, B-Class-3=yes|no, B-Class-4=yes|no and B-Class-5=yes|no for the criteria to be resolved. Give me your verdict on this. Remember, the talk pages where the template already exists need to be saved again to view this template. For an example check this page. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 22:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The B - class criteria list what i think should include(as followed in other projects)
Article is properly cited.
Article has one or more sections including LEAD.
Article is comprehensive.
Article includes some graphics(i.e. Pictures or Infoboxes)
Article is free of grammatical errors.
The above all points must be met by an article to be rated as B - class, but if any one the above criteria is crossed, the article can be a Start class. And for GA, A and FA ratings, some other parameter can be added as I think these ratings can't be given by us, there is a process to promote an article to these ratings. --SMSTalk17:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have completed the task at hand but there are some minor differences from the template provided to me by Smsarmad (talk·contribs). The template has B-class criteria that has a collapsible box and criterion listing available. However, what's missing at this moment is the functionality of stating the article a Start article if all five criteria are not met. In other talk page banners, if all the criteria for B-class aren't met, the article is termed a Start-Class article rather than a B-Class article. I would surely be working on it today. Problem is that at the time of writing there are 183 articles ranked in the B-Class and for none is the criteria list met. If I were to term those as Starts, the number would decrease dramatically. That's where that community consensus would come handy ;). Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 01:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If the number of B - class articles are reduced by introducing this criteria, I think we should still move on, because quality is the main thing and we should not comprise on it. We can improve the demoted articles on the basis of this criteria list. --SMSTalk17:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have included the new functionality. Now all the articles that have uncompleted B-Class criteria are demoted to a Start-Class status. Hopefully by the end of the day, all the articles would end up in the Start-Class Pakistan articles. Let's hope we can fix some if not all by then. Try out the new updates and come back. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 19:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I ran the WP 1.0 bot last night and the assumptions it came up with demoted 163 articles to Start-Class status while only 20 were left in the glory of B-Class. Not sure why these were left-out. The last I checked, the articles in the category were only 11. So, I presume, it will be a matter of another day that we might have proper deductible references to the estimate damage ;) we've caused by demoting those articles. Any way, I will surely be checking content myself personally for most of the B-Class that had been demoted to understand how I can sum the numbers back to their lost class. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 03:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! for all this work its looking fine now, and I am really sorry for late response(I was a little bit busy in real life). I think we can reassess all the start class articles so if some of them are missing B - class we can promote them. --SMSTalk19:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Recently enough, I was looking through archived messages here and came across a proposal for Pakistani barn stars. Read through the proposal and comment here what we should be doing with the awarding schemes on WP Pakistan. Your suggestions are really valuable and would help us organize awarding schemes on this project. Any ideas would be rewarded with gratitude. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 04:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Szhaider (talk·contribs) created these two barn stars (on the right) but they were never proposed for official awarding purposes. Shall we include them in the project. Click on the two barn star images on the right to view them in their full details. Would you like to have them up at the project page? Or are you good enough to make us proud by making your own and presenting it here? We would really like to hear from you. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 14:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a good idea, I think a major reorganization of the project is much needed, we should restructure the departments, so there can be an Effort Recognition Department or Award department which can deal with this. --SMSTalk17:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Have spent the last few days in editing controversial articles for DYK. Although, just for an update, I created a recognition department where we can discuss what awarding schemes need to be established. Hope you guys would come up with some decent ideas. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 19:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Restructuring Departments of Project
I propose the restructuring of the departments of this project, please give your ideas. I think the the project should include these departments:
Assessment (for formal assessment of articles)
Outreach (for welcoming newbies and asking editors to join the project)
Review (for formal review of articles)
Logistic (for formal requests of Copy editing or any request related to images or supporting material)
Recognition (for recognizing efforts of users and giving awards officially)
Contest & Drive (the dept. which will manage any drives or contest held for the improvemnt of articles)
Other thing we can have coordinators elected for the better management of the project after we gather some inactive members of this project. Any suggestions? --SMSTalk17:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We currently already have the following departments (some of which are mentioned in the list above):
Assessment (as you mentioned; needs a group of editors to look after it)
Automation (no idea what this department does; maybe you can help SMS)
Cartography (this is a concept I seem to have come across on other WikiProjects for the betterment of geographic understanding by creating and manipulating maps)
Collaboration (where you say Contest and Drive; this is where can hold these contests)
Outreach (as you mentioned)
Peer reviews (as you mentioned again)
Photography (a department to tag articles with Pakistan-related pictures)
Translation (a collaborative drive to translate content from other languages to English Wikipedia or the Urdu one)
Vandalism (aah, this one is wicked)
The departments we are missing may include Recognition and Logistic (which I am sure can fit somewhere else). Let's see what others have to say about the awards proposals and we can put those thoughts towards the Recognition department. I think most of the departments can generalised and restructured. Let's see what others have to say. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 19:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For me, the fewer departments the better, as visitors and editors may find it hard to locate the right place for queries etc.
