User talk:Mar4d

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

You've got mail!

Hello, Mar4d. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

descent, emigrants and expatriates.

Well lets start with the most easy. Category:American people of Pakistani descent is for people who are American citizens but have Pakistani ancestors. This is a bit odd of a category, since Pakistan only has existed since 1947, so someone whose family immigrated from Lahore to the United States in 1912 does not qualify. To illustrate Ayad Akhtar belongs in this category, since he was born in the US, but his parents were immigrants from Pakistan. Category:Pakistani emigrants to the United States is a sub-category, meaning by definition all its contents fit in the parent, but it is more specialized. This category is for people who were born or lived in Pakistan as nationals of that country (the later is important, since Pakistan only has existed since 1947) but are now in the United States, in theory as at least permanent residents, I will get to why that is so tricky in a minute. This category should not be used for anyone who came to the US before the start of 1947, they belong in the India category. It should be used for anyone coming from what was then Pakistan from 1947 to 1971. In general the people can have made stops along the way, but if they were born in Britain to Pakistani parents and now live in the US they belong in Category:American people of Pakistani descent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

On your third point, Category:Pakistani expatriates in the United States, this is a head-ache causer I am not sure we understand. Expatriates are in theory not emigrants at all. They are Pakistanis who just happen to be in the United States. The cases that come to mind the fastest are diplomats. However in theory many college studnets fit this mold, although many are functionally immigrants who have not received permanent status but will after graduation, so the issue is a little of a mess. There are large number of professional athletes who fit in expatriate categories. On the other had, Henry Cavill to illustrate a British example I know a lot more about than any Pakistani examples, is not in Category:British expatriates in Italy, British expatriates in Canada and Category:British expatriates in the United States, although as an actor he has had prominent roles in films made in all those locales, and may well be currently in the US to prep for filming of the next Superman film. This is actually a problem with the expatriates category. [Mitt Romney]] spending two years as a Mormon missionary in France is probably enough to define him an expatriate there, but what do we do about Ron Esplin who spent 2 years in a Mormon mission covering 5 or more countries? Some actually think we should get rid of such categories all together, although there are just so many that they stay more by inertia than anything else. The best I can tell you is that if the person spends more than 10 years in a new country continuously, call them an emigrant. Another example is Munni Begum who was in the expatriates category, but the article explicitly called her an American national. If they are in any way described as American they need to be in the emigrants category. If their place of birth is unknown but it is known they have Pakistani ancestry, put them in Category:American people of Pakistani descent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Some articles will explicitly state that the subject "emigrated". In this case they should be put in the emigrant category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the very detailed explanation :) It is indeed confusing and ambiguous many times when it comes to dealing with these categories due to the perceived overlaps, but this makes it a lot clearer. So from what I understand, the descent category is for an American citizen born in the US to Pakistani parents while the emigrant category applies to someone who was born in Pakistan and was a Pakistani national but migrated to the U.S. later, where they became long-term residents (and may have also become naturalised U.S. citizens along the way). On the other hand, the expatriate category is for anyone who lives temporarily in the U.S., and did not become an American citizen or a long-term U.S. resident, which can include diplomats, students, sportspersons or transient migrants. Sounds pretty clear now, hopefully I can get this right whenever I categorise someone next time.

I was actually in a bit of a fix over how to categorise Nasreddin Murat-Khan. The person in question is a Pakistani architect of Russian origin. He was born in 1904 in Dagestan (which was part of the Russian Empire back then) and escaped to Germany in 1944 as a refugee when Dagestan was part of the Soviet Union. In 1950, he migrated from Germany to Pakistan with his family where he became a citizen and lived the rest of his life. So ideally, he would be categorised into Category:Soviet expatriates in Germany (as he lived there for an odd five or six years) and into Category:Soviet emigrants to Pakistan (as Pakistan became his adopted country and permanent residence)? Mar4d (talk) 17:15, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Actually, part of me thinks Murat-Khan should go in Category:Soviet emigrants to Germany and then Category:German emigrants to Pakistan. 6 years is a long time to not be an emigrant. I think one thing is that especially sportspeople while they are notable for being in one place, often regularly return to their place of origin. Murat-Khan had permanently fled the SOviet Union, with no chance of going back, so I would count him as an emigrant.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:47, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, will adjust accordingly. Mar4d (talk) 17:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Help!

