User talk:Nannadeem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm Dawnseeker2000. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Naqvis, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dawnseeker2000 16:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did to Naqvis, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 13:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Nannadeem (talk) 11:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC) Respected Alexf, I (user Nannadeem) testify that I made my best according to knowledge and belief in quoting source. I can mail you the scanned pages of the books i referred. I further state that telling lie is sin and writing lie is great sin. However, I request you to guide me which source of reference is acceptable - thanks Nannadeem (talk) 11:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

It is all fairly simple really. Sending scans does not accomplish anything. The only thing that matters is that your edits follow the Golden Rule. -- Alexf(talk) 12:20, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Nannadeem (talk) I (Nannadeem) testify that I confined myself to edit by following Golden Rule. Please belief me Nannadeem (talk) 12:29, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Alexf(talk) 22:39, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Nannadeem (talk) 23:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks a lot for giving importance to my article. Kindly remove mistakes, if any, which might be due to my poor knowledge & ability, however, you may please improve my article by giving your valued advice and guidance. thanks again.

Proposed deletion of Naqvi Orientation[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Naqvi Orientation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Apparently a personal essay, with most of its key points unreferenced. In any case compeltely unencyclopedic as written. The topic may be notable, but the article would need a total rewrite.

While all constructive 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. DES (talk) 23:18, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Nannadeem (talk) 01:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC) In the light of your observations, I attempted to modify the article so as to remove personal style. I request the Admns to guide me which phrase(s) need improvement or deletion, for which writer is ready. However, it will be discouraging to remove the Article completely. I shall appreciate the points to be deleted. Thanks for reading the Article closely.

Your request for undeletion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Naqvi Orientation. JohnCD (talk) 11:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Naqvi Orientation, again. JohnCD (talk) 09:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Naqvi Orientation for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Naqvi Orientation 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/Naqvi Orientation 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 notice from the top of the article. JohnCD (talk) 09:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Duplicated in case of page deletion[edit]

I am placing a duplicate here of what I wrote on the Naqvi Orientation talk page in case that page is deleted before you get a chance to read it. If you have read that page already, ignore what is below. I am not trying to harass you. Just the opposite, in fact.

Nannadeem, it is clear that you wish to contribute to Wikipedia with an article that is close to your heart. This is, in general terms, a good thing. Wikipedia would be worthless without millions of volunteer contributions from people around the world.

Wikipedia has a series of self-imposed guidelines and policies. These guidelines and policies are intended to keep these millions of contributions focused on a common goal of what the project hopes to achieve. The other side of this coin is that Wikipedia does not try to be all things to all people.

You are apparently having difficulty with the feedback that you have received so far. The other editors that have left messages here are attempting to explain they feel why this article does not fit into Wikipedia's policies for including or excluding articles.

I will attempt to summarize these concerns in plain English, with links to the guidelines and policies that support these concerns.

  • English usage We have a Manual of Style that has been agreed to by the broad community as the preferred way to write articles. Among other things, it says: "Writing should be clear and concise. Plain English works best; avoid ambiguity, jargon, and vague or unnecessarily complex wording." The article you have written, and your messages on its talk page, are neither clear nor concise. They are generally extremely difficult to understand, and in some places so not make coherent sense at all. You are apparently a non-native user of the English language. This is not a issue in itself. Many other productive editors speak and write English as a second, third, or even fourth language. The issue is that articles are intended for an English-speaking audience, and so should be understandable to that audience. The editors that have commented on your article so far cannot understand what you are writing.
  • Original Research We have a policy that Wikipedia is not the publisher of original research. What you have written appears at the very least to be a synthesis of ideas not found in your sources. To the extent your article and messages are understandable, they seem to be advancing a new idea that you have generated yourself. You cannot find one article that says A, a second that says B, and together use them to justify your statement of C. So far as I can tell, you not only do just that, you then go on to say D, E and F without any further sources of information. If you think your apparently unique idea of a Naqvi Orientation is a genuinely useful one, you need to bring this to the world's in some other media.
  • Sources We have a policy that Wikipedia articles must be supported by what we call "reliable" sources. "Reliable" sources are materials published (online or print or otherwise) by those that are not directly connected to the subject of the article or its author. We also prefer English-language sources to other sources that are in another language. The reason for this is that each major assertion in an article needs to be verifiable. Non-english sources make verifiability difficult. Having no source at all makes verifiability impossible. Your article has both problems.