This also brings up the issue of redirecting all Talk pages to the main project's page. May cause occasional clutter, but at least we'll have all in one place.
I didn't understand the thing about redirection of all the talk pages to this one but then again it's a good thing that everything is kept in the same place. I will try to reduce the number of departments. Check back later for changes. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 16:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have read through the article and have removed over-referencing and -linking and have checked against two of the B-Class criteria in the {{WP Pakistan}} template. If you don't know by now the B-Class criterion list introduced on 2008-05-02 has to be filled for the article to be truly B-Class. Even though your article is B-Class, it still doesn't meet the complete criteria list. Check the Additional Information section in the talk page banner template. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 19:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is not "overreferencing". I have used references for each and every sentence because it needed for FA status. It is simply use of reference per sentence. You can use a reference for supporting a paragraph, it is generally good to provide ref for every single sentence. It will be useful in featured article nomination. To use reference sentence by sentence is the best practice. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the sentences in the article within a single paragraph is referenced from a single book, but from different pages. To cite every sentence, it becomes easy for the reader to understand from which page the information came. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Having sentences like: Sentence with a particular reference.[1] And, another with the same reference.[1] And then, another.[1]
This goes against the rule-of-thumb as I mentioned and can be corrected by: Sentence with a particular reference. And, another with the same reference. And then, another.[1]
I think the latter practice is a better alternative. Only the citations that occurred as same in three or more consecutive sentences, I gathered at the end of the sentences. Not all are put at the end of the paragraphs. I hope you grasp my meaning and hope you don't have problems with that. Do reply. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 20:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let's put this page for other editors to see and if they deem necessary make it aptly punctuated with citations. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 20:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, rule-of-thumb does not specify any particular guideline. I have only used it so that the reader can understand from where the sentence is taken. Using the reference at the end of the paragraph is often confusing, clarification for each sentence is better. And if you use reference for every single sentence, it will not prohibit your article to become FA. Hope you will understand my reasoning. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 20:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to say but the over-citing in the article leads to a clutter. I apologise if my concerns seem to bother you. Let's have others decide. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 04:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion and voting for the creation of a new task force for the Military of Pakistan at WikiProject Military History is going on here. Anyone can participate in the discussion whereas voting can be done only by the members of WikiProject Military History, if you want to be a member add your name here. Another info that currently about 546 articles related to Military of Pakistan on Wikipedia. --SMSTalk03:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What's the verdict so far. Was there a Pakistan TF formed or not. Please update us on it. Although, I am not much into military stuff, I feel that there certainly is a need for that. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 19:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please see this archived complaint. I allowed this to be archived before bringing it up here as I didn't want the same sort of reaction that is unfortunately common regarding Eastern Europe and other similar topics on the admin noticeboards - and I also feel that the majority of en-WP admins and editors do not have sufficient knowledge in these subjects to make judgements on the accusations of "vandalism". I hereby bring this matter to the attention of this WikiProject, who I assume to have both the knowledge and the neutrality to assess these claims.
Should it be found that admin intervention is required, and that no such admin can be found or is willing to act (since there is no need to escalate potential conflict) within the project, please feel free to contact me again - or any other help as required. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
Stale
