User talk:NadirAli

Arab-Israeli relations
Starkiller base
Star Wars Feel The Force
Star Wars: The Power of Myth
Sheheri
Science and Star Wars (webseries) [35][36]
Niagara Comic Con [37]
Daraz PK
Star Wars Adventures: Luke Skywalker and the Treasure of the Dragonsnakes (January 20, 2010)
Real life Supervillain
The Outer Limits (comics)
Canadians for a Sustainable Society
White apologist
Deposit Insurance Corporation of Ontario
Scandinavian Airlines

Improve

The Force (Star Wars)
Draft:ZippCast
Outline of South Asian history
Muhammad Ali Jinnah
List of languages by number of native speakers records the number of first language speakers
List of languages by total number of speakers records the number of first and second language speakers
Abu Dhabi
CAS School
Emirates (airline)
Virgin Atlantic
Douglas DC-8
Philippines and weapons of mass destruction
Boeing 777
Airbus 350
Middle East
Saturn 3
Condor Flugdienst
Al Maha Airways
Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System
Competition between Airbus and Boeing
Scandinavian Airlines
Technology in science fiction
Afghan cuisine
Almond milk
List of lakes of Mongolia
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Indian subcontinent
Defence industry of Pakistan
Tirana International Airport Nënë Tereza
The Nation (Pakistan)
Thomas Cook Airlines
Persian language in South Asia
Superman curse [38]
Irfan Husain more details needed on marraige
York Regional Police
Star Wars sources and analogues
Kaaba [39]
Ramadan add mention of commercialization
Gora Prai airstrike

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	In appreciation of all your high quality work on Pakistan-related articles on Wikipedia that I have come across since 2012. I realize you are an experienced editor and have been active for many years. I have nothing but respect for all your work. Thanks and Best Regards Ngrewal1 (talk) 22:25, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are still part of the ARCA appeal

Once voting starts, you can't withdraw, and it started several hours before your withdrawal.

Doug Weller talk 10:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. You had nearly a week to withdraw if you wanted to go to AE first - removing your name just after the first vote which happened to go the way you didn't want is gaming the system. Worm^TT(talk) 10:18, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Worm That Turned:, I didn't mean to it that way. I felt this appeal should have been a last resort and should follow other steps before appealing there, but now that you and user:Doug Weller pointed it out, I'll keep my name there if still required.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 15:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to hear that, but the time for that decision was a while ago. Worm^TT(talk) 15:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Worm That Turned: and that you for explaining it. This clarifies it.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 15:47, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

India-Pakistan arbitration amendment request closed

The India-Pakistan arbitration amendment request filed on 23 May 2018 (the appeal of certain arbitration enforcement actions by GoldenRing) has been closed as unsuccessful. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AE

Consider checking Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#NadirAli. My Lord (talk) 05:51, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wahga vs Wagha issue

Hello Nadir. Hope all is well. I'm having a little issue at the Wagah article. I thought it would be a straightforward change in name request, but it appears one person is resisting because apparently the New York Times and BBC news articles have more credibility than the official Government of Punjab's document over the spelling of Wahga. What's your take on this? How should I proceed since I'm new to Wiki. --HudairaViki (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited TED (conference), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sean Carroll (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid this page, please

This is a violation of your topic-ban. I'm not reporting you only because it seems as though you were reverting this edit which added material while reverting your previous edit: but it would be a good idea for you to avoid that page altogether, and another admin could still could still block you. Vanamonde (talk) 10:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

To enforce an arbitration decision and for violating a condition of your ban appeal by editing from alternate accounts and while logged out, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:43, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: NadirAli unblock conditions and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:01, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Ivanvector: Although I will not contest the block, I've looked through the IPs and accounts and can confidently state the vast majority are not mine. The method being used here is: Canadian based IP, overlapping edits=NadirAli. These are also not the IPs I was referring to on AN (which I shall not disclose here). The ones added indirectly by Ravi are certainly not mine. I have no recollection of editing in 2011. Infact I was inactive since 2009 and then returned in 2013 to edit. These IPs trace back to Missisagua/Brampton where there are large concentrations of Pakistani populations (and fewer in Richmond Hill where there are fewer). I can even re-direct you to areas of similar concentrations of Pakistani populations where you might find similar edits. They are not mine. When i first starting editing again as NadirAli in May 2014, I realized the IP I was using was shared and had even days earlier made edits on The Empire Strikes Back. In fact the IP was already blocked for a reason I can't remember. It had overlaps with my editing arwa, but mostly had edited different topics. I posted on ANI requesting that the IP block not be extended to my account as it was shared.

But currently the more serious concern is these people are closely co-ordinating to jointly harass me, but turn by turn. It first started MBlazeLighting filing an SPI case against me in November and then turning up on CFDs on topics unrelated to his editing. He then proceeded to track my edits to undo them, as he is currently doing right now while I'm blocked on topic unrelated to him. Between these times, My Lord showed up and filed all these strange complaints against me including these SPIs and followed me. But the current concern is MBlazelightening is undoing my edits, taking advantage of the block.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 04:01, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to the evidence, you say "the vast majority are not" yours, yet you admit that still the rest of the IPs are yours and thus proving the fact that you evaded your site ban, topic bans in violation of WP:SOCK. Thanks for the admission. --RaviC (talk) 08:23, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ravi jee, get off my talk page. There's nothing linking me to most IPs. CU discovered recent IPs which were not posted by your gang members in that page. There's nothing that indicates those accounts and IPs were mine. You pick out some IPs that overlap with my edits and cast them as mine, to try and claim I violated the site ban.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 03:07, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA archived

