Talk:Ormur

Care to provide evidence for this claim? As far as i know. Burki's identify as Pashtun and are part of the Pashtun tribal confederation, also Ormuri is believed to be a dialect of Pashto like Wazirwola. Akmal94 (talk) 19:00, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ormuri is a seperate language, not a dialect of Pashto in any way. AnonymousCat69 (talk) 18:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I removed the editsemiprotected template and such from the start of the article. If you feel the page needs protection for some reason, go to WP:RFPP and follow the direction to make a protection request. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 15:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

{{edit semi-protected}} Please change the spelling of my last name (Zafeer Burki) from "Burki" to "Berki" because in english "Burki" "Barki" and "Berki" are all used to spell the traditional "Burki" name and add either the midddle initials or the full midlle name so that the name is listed as either "Zafeer H.K. Berki, MD" or "Zafeer Hussain Khan Berki, MD."

Likewise please add "Berki" in the beginning of the article where the different spellings/pronunciations of "Burki" are mentioned.

Thank you. 152.132.8.196 (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Partly done: I've changed the lead sentence, adding Berki. Unfortunately, I don't think you're going to like what I do for the other part; I'll explain in a new section below.

It does not bother me that you have removed my name from the article. I don't know how you define "notable." However, I would like to bring to your attention that I am probably the only psychiatrist in USA if not the world who is board certified in four specialties: Psychiatry, Geriatric Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Addiction medicine. The first three can be verified from the website of American Board of Psychiatry & Neurology and the "Addiction Medicine" from American Board of Addiction Medicine.

Thanks anyway for editing the article and adding "BERKI" to it.

Zafeer H.K. Berki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.132.8.196 (talk) 23:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Don't know what your agenda or interest is in our tribe but you need to stop acting like an Egyptian autocrat or worse a Mughal Emperor. The song clearly is relevant as it refers to Pir Roshan and even identifies the location on song and is historically v.relevant. Second, all the generals mentioned are legit just google some of the names That olympians Niaz and Hamidullah do not have wiki pages is that not everyone wants to "advertise" but all you have to do is google Olympics 48 and hockey Pakistan and voila theypop up,. This is our tribes page and not sure what yoru agenda is but if necessary will take this up higher as tyranny in all its forms must be challegned. Khuday pay amaaan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virginiacity (talk • contribs) 15:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Per WP:BLP and WP:NLIST, people cannot appear on lists like this unless they either 1) have their own wiki-article, or 2) have one or more references that verifies that the person is part of this tribe and that they are notable. As such, I am going to now go through and remove all people that don't meet this criteria. If anyone has references for any of the removed people, feel free to add them back on the list with references. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Also, I know it's possible that some of these people are cited in the references section; unfortunately, there is no way to tell which ones those are. I can't even tell which of those people are living and which are not. As such, I feel the correct approach is to conservatively remove those not explicitly cited; then people with knowledge of what's in the reference material can add in inline citations that verify the inclusion and notability criteria. Qwyrxian (talk)

Finally, a three of the people who had "references" were also removed, as those references don't meet our guidelines on reliable sources. Those people are: Mr. Jahanzeb Khan Burki, Mr. Sher Khan Burki, and Mr. Adnan Anwar Khan. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Youtube videos are not reliable sources, and the claims that you are making certainly need good verification; that's why I removed edits by Virginiacity (talk · contribs) here.  Chzz  ►  13:31, 4 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please provide proof Video by Video that thay are not relaible, along with the Wiki definition of reliable.

Had you taken the time to read the title of the videos or if you understood them or better yet if you were from the area you would not take such a rash step. From this one can reasonably conclude you have some agenda which appears to be in cahoots with other Wiki Admins Namely: Qwyrxian and Nyttend, as they fall into the same category yet seem to show termendous interest in an area which is not their domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 15:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Have you read our definition of reliable source as linked by Chzz? Anyone can upload a video and claim to be a reliable source, but YouTube doesn't require proof that its uploaders are who they say they are; therefore, we can't trust its uploaders enough to qualify them as reliable sources. Nyttend (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nyttend: Please remove the christian conservative pictures from your wikisite as we cannot verify those pictures are actually what you claim them to be. Once you have done this then we can also do the same on this site.

Wiki Admin Hyprocracy = Wiki Vandalism Namely: Qwyrxian, Chzz, Nyttend and The Blade of the Northern Lights — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 09:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please don't call good faith edits vandalism; doing so is a personal attack, and may result in you being blocked. As said above, if you want to know the definition of a reliable source on Wikipedia, just look at WP:Reliable source.