I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) 21:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Nannadeem. You have new messages at NatGertler's talk page.
Message added 17:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nat Gertler (talk) 17:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Ape is a Punished Man. JohnCD (talk) 11:09, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Nannadeem! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Proposed deletion of Creationism & Empirical Science[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Creationism & Empirical Science has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Original essay; creationism and knowledge both already have articles.

While all constructive 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. Nat Gertler (talk) 01:38, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

  • You are still not getting it, are you? Wikipedia does not serve for you to write essays on various topics; original research and synthesis are outside the scope of Wikipedia. I have summarily deleted the article as a duplicate of Creationism and other articles, unsalvageable original research, and preaching (i.e. promotion of a particular belief system). Please stop creating articles like this one; should you continue, you may be blocked from editing. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 08:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

I have already explained to you what was wrong with the article:

There are certain classes of articles that indeed may be summarily deleted by any administrator upon discovery; these are defined by the speedy deletion criteria. Both promotional and duplicate with an existing article are among the criteria. While original research is not a speedy deletion criterion, that original research is outside the scope of Wikipedia is one of the core Wikipedia policies.

You had created several unencyclopedic articles in the past, and after both me and other users have explained to you what was wrong with them, you still fail or refuse to understand. I am not going to personally block you, but if you continue creating unencyclopedic essays, I might report you at the administrators' noticeboard, with a possibility that a block or another restriction will be imposed on you (if consensus exists that such an action is warranted). - Mike Rosoft (talk) 11:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Removed edit[edit]

I removed your edit from WP:RFAR. It doesn't belong there. The proper forum for requesting undeletion of articles is WP:REFUND.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:41, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

I could not understand what do you want to tell me. I donot want undeletion of my article. ok I am sufferring from biased treatmentNannadeem (talk) 20:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
There's no bias. A malformed arbitration request is not the way to go.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


Thank you I think you all admins do favour each other without considering justice and logic. You all have power to remove and delete.Nannadeem (talk) 21:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

I noticed the request for arbitration and have checked to make sure the administrators (Bbb23 and Mike Rosoft) haven't done anything they shouldn't, and I'm afraid they were absolutely correct to delete the article. I was going to return a copy of the article to your talk page, so you could continue to work upon it, but I found part of it was a copyright violation, which both confirms the deletion by Mike was correct, and also means I cannot undelete it. I believe the text came from [1] originally. Sorry this probably isn't what you want to hear. Nick (talk) 22:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I read your arbitration request from the history after its deletion, and I have no idea what it is that you are asking the ArbCom to do. You have posted several articles that have been proposed for deletion as containing original research or otherwise unsuitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Both other editors and I have no idea what you were trying to bring to the attention of the ArbCom. You claim that you suffering from biased treatment, but it appears that you don't understand our policies of reliable sources, notability, and original research. If you read those policies and still think that you are suffering from biased treatment, please try to explain your concerns and we will further explain our policies. As it is, we have no idea what you are asking. (If you are actually asking for the editors who deleted your articles to be blocked or banned, you may be assured that that will not happen.) Robert McClenon (talk) 23:20, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Some gentle advice[edit]

Nannadeem: The conversations immediately above came to my attention because I still have your user talk page on my watchlist after we had discussions over your Naqvi Orientation and Ape is a Punished Man articles. You may remember our previous conversations in connection with those articles. I am not an administrator but a humble editor such as yourself. I have no more power or influence than any other random user of the encyclopedia. I want you to understand that I say what I am going to because it is my honest observation and not part of any campaign against you or because I am attempting to gain the favor of those that delegate power.

What you need to understand and understand soon is this:

You are not going to win.

What I mean by this is actually a number of things: You are not the victim of a conspiracy among administrators to silence you. You are not the target of a group that wishes to automatically delete every article you create. You are not going to single-handedly change multiple policies that have built up over years of worldwide collaboration. Most of all, however, you are not using Wikipedia in the way that the rest of the community has determined it should be used.

Wikipedia is not a blog. It is not for any person's dissemination of their deep thoughts and philosophical musings. You have no right of free speech here. The owners of this service are perfectly within their rights to determine what can and can't be said here. Even if the slogan is that "anyone can edit" Wikipedia, it does not have a corollary of "anyone can say anything."