One of my created article is nominated for deletion, can you have a look please and make a comment in discussion? Thanks! UBStalk 09:56, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Chaudhry Aslam Khan

Plz add references to the 'personal life' section inserted by you in the article Chaudhry Aslam Khan.Rameshnta909 (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Nasreddin Murat-Khan

Thanks from the wiki and the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 08:03, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Dail Jones

Since Dail Jones was born in British India, not New Zealand, he might fit in Category:Pakistania emigrants to New Zealand, but not the other way around. It is unclear from his biography that he was a New Zelander in anyway before going there in the late 1950s.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Mar4d (talk) 06:19, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

British Mirpuri community

Hi,

Thanks for your edits on the British Mirpuri community article.

As someone who is from the UK, I can confirm however that Govt ethnicity questionnaires often have a Kashmiri checkbox. (as opposed to Indian or Pakistani, however strange it is..)

I don't have a reference for this but it is anecdotally something that is present in the UK. If I get a source, I'll send it on to you.

Regards

--RaviC (talk) 13:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, found it. You can see the recognised ethnicity codes here in the DEd website:

     □ Mirpuri Pakistani - AMPK
     □ Kashmiri Pakistani - AKPA
     □ Kashmiri Other - ASNL

There's quite a lot of choice for the Kashmiri community to identify as, as you can see.

A lot of the community I have met have disdain for both India and Pakistan and select the 3rd option.

--RaviC (talk) 14:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I've taken a look and have concurred that this checkbox issue comes into trivialities. There is a breadth and depth of academic sources which discuss the Mirpuri community in the context of the greater British Pakistani community. The official UK census treats migrants and their descendants originating from Azad Kashmir in the 'Pakistani' category - this is the reason why about 60-70% of British Pakistanis are Mirpuris/Kashmiris. Some sources that focus on the Kashmiri ethnic group alone usually do it for the purpose conducting studies on the Kashmiri ethnic group exclusively (as the Kashmiris are a huge group in Britain in their own right) or as demographic comparison with non-Kashmiri Pakistanis. Hence, the purpose of Kashmiri checkboxes in Govt ethnicity questionnaires is purely statistical and has more to do with studying demographics of that particular ethnic group as opposed to defining their nationality. As an example of this, the checkboxes above present three categories: Mirpuri Pakistani (Kashmiris originating from Mirpur, Pakistan), Kashmiri Pakistani (other Kashmiris originating from Pakistan) or just Kashmiri (this one is trivial but could include Kashmiris who are neither from Mirpur or Azad Kashmir, but Jammu and Kashmir). Mar4d (talk) 14:20, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Regarding the third option, there isn't a substantial diaspora from Jammu and Kashmir; mainly Pandits (who would probably select Indian) and no more than 2,000 people from the valley at the max.. I'll try to encompass some of this into the article in a way which will be acceptable by all sides. --RaviC (talk) 14:38, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• 12george1 (submissions) and TropicalAnalystwx13 (submissions) were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
• WonderBoy1998 (submissions) scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Wikipedia:Featured topics/She Wolf.
• TheAustinMan (submissions) scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
• Igordebraga (submissions) has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

about your revert on my edit

Salam aleikum

Afghanistan and Australia are counted as 'white countries' Afghans are conisdered as Middle Eastern American. they are not considered as asian by the US census but white because they all belong to the Iranian race (pashtuns, persians, tajiks, balochs, kurds all of them are from Iranian race) that's why the US census considerers Afghans as 'white americans' and not asian americans like paki's and indians. the person who made that map was wrong