Talk:Inqilab March

Biased reporting

This is obviously a strongly biased article, and it ought to be flagged accordingly.

I edited the English, which was largely incoherent, but in some places I couldn't figure out what they were trying to say, and I left those passages uncorrected. Wallace McDonald (talk) 15:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I reviewed this article, while I suspected a POV, I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter to identify bias. Could you kindly highlight the most questionable sections as new topics in this talk page? --Salimfadhley (talk) 21:07, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Burden of proof

This whole article is extremely weakly referenced, so I've removed all the sections which don't even have a single credible citation.George Custer's Sabre (talk) 11:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I have attempted my best to improve and expand the article per neutrality. Material is based on media reporting of Pakistan, like media reporting of tv channels of USA & UK Nannadeem (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Copy from talk page (pasting)

Dear Nannadeem, assalamu alaykum. I hope you are well. I'm sorry but I disagree with you. The material is not directly relevant. Let's be honest: this article is a mess and needs a lot of work. The English is really bad and the content is inadequately referenced. It also contains repetition and trivia. I'm not involved with, or opposed to, Khan and Qadri. I just want to see an accurate and reliable article emerge. My regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:27, 7 September 2014 (UTC) Walaykum Asslam (R.B). Thanks for your comments. I know your sincerity, but please wait for some time and give me time to make it an appropriate article ( am working on it). When I saw this page as an stub, shocked me, so my all sympathy (natural) started orbiting around this page. I assure I will try my best to be neutral as far as possible. I further request you to point out me partiality, so that I could learn. Thanks my Bro Nannadeem (talk) 10:58, 7 September 2014 (UTC) Dear Nannadeem, assalamu alaykum. I'm truly very sorry but I have reverted more of your additions. You need to ask yourself: is this (information) really necessary? Have I expressed it clearly and SUCCINCTLY? Have I provided enough reliable citations? My recommendation is that you use the article's talk page (not my own talk page) to put forward the additions or changes you want to make. Other editors will help you to get it ready for inclusion in the article itself. I'll be glad to myself, IF you have relevant and IMPORTANT (not trivial) things to add. My regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 17:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nannadeem (talk • contribs)

Deletion + Deletion and Deletion

Award of copy paste medal is accepted. I preferred this type of editing in order to avoid any blame of OR. In view of frequent deletions made by User:GorgeCustersSabre, it is noted that the inclusion of agenda of the Inqilab March to the Article “Inqilab March” is un-necessary.

Agenda and decisions are best presented as verbatim. Ref of Sama television (Its found verbatim here: http://www.samaa.tv/pakistan/16-Aug-2014/qadri-formally-demands-resignation-arrest-of-sharif-brothers) may kindly be compared with http://tribune.com.pk/story/752888/inqilab-march-pat-unveils-nin-points-to-supreme-court/ . Hence deletion of agenda on this logic is very poor. It is further added that this Inqilab March is Socio-Politics and as such to be dealt with Social Science and no law of physics and Chemo can be applied ignoring the demand of Sociology. Therefore change of demands (first/2nd or final demands in agenda) should not be questionable for an editor at EN:WP specially for an experienced editor. However, contents may be changed/replaced in terms of change in scenario without disturbing the essence of facts and figures.

My request for time and your prompt deletion (history of deletion just after the creation of article) is sufficient enough to reveal something still undisclosed. As an observer I am with PAT and PTI, as their critique I will prefer to be in front in a constructive manner. It is also recorded that My first visit to Azadi/Inqilab March at En:WP is perhaps 4 Sept. Nannadeem (talk) 19:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

But Nannadeem, you must study Wikipedia's guidelines. Learn how to be a good editor. You are NOT allowed merely to cut and paste. Please stop this. With respect, you are making a mess of this page. Citations to reliable, authoritative, and neutral third-party sources are essential. Wikipedia requires them. Two good sets of Wikipedia guidelines that I have found really useful can be found HERE and HERE. Yours sincerely, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

After careful study as per your instruction and recognizing evils of vandalism, I am to state:

• I have no concern about deletion on account of unreferenced contents. The history of edits reveals 46 sever surgical contribution from 2014-08-28 to 2014-09-09, whereas article was in need of improvement with references from third party. Most of the deleted contents even the sections of article were based on media reporting i.e. news telecast by different channels of television and reporting in the daily news papers, duly referenced inline citation. Thus question of citations to reliable, authoritative, and neutral third-party sources is irrelevant and not the core issue of this article (say from 04 Sept 2014). The question of a partiality and impartiality can best be resolved by creating a section of Criticism (I was working on this aspect too).

• I think poor English is not the criteria for deletion of contents or sections.

• Deletion of Article’s Section “Special tribute by Minority” – as per my best knowledge the Chief of PAT is a religious Islamic Scholar and emergence of PAT is a result of previous working of TMQ (Minhaj-ul-Quran). Thus any tributes by minorities of Pakistan (participation and presentation by Mr J Salik, a local Christian leader of Pakistan) would show a good image by highlighting involvement of minorities in such a movement. Hence purpose of deletion of this section is beyond comprehension.

• This article is neither a FA/Good nor has so far been categorized in view of its importance. The main concern of this article is socio-politics, which is ongoing and change of scenario is unpredictable for general people. Thus fixing of parameters for article “Inqilab March” at its preliminary or secondary stage is not justified; updating and necessary amendments are the best tool to make the article an appropriate one. I am pleased to nominate George Custer's Sabre as an updating editor of this article with the hope that the article would soon become either a good or FA. I am sure this idea is the best.Nannadeem (talk) 12:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Dear Nannadeem, assalamu alaykum. If seems you don't like the fact that I have reverted your edits. I understand. Sometimes I feel bothered when other editors revert my changes. But that's how Wikipedia works. You have the right to insert something. I have the right to disagree with its inclusion. And vice-versa. But let me reassure you that I am not reverting you out of malice. I don't know you and have no reason to dislike you. We merely disagree on issues of content relevance, importance and strength of citations, and quality of written expression. That's all. Regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Walaykum assalam George Custer's Sabre sweetbro.Nannadeem (talk) 13:57, 20 September 2014 (UTC)