You have already been warned by actual administrators that you are treading on thin ice by continuing the same sort of postings. I urge you in the strongest terms possible to stop creating new articles for the time being and get some more experience in the way editing works here.

For example, there are are thousands of articles in the category of articles that need cleanup. That is a mere subset of the many, many, areas of maintenance that need help. May I suggest you start by seeing if you can assist in those areas before you go back to creating articles. It may help you avoid the issues that have caused your previous articles to be deleted.

Best of luck. --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 03:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Your Comments Please[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Nannadeem. You have new messages at Eggishorn's talk page.
Message added 15:45, 31 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: your message at User talk:Eggishorn - Good, we are getting somewhere; the photo was in fact taken by your brother. However, a permission that only extends to Wikipedia is insufficient. In order for the photo to be usable on Wikipedia, it needs to be under a free license. In this context, "free" means that the license needs to allow third-party use and distribution, including commercial use, and creation of derivative works. So you need to choose an appropriate free license, such as Creative Commons Attribution or Attribution share-alike license, and then have your brother e-mail the Wikipedia mailing list (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) to confirm that the photo is under the chosen license. (See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 15:48, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

  • The photo File:Shrine-Sharif-Razi.jpg is a nice photo of the shrine entrance. But I am afraid as it stands, it cannot be used on Wikipedia; the image use policy is clear. Every image needs to contain a notice that identifies its copyright status, and incorrect information is worse than no information at all.

    You have marked the photo as a reproduction of a "unique historic image", which is clearly not the case; it is a recently taken photo of the shrine. Since the photo can't stay on Wikipedia with an incorrect fair use claim, I had no choice but to mark the file for missing copyright status. That means that unless the problem is corrected, it will be deleted a week from now - on 10 January 2014.

    But there is also good news: since it's your brother who took the photo, all that's needed is to choose an appropriate free license, and e-mail the Wikipedia mailing list to confirm that your brother has agreed to publish the file under that license. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


Dear Mr. Rosoft, He is not my brother. I found the shrine pic on flicker and a copyright monogram thereon. So I contacted him through email. He granted me right of use. There is complicated system for uploading media, in case of copyright material/contents. It is not my intention to make myself something important. You may see that prior to my editing the burial of Sharif Razi was shown in Karbala. That is why I think the pic is necessary to remove the general awareness of the sweet people who believes without sereach.

I request not to delete the pic of shrine. However, whenever a new pic is available you or anyone may replace it by uploading to common. Besides, this you are free, I cannot stop you, I am a simple element your a huge molecule, and you can eat me (blocking) by your intramolecular force. Nannadeem (talk) 20:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Oh, sorry, I thought you really meant he was your brother; it was actually just a figure of speech. In any case, I am afraid the picture can't remain on Wikipedia unless it is under a free license; I am going to contact the Flicker user myself and ask him to license the photo as appropriate. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


No matter. I am hopefull for the fertility of your constructive efforts for shrine pic of Sharif Razi. I further request you to spare your precious time for study of his compilation Nahjul Balagha. Nannadeem (talk) 15:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Ali al-Sistani[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Nannadeem. You have new messages at Mike Rosoft's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Good converstion is in progress. Nannadeem (talk) 07:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

  • I have rewritten the "Nobel Peace Prize nomination" section. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 12:49, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


Well I have seen Ali al-Sistani page section-3, I appreciate your grooming in accordance with EN-WP contents style. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Tehran Times has named the Iraqi newspaper Azzaman [2] as the source of this information; could you locate the original article? (I know no Arabic.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:16, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


Even I donot know Arabic/Persian. Anyhow me attempting to prove worthy in this task. Thanks for attention and kindness.Nannadeem (talk) 06:55, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

  • I believe the original article is here (Google translation). The article was published on 7 March, still postdating Colin Freeman's article from 4 March. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 16:34, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes your investigation is 100% correct. Article publishing date of Colin Freeman, the Chief Foreign Correspondent for the Sunday Telegraph is 4 March. The article published in the REUTERS (OSLO Tue Mar 4, 2014) reportedly states:

Committee members who met on Tuesday added their own proposals with a focus on recent turmoil around the globe. Part of the purpose of the committee's first meeting is to take into account recent events, and committee members try to anticipate what could be the potential developments in political hotspots, said Geir Lundestad, Director of Norwegian Nobel Institute. It was further added here that - Although nominations are kept secret for 50 years, thousands of people around the world are eligible to propose candidates, including any member of any national assembly, and many make their picks public. This is here http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/04/us-nobel-peace-idUSBREA231R920140304.

