User talk:Hassanfarooqi

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Hassanfarooqi/Archive 2. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Shah Ahmad Noorani Siddiqi

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Shah Ahmad Noorani Siddiqi, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 04:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of "Hasrat"

The deletion of an article you created, Hasrat, has been proposed for the following reason:

No reason to include a dicdef of a foreign word in an English-language encyclopedia.

You are welcome to improve the article to meet Wikipedia's quality standards and remove the deletion notice from the article. You may also remove the notice if you disagree with the deletion, though in such cases, further discussion may take place at Articles for deletion, and the article may still be deleted if there is a consensus to do so.

Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy. You may wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thanks.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

George N. Farr

An article you created has been nominated for deletion. Please see the article and WP:PROD to see if you wish to dispute this. Thanks, Hndis (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Sindhi Wikipedia

Hello,

As a Sindhi speaker, would it be possible for you to join the sindhi wikipedia? It has very few members and little has been translated. Could you please help?

Thanks. --92.11.24.4 (talk) 12:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Requesting for the edit involvement for the article Aisha

Hi i am Omer, i request your kind self to help me out to make the article Aisha a organized and model article for viewers, there are some users who had challenged the references of this article, and based on my research knowledge, references and poor comand on english, i am not able to work out for those, therfore kindly help me to make the article Aisha organized. Thanks and pls advice --Omer123hussain123 (talk) 11:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Invite to WikiConference India 2011

Hi Hassanfarooqi, The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011. You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form. But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach. As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions. We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

Nomination of Abu Hubairah Basri for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abu Hubairah Basri is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abu Hubairah Basri until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Inter rest (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Aliabbas aa (talk) 02:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Aliabbas aa (talk) 02:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Aliabbas aa (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Abdul Qadeer Siddiqi Qadri (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Aliabbas aa (talk) 06:27, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Join us at FB

Hello Pakistanis Wikipedians! Assalam-o-Alaikum, I hope you are enjoying editing Wikipedia and helping around. I want to join every Pakistani Wikipedian on facebook so I hope you would like to join us in our community. We would/could help each other and make Pakistani articles more better.

Join us:

• Group: Pakistani Wikipedians
• Page: Pakistani Wikipedians

And then sign my guestbook for memories.

Regards: -- Captain Wikipedia! ^{( T - C - G )} 12:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Maudood Chishti

The article Maudood Chishti has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article has remained improperly sourced for years. Nobody seems to care for it.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Abu Yusuf Bin Saamaan

The article Abu Yusuf Bin Saamaan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article has remained improperly sourced for years. Nobody seems to care for it.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Abu Yusuf Bin Saamaan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abu Yusuf Bin Saamaan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abu Yusuf Bin Saamaan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. MezzoMezzo (talk) 13:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

MezzoMezzo's edits

perhaps You would like to share your views regarding the editing behavior of this mezzomezzo.I have lodged a complaint here [1]

You have witnessed his edits since a long time.Msoamu (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of above Hassanfarooqi you should improve your provision of sources. Even if it means supplying Farsi text into footnotes. Also - for example Abu Yusuf Bin Saamaan why no Category:1067 deaths? Category:People from Chisht? (I have added for this for you). Are you certain he has never been mentioned in any English text? ... and so on. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution. At least someone is contributing to the article isntead of trying to get it deleted based on one's personal beliefs Hassanfarooqi (talk) 16:03, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Hassanfarooqi! Speaking of MezzoMezzo,I have noticed that you have repeatedly acused him of being an anti-sufi jihadist. I would like to say that such claims are not permitted on wikipedia. You have no real proof that he or she is any of these things. Insulting people like this just makes wikipedia an unpleasent environment in which to work. Please read WP:NPA for more information.   75* 18:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I am not accusing you of being an anti-sufi jihadist, you are proving it yourself thru your edits. Why are you so afraid of revealing your name? Are you involved in a terror organization? Hassanfarooqi (talk)

I know your not accusing me, your accusing MezzoMezzo. I never said I was afraid of revealing my name, and am an agnostic.75* 17:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

"Let it be."- John Lennon. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC))

Wha? --75* 21:43, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments

Please do not engage in personal attacks like you did here. Your comments were rude, unnecessary and inaccurate. In the future, try to discuss content and not contributors per Wikipedia:No personal attacks. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:34, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Exposing your personal agenda was not a personal attack. Anyone can take a look at your edit wars and know you are a Nejdi/Wahhabi/Salafi/Athari cultist, and want to discredit me to delete all Sufi bios. Guess what? I use my real name, while you use fake names for your sneak attacks. Stop posting on my page or you will see retaliation. Hassanfarooqi (talk)