A clarification request in which you were involved has been archived at WT:Arbitration/Requests#Clarification request: NadirAli unblock conditions (August 2018). For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 17:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Someone's asking about you

GenuineArt (talk · contribs) sent a bizarre email asking about my perspective on you [on NadirAli, for all your NadirAli-talk-page-watching friends and neighbors]. Just thought you should know. I posted a note to GenuineArt's talk page here. --EEMIV (talk) 01:25, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --EEMIV (talk) 02:00, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Indo-Iranic languages.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Indo-Iranic languages.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Rye-96 (talk) 11:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Site Ban

I have just closed the discussion at ANI with the conclusion that there is sufficient consensus for a full site ban on your account.[40]

There was no significant discussion of possible unban conditions, but I would suggest that the standard offer is probably your only possible path to being unbanned, and you would probably need to go at least a full year without socking or appealing as opposed to the usual six months, given your lengthy block history. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Beeblebrox:, I just got the message. The "community ban" votes included so many votes from rival partisan users involved in this topic area, many of them being having never edited AN before as even pointed out by Ivanvector and RegentsPark, not to mention many of them being canvassed. Yet they have been counted in. As a result, how can this be in the least counted as a valid "community ban"?--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 01:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because I, as a previously uninvolved administrator, read the entire discussion and evaluated it. I don’t recall ever interacting with you and did not have any opinion myself on whether or not you should be banned, but in my role as an administrator I concluded there was sufficient support for a ban, even after disregarding some of the supporters comments.

In other words, it is a perfectly valid ban. Trying to characterize it as ilegetimate is not going to help your cause. I strongly suggest you simply walk away from Wikipedia for at least a year if you would ever like it to be lifted. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:06, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) That approach isn't going to get you anywhere, Nadir Ali. While there was an unfortunate amount of partisan bickering at the site ban discussion, there was support for a site ban from a number of uninvolved and experienced users, including several administrators. Take Beeblebrox's advice. Wait at least a year before appealing, and in that time, do not use sockpuppets. It's against policy, and it will probably cause your appeal period to be reset; you're also likely to be found out very easily. There's important things in life besides Wikipedia; and if you find it hard to let go, confine yourself to reading and research. Remaining on the straight and narrow is the best way forward for you, and will avoid any further time sinks for the community. Vanamonde (talk) 03:11, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Beeblebrox: I agree with most of what you have said, but if you take out all the canvassed and partisan votes (many of them never having edited AN before), the votes come to a 50/50 grey area. This is not a "community ban", but rather a co-ordinated, organized mob style attack and has happened times before. In any case, I voluntarily stopped editing after CU verified that I was IP editing. It would have been another matter if a group of uninvolved administrators or arbitrators issued a siteban. If you cross examined each and everyone of the votes and comments yourself, you would have found it to be true. The whole act of canvassing is a violation against the spirit of the community. This has happened by the same group before in the case of Xenjao. I am not trying to "characterizing" it as illegitimate, I am stating it for what it is. How can the fate of users be handled by their direct opponents and those affiliated with them.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 04:58, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Vanamonde93:, I do not know of these alleged sockpuppets of mine anymore than CU or the clerk does. I was blocked by user:Ivanvector following the discovery of recent IPs used by me. But I agree with what you've written. Wikipedia is not that important to me, I left over a month ago and do not plan on coming anytime soon. I am just worried how this lynch mobbing on AN will affect future users and how easy it has become for these mobs to misuse AN to ban opponents as opposed to more neutral judges evaluating the situation.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 05:05, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I'm not making any assessments of your past actions, but making a recommendation with respect to your future actions. Several users have demonstrated that the temptation to use sockpuppets after an indefinite block is high: I'm asking you to resist that temptation. Vanamonde (talk) 02:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To editor NadirAli: I have no involvement in this, but you seem to be under a misapprehension about how consensus is established on Wikipedia. It is not a vote count but an evaluation of the strength of the various arguments. As a very experienced Admin, I fully trust Beeblebrox to evaluate the arguments and determine the resultant consensus. As others have said, best you walk away from Wikipedia for a year or so before attempting to get unbanned. - Nick Thorne ^talk 07:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Droid (robot) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Droid (robot). Since you had some involvement with the Droid (robot) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		May your Holidays and the Year that follows shine as much as this coin still does beneath the tarnish of bygone weather and long use. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nadir Ali, I hope all is well. All the best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:37, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Such sticklers they were for their own rules and compulsions that commonsense and wisdom had no meaning in their court." Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:49, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Seeds of Yesterday (film)

The article Seeds of Yesterday (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable television film, does not meet WP:NF

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. BOVINEBOY2008 00:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Frontier Corps logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Frontier Corps logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Violence in science fiction

The article Violence in science fiction has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Whole article is poorly sourced OR, can't see any indication that violence in SF as a genre is any more or less of a notable issue than in any other genre.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Darkover (TV series)

The article Darkover (TV series) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Canceled TV series. Got a brief burst of "coming soon" coverage but nothing since

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Darkover (TV series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Darkover (TV series) 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/Darkover (TV series) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Comic Con PK

The article Comic Con PK has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable event , fails to meet the criteria of WP:EVENTCRIT and WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 02:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Karachi Comic Con

The article Karachi Comic Con has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable event fails to meet the criteria of WP:EVENTCRIT and WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 02:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The X-Files sources and analogues for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The X-Files sources and analogues 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/The X-Files sources and analogues until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:05, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]