Now dates are 4, 7 and 8 March 2014 (on/in different web & media). But I think case is old. Otherwise it might not be on the concerned URL. Nannadeem (talk) 17:42, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
good Mehdi ghaed (talk) 12:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Your name has been removed from Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. Please read the instructions in future before you do anything on Wikipedia; that way, and if you ask for help if anything is not clear, you will enjoy your editing here much more. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

link=User talk:--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC))
Hello, Nannadeem. You have new messages at [[User talk:--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC))|User talk:--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC))]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Recent discussion[edit]

Hello Nannadeem, thank you for your reply but you do not need to ask for pardon as you have not done anything wrong. When I get time, I will look into Umm Kulthum bint Jarwila Khuzima and if it meets WP:NO then I will create an article. Regards. Mbcap (talk) 21:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

MbcapThanks. Dr best wishes for you.Nannadeem (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Please do not tag draft articles[edit]

I have just removed tags form Draft:The Smallest Penis in Brooklyn pageant. They are not relevant to articles in the Draft: space Fiddle Faddle 21:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
For your well-researched opinion on Talk:2015 military intervention in Yemen#Needing to opinion poll Strivingsoul (talk) 09:40, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Confused[edit]

Hello, I got a notification saying that I have been patrolled by you. What does that mean?ArabianWonders (talk) 19:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC).

@ArabianWonders, simply your editing has been patrolled. There is nothing wrong to be noticed.Nannadeem (talk) 19:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Should I be flattered or worried?ArabianWonders (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
No flatter no worry. It's a routine matter.Nannadeem (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)


2015 Qatif mosque bombing[edit]

Hi there. Care to explain this edit to the above article, in which you re-introduced grammatical errors? Cheers.--203.173.192.240 (talk) 07:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@203.173.192.240 thank you for your attention and pointing out grammar errors. Paragraph has been rephrased. It is further mentioned that the said paragraph was not according to my first edit. Nannadeem (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
You don't appear to have understood. I provided a link of your edit for you to check.--203.173.192.240 (talk) 07:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
@203.173.192.240, if so please teach me. Nannadeem (talk) 16:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I have a better idea: Look more carefully through the edit link I provided above and undo all the errors throughout the article that you resinstated. Thanks.--117.120.17.227 (talk) 22:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG I'm happy that i helped you.. If have any work for me so tell me? GreenCricket (talk) 13:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.Nannadeem (talk) 13:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Reply[edit]

Hi, thanks for message. I deleted your article because

  • it did not provide adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Many of the sources you gave do not seem to be independent reputable third-party sources. Note also that his lineage is irrelevant, you can't inherit notability, so know point writing about what his ancestors or brother did.
  • it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
  • Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: Al-Razi genius came to the notice of his family and teachers at a very young age... His wit and alertness of mind surprised all... Most of his teachers were eminent scholars and writers of Arabic... Very soon he acquired fame... His fame as a poet overshadowed his excellence in all other fields... intimate friendly relations of mutual respect and love with eminent contemporary scholars... which was an indication of his broad humanism and tolerance... these jewels were scattered all over the Islamic literature... Allah gave Syed Razi the opportunity and the will to finish this enormous task... are matchless in human expression by eloquent writers... are superior to human expression and beyond the ordinary level of the human being's knowledge at that time. Mankind is indebted to the endeavors and initiatives of Syed Razi— and so on. It's a hagiography, not an encyclopaedia article
You have put in spamlinks to sales sites like Amazon and Momin
Why do we need a list of translations?

