User talk:Flyer22 Frozen

I don't expect to engage here much anymore at all unless necessary (such as article talk page space). So, given that this talk page will not be getting much use (and its use has been on the decline because of certain unwanted watchers), you might want to go ahead and drop this talk page. If you email me, I may or may not reply.

My watchlist will be significantly reduced.

I don't care about your politics and activism as long as you keep them off Wikipedia and edit the way you are supposed to edit. Read and comprehend WP:Due weight and WP:Advocacy. I am not here to present one side of any debate or conflict. So, no, you will not see me only adding material that you agree with. I am not here to make you feel more validated in your views. I am here to present what the WP:Reliable sources state with WP:Due weight.

Harassment/hounding. For those expecting me to just grin and bear it when facing harassment/hounding, and who act like I'm just not assuming good faith enough in these cases, how about you go smile when someone harasses/hounds you. Yes, I'm going to respond to jabs if they are persistent and they are not just a troll matter to ignore. This is not necessarily taking the bait. It can be about making it clear that I'm not going to tolerate it. And while bickering on a talk page is not ideal, I am human. We are human. Bickering will happen at times, and our admins are not above succumbing to this fate either. With as long as I've been at this site, I know that. For the admins who have never bickered, it may be that they aren't out there in the thick of it dealing with harassment/hounding or POV-pushing that undermines this site. Whatever the case, assuming good faith does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of obvious evidence to the contrary. Assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism. Assuming good faith does not mean playing dumb.

Socks. If I see a WP:Sockpuppet, I am likely to alert a CU to the matter. I might start a WP:SPI. If I ask you if you have edited as a different account, I have a good reason for asking. It is allowed. It is not a violation of WP:Assume good faith. And since WP:LEGITSOCK is a thing, it is not always because I'm certain that you are violating our WP:Sockpuppet policy.

My block log. Since many here will look at a person's block log without taking the time to read and comprehend it, or are simply confused by it, I point to what Boing! said Zebedee stated about mine: "Just for the record, I want to confirm that Flyer 22's block log is the result of a genuine 'My brother did it' episode. I communicated with Flyer by email at the time (as did other admins), and I was convinced that she was not guilty of any abuse herself - and the block that I made was indeed to help her secure her account, as I noted in the log. In fact, none of the blocks is a result of any misbehaviour by Flyer 22." So if you want to bring up my block log to sling mud my way (failing to read descriptions as simple as "uneccessary block, will comment at ANI"), be my guest, but it just makes you look ignorant.

Stating the obvious

You changed your name! I'll have to get used to it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An intriguing change for sure. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed new user page image :-)

Insert appropriate caption as desired... Viriditas (talk) 04:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to the article on Higher Education Commission (Pakistan)

No offense, but you undid my edits to the article on the Higher Education Commission (Pakistan) without any justifiable cause. I had worked hard on it. For example, you have reverted the old figure for the HEC's budget, i.e., 102.4 billion rupees. This is no longer correct. This is a 2014 figure. In another place, the budge figure has been put at 57.4 billion rupees. The relevant sentence reads: "Prioritizing the expansion of the higher education in the country, HEC's financial budget is estimated near ₨. 57.8 billion, which is more than that of Pakistan Steel Mills, PIA or any other state-owned enterprises’ allocations." Not only this figure is wrong, but the sentence leaves much to be desired in terms of editing.

Similarly, please read this sentence: "Many recommendations were directed and accepted by the government to established the UGC as a federal regulatory institution in 1947." I think Wikipedia and its readers deserve better than this.

I hope it would not be out of place to say a few words by way of introduction. I studied international relations in Islamabad and media in London. I have worked for several English-language newspapers. I am a trained copy editor. I have written a critically acclaimed book on the English language. Entitled "Handbook of Functional English", it has been published by Ferozsons, Lahore. In addition, I have edited dozens of Wikipedia articles.

Last but not least, may I have the pleasure of knowing your real name and location? I hope we can work together for the betterment of Wikipedia, which is a great resource for humanity.