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

You should really check the ANI thread as soon as you see this message. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

It is basically your dirt. Deal with the repurcussion of your vandalism, and stop posting on my page or you will see a retaliation. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 15:03, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Only warning

This edit is unacceptable. You all have got to stop trying to claim that this is motivated by some sort of personal belief. Deal with the edits. Any more commenting on the editor's motivations is going to result in a block. Qwyrxian (talk) 18:00, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Then go ahead and block me. No threat from someone with a fake name can stop me from trying to stop genuine articles from deletion by someone whose cult belief can not stand these articles. Deal with it. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 21:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

• You're very, very lucky you only got 72 hours. Your comments about someone editing with a pseudonym are completely inappropriate and irrelevant - why should Mezzo have to edit with their real name? - and your comments about his "cult belief" are irrelevant, inappropriate and incorrect - MezzoMezzo actually tries to stay neutral, unlike the majority of those opposing him. Lukeno94 (talk) 09:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• I am totally disappointed you have blocked me for only 72 hours. I dared speak truth about the Salafi cult that holds oil reserves, and should have been more resourcesful than just banning me for 72 hours. You are however mistaken it would stop me from defending the bios of peaceful sufis against the any cult. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for personal attacks. My apologies for not putting this notice up yesterday; I'm not sure how I overlooked it (I'm guessing because I was reporting to ANI). Your unblock request instructions follow if you like. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Qwyrxian (talk) 11:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I am always making valueable contribution. It just so happens that they are mostly bios of Sufi saints, something Wahhabi/Salafi/Nejdi cultist want to immediately remove by any means necessary.

They used to claim Sufi saints are not noteworthy, and that claim did not stand. Now they use some wikipedia's technical loopholes to find technical reasons to shut down these articles.

Whatever justification they give to shut down these bios, when I go for the defence of these articles, all that these cultists can come up with is "personal attack" to get me banned. So enjoy banning me while the oil wealth lasts Hassanfarooqi (talk) 18:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• At the risk of feeding the troll, I'm not a cultist, in any sense of the word, and yet I also see blatant personal attacks aimed at MezzoMezzo, and anyone seen to support them. Your comments are well into the realms of absurd paranoia. Lukeno94 (talk) 20:08, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Trolls do not have names like Hassan Farooqi and come up with dozens of genuine articles and factual edits. They come with names like Lukeno94 and are usually speed deletionist, not creators of articles. Just enjoy the ban and wait for the next time. You will have your turn of banning me. Get in line Hassanfarooqi (talk) 21:31, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• I challenge you to go through my contributions and make that accusation against me again. Lukeno94 (talk) 21:52, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• This "discussion" is not helpful. Stop.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:58, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually it just goes on to prove that on wikipedia, anyone can ban anyone with a help of a few guys, and hide their biases due to technical loopholes. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 01:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Formal warning

Just a note based upon the results of the WP:ANI discussion. While some have suggested extending your block here due to comments made here after you were blocked, both myself and several other editors think that doing so is inappropriate. We understand that being blocked is stressful and can result in some venting. However, once this block expires, if you engage in any more attacks, you will be re-blocked, for longer, or possibly indefinitely. When you edit, discuss edits, not editors. Contribute civilly, or don't contribute at all. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Understand this clearly. Whenever my genuine articles are targetted by speed deletionist due to their religious or other biases, I will react. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 01:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Incase you don't understand, Qwyrxian (talk) is signaling to you that he will be watching your every move personally(he has blocked you once) and you are on a list of his of people that he wants to potentially block permanently and it is only a matter of time for him. You gotta understand that this institution is run as a bureaucracy and some people(by far not all) just want to play internet dictators(not saying it is definitely Qwwyrian). These people don't get paid for what they do. Some peoples joy comes from blocking people like you who have something to say. I would seriously cool it for a little bit, think about what you want to do about the situation- not just the articles

Also tone down the accusations. It makes you look bad. I have seen clear vandalism upheld by administrators because calling an edit "vandalism", no matter how blatantly clear, is considered a personal attack because it is not "good faith." Like I said, think about the situation-not just the articles.