He may well be notable, but the article is so hopelessly promotional that it's hard to sort out the facts from the glitter Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak thanks for reply and observations. I am sorry for inclusion of sale site. Can I re-write the page in accordance with your findings? Nannadeem (talk) 09:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
You don't need permission, but obviously you need to improve your references and write in a neutral tone if the article is to survive. You might want to write a draft here rather than throw it straight to the wolves. Let me know if you do and you want me to take a look Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jimfbleak could you please favor me with the copy of page deleted. Nannadeem (talk) 19:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I'll post here shortly Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:33, 6 July 2015 (UTC
@Jimfbleak, respected admin, see the page and restore the article, please. Nannadeem (talk) 08:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
I made these edits, mostly formatting, MoS and general tidying but I also removed a few phrases that seemed to be too hagiographic. When you are ready, use the move button to restore to the original title, don't cut-and-paste. Good luck, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak. Thank you very much. Nannadeem (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: E-trading in Pakistan has been accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
E-trading in Pakistan, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Mr. Guye (talk) 20:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Guye thank you very much. Nannadeem (talk) 12:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Shia Portal[edit]

Salaam Alaykom. I was wondering why there's no shia portal but got to know that the portal with such a title was deleted years ago. I decided to revive the portal once again. Are you willing to help? Mhhossein (talk) 14:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC).

@Mhhossein yes please. Nannadeem (talk) 15:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Lets start with DYK. Could I have your suggestion on this? Mhhossein (talk) 17:56, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
@Mhhossein please be informed I am not an expert, however, I will attempt my best to be a good worker. I have no good suggestion at the moment. Page watch history will encourage in future, besides unforeseen critics. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 14:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope to be a good co-worker. Btw, I'm not a native speaker, so could you please tell me what you mean by "page watch history will encourage in future, besides unforeseen critics"? Mhhossein (talk) 14:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
@Mhhossein Oh good (i) You traced the deleted portal and attempting to revive (ii) number of users/editors who visit the DYK page/portal will encourage us (as community/group). This is explanation, plz Nannadeem (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. Yes, "Page watch history will encourage in future!" Do you think is it good if I launch the portal and we build it gradually? Mhhossein (talk) 14:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Do you know any other editors who may help us build and run the portal? Mhhossein (talk) 14:36, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
    @Mhhossein I think we must have a team for successful and up-to-date maintenance of proposed portal. Without teamwork delay is suggested and first priority should be focused for a team. Last night I visited your contributed editing on talk page of users for their involvement in this portal. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 06:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
You just hit the nail on the head 'Nannadeem'. I wonder if I can find some other concerned editors! Please let me know, if you know any. I'll do my best to form a know-how team. Mhhossein (talk) 06:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Alipur Tehsil[edit]

Hi, Nannadeem, I was wondering if you could take a look at that page. It just doesn't look good. Thank you for your time. Face-smile.svg Lotje (talk) 14:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

@Lotje thanks. I have looked at the page. Yes it needs to be rewritten. By the way I have a maternal link to Tehsil Alipur. I will attempt to edit the page after my reading. Thanks once again. Nannadeem (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
You are most welcome. Lotje (talk) 14:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Fatima (s.a)[edit]

You were right about the issue of "sister or daughter" on Fatima (s.a) page and thanks for reverting my edit. I had to be more careful and not pay only to the infobox but to the article. Mhhossein (talk) 09:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

DYKs[edit]

Hi there. Your userpage has a section for "My DYKs" but I didn't see any articles listed and I haven't seen your name before at the DYK nominations page. Could you show me where one or two of them appeared? — Brianhe (talk) 13:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@Brianhe You mean I should provide reference(s) with regard to my DYKs Nannadeem (talk) 18:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
That would be fine, if they weren't "official" DYKs. Or just rename it ... maybe "articles of interest" or factlets or something of your choice. — Brianhe (talk) 18:38, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Refs are (i) Arabic Book Al-Muraja’at its Urdu translation by Maulana Syed Muhammad Baqar, pages 609-619 7th Edition April, 1999. (ii) Peak of Eloquence (Nahj al-Balagha) Sermon # 192 title-Khutaba Qassi'a (iii) See [3] + [4] (iv) See please [5] & [6] respectively. Last one, I think was appeared on the current event portal of WP during the month of June-2015.
I have no knowledge about official and un-official DYKs, could you please teach me. Nannadeem (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay, here's the deal. Wikipedia:Did you know (DYK) is a semi-official program to promote the creation or expansion of new articles. These are featured on Wikipedia's Main Page (like a newspaper front page) once they are approved. Example, I've written some and they are listed here. My DYK list is all articles that were approved to appear on Wikipedia's main page at some time. My list includes the dates each DYK appeared. If you say you wrote a "Do You Know", and you didn't, it's kind of taking credit for something you didn't earn. Does that make sense? The solution is just to use a different phrase to describe what's on your userpage. — Brianhe (talk) 23:37, 30 August 2015 (UTC)