I don't think administrative abuse has taken place here. People in the past have become so frustrated with potential administrative abuse they have taken to telling their family members and their institutions to stop donating to wikipedia, but I would not recommend this. But if you are interested in changing the situation, find means. I would also like to recommend that change starts from within and you should think about how you try to get your point across first. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 18:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC))

Just saw your profile. LOL. You got more bans in one year than I got in 13 years. Probably because I never go on offensive, just on defence of my articles. However some people know how to provoke, and I just fell in their trap. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 21:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

It was actually just one ban and I requested a review multiple times because I was new to wikipedia. Qwyrxian is an administrator who had filed a dispute resolution notice when it appeared that he was defending a extreme right wing hindu religious ideology and I had won the consensus in the DRN board over him. I think this upset him quite a bit. Later, when I was protecting an article that I had worked very hard on from vandalism he blocked me.File:Blush.png It looked like clear administrative abuse . I decided to appeal it, then decided against it because I didn't realize it would be an independent administrator who does the block review. When I realized the reviews are done by independent administrators I decided to appeal but was turned down. They dont get paid to do this. What some people get their joy from is blocking people who are passionate about something.

13 years is a very long time! Yes you are right, there are people who try to push buttons on wikipedia and are very good at it. Sometimes it is good to take a step back, laugh and think about your next move. I seriously thought about telling my family and friends to stop donating to wikipedia, but decided against it. I will be bringing this conversation about the administrator abuse and censorship to my family dinner table and discussing it with my friends for sure though because I know they are passionate about the article. For now: life is short, so enjoy it! ;) Cheers!

[[2]] <--Look at this and smile! Life is too short to let fools upset you. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 22:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC))

Lowkeyvision, I don't even know which DRN you're talking about. I'm involved in dozens of different pages and discussions simultaneously, and I don't pay too much attention to who is involved in each one. If you think I've wronged you, you are welcome to seek review, as I have been known to make mistakes.

Also, I don't intend to scrutinize Hassanfarooqi's edits. I might check in occasionally, and I'll keep this talk page on my watchlist for a while, but I simply don't have the time or interest in monitoring individual contributors. And I'm certainly not going to watchlist the pages that were involved in that dispute, as there seemed to be quite a large number. Rather, if someone reports to me or to ANI further problems in this regard, then I or another admin will take action as needed. Again, Hassanfarooqi, if you feel that pages you've worked on are "under attack", you absolutely should discuss the matter, defend the articles at AfD, add more sources to establish notability or particular points, and take the matter through dispute resolution. The only thing you have to stop doing is to stop attacking other editors. And that's actually really easy: don't try to guess why someone is doing something. Instead, just focus on the edits being made. I really think that Wikipedia is better when everyone does this. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I am a professional analyst, I do not guess. I examine the data and come to conclusions. When my articles are attacked by a single person, I see the attacker's edit history. MezzoMezzo is mostly in conflict with Sufies, and on defence against Salafi cult. Remember, Salafies call themselves Salafies only when they are among each other, and among Sunnies they will always call themselves Sunnies and deny being Salafies. Also remember, we Sufies are peaceful people and preached peace for over a thousand years. See my ancestors in my bios. We are respected by all religions except the Salafi cult who believe in wiping us out by sword. We are killed by them on daily basis. Here on wikipedia they kill our bios thru edits. Hassanfarooqi (talk) 23:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

MezzoMezzo has never declared his religion on Wikipedia, and I believe has denied the exact claim you made. In any event, it does not matter. If you want to argue for keeping articles, do it. But if you start ascribing motives to other people and attacking them, you will be blocked. That's how Wikipedia works. Can we all finish this and get back to editing please? Qwyrxian (talk) 01:47, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Clearly you do not understand Arabic, and that is why you are making this erronous statement that MezzoMezzo has not declared his religion. On his bio there is a clear tag in Arabic that he is "Ahl Sunnah". Go there and see it, before he deletes it. Ahl Sunnah is a sect of Muslims also known as Sunni sect. Salafies are a minority cult, but claim they are the real sunnies because of their tremendous oil wealth in Middle East. They acquire the services of "Perception Management Companies" who hire trolls to change their perception.

and just what would I achieve by pleading to review with administrators who are so eager to ban someone that they do so without proper knowledge and without proper investigation? As you correctly said, it does not matter. No matter what proof I will provide you, you will go ahead and ban me. I say "Exposing personal agenda" and you say "Personal attacks". Hassanfarooqi (talk) 14:21, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see now that it was the saffron terror DRN. You do realize that I agree with you on that DRN, right--that we shouldn't use the word "allegedly"? So I don't know why you think I'd be upset with you when I actually agree with you, at least on that point in that article. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:57, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not talking to Qwyrxian on any page except the Saffron terror page because I feel he is dangerous and will again abuse his administrative authority by later creating petty reasons to suppress my voice. Issues regarding his potential abuse of power were expressed on his administrator application regarding India-Pakistan related issues and now he is embodying those concerns. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 00:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC))

Apologies for giving you that impression. As you wish. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)