HOWEVER! I think that you may be able to add one or two of those videos in an external links section. However, to do so, you need to pick out just a couple, and they need to 1) be very highly representative of Burki music, dance, etc., and 2) have been uploaded by the copyright holder. The second one is absolutely non-negotiable: if the video was uploaded by a fan, not the copyright holder, linking to it may be contributory copyright violation, and thus is absolutely forbidden. I'm now going to revert your change (please don't edit war to keep it), but if you want to work together with us, help us pick out the best of those videos and I'll show you where they go on the page. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oh, sorry, one more thing: do not, under any circumstances, re-add those extremely negative unsourced claims. Doing so is inexcusable and absolutely a violation of WP:V and WP:NPOV, and will result in you being blocked. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

YELLOWMONKEY your account was blocked in November 2010 for all the right wing INDIAN propaganda and I am surprised to see Wiki Allowed you to open another account under a different name. You Called a Living Person "Javed Burki" a Bengali, remember that Vandalism. Anyway I have read WP:Reliable source and there is not mention of YouTube, nor is there any requirement for people to verify copyright, otherwise you would have to also verify if CNN has copyright for the videos they publish, so get real dude. So YellowMonkey or Qwyrxian, here is the quote from Wiki, now I hope Wiki Admin will investigate and pull your account.

Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:

   the material is not unduly self-serving;
   it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
   it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
   there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
   the article is not based primarily on such sources.

This also applies to pages on social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Okay, first of all, those videos aren't being used as sources--they don't verify anything in the text. They're just videos of dances and songs and pictures of Burki. Thus, they are better understood as external links. If you look at WP:ELNEVER, you'll see that the very first restriction says, "Material that violates the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations should not be linked." So in order to provide those dance/music videos, we need good evidence that they were uploaded by the copyright holders.

Second, you haven't provided any verification of the claims of genocide or jihadi intruders at all. Look back at the information you're reverting: both the individual sentences and the big paragraph at the end have literally zero sources. Unless you have sources, that information cannot remain. WP:V states, "To show that it is not original research, all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable, published source appropriate for the content in question, but in practice you do not need to attribute everything. This policy requires that all quotations and anything challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed in the form of an inline citation that directly supports the material." Claims of genocide and outside infiltration are clearly claims that are will be challenged (in case it wasn't clear, let me explicitly state that I am "challenging" them).

Third, on self-published sources. You're confused about the meaning of "self-published sources talking about themselves". In this case, there is no such thing as a "Burki" SPS. This section is referring to using the official corporate website of a company for claims in the wikipedia article about that company. It doesn't apply to an article about a group of people. For example, I live in Japan. I can't create a blog about Japan and then attempt to use that information in Japan as a self-published source. But, if you have a specific source you want us to evaluate, please provide it, and, if necessary, we can ask for other's input at the reliable sources noticeboard.

Finally, please stop commenting on other editors. Comment on the content itself. As a note, several of the people who reverted you, including myself, are Wikipedia admins. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:23, 7 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Very enlightening indeed googling wikipedia and educating oneself on what's what. Most of us have lives and not copious amounts of time to spend VANDALIZING sites that --judging from the "gatekeepers" publicly enunciated "interests"-- shouldn't be so obsessed about an obscure subject matter as the Burki!!! Yet, I agree with Khan here, who seems to have more proficiency at navigating the intricacies of Wikipedia (is this intentional as conspiracy theorists might deduce??) I'm tempted to tell these "gatekeepers," who know squat about this subject but have somehow been assigned the task of "policing" this subject (why indeed???), to DELETE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY CONTRIBUTIONS SINCE 2008. But that would be a victory to these "powers that be." If anyone at Wikipedia monitoring the monitors (i.e. gatekeepers) should take a disinterested interest in the efforts to eliminate the TRUTH and info via utube relevant to the place of origin and history/culture of this tribe with mostly oral history (this is not the West) and sourcing is indeed a challenge when it comes to first hand accounts/eye witness accounts of the Soviet/Russian GENOCIDE in Logar and Baraki Barak. The survivors, unlike those in the West, didn't own cameras. Most can barely write. It is all ORAL history. But certain "gatekeepers" here want to hide the truth of their comrades past. Sorry but the truth is still the truth even if you try to kill the messenger Ruskies. Anyhow, I hope Mr Wales --who seems like a decent man-- eliminates these hiccups. There will be other ways to skin this cat. Trust me. SAPERE AUDE. VirginiaCity

While I warned VirginiaCity for PA, for some reason I'm still trying to help. And look, a quick search did turn up reliable sources to support, if not genocide, at least murder. Take a look at [1], which is a book published by the University of California press, clearly a reliable source. I'm just about to go to bed, but if anyone has time, take a look at what you see there, and you'll find some things we can add to some article. It can't go here, because they just talk about murders in Logar not Burki, but it can go into Logar Province. And look, here's another book: [2]. Just search in Google (web, scholar books), and there's plenty. See, VirginiaCity, there are reliable sources to support murder/genocide in the area. Maybe not that refer to Burki, but that refer to the terrible behavior, and so we can get that info into WP, as LONG as we follow the rules of reliable sourcing. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Since WikiAdmins have spent so much time writing long essay, I will take you up on your offer. Plese add the acceptable quotes from your California book and the "Appropriate Videos", if there are suitable we will let you know. We take you up on your collaboration....— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs)

Please note several things I think you mised. First, I told you that you need to select videos which meet the criteria for EL, as described above. Also, please note that, as I said, the information from the books won't be going into this article; it will be going into Logar Province or somewhere similar, because neither of the books mentions Burki. When I have time (which won't probably won't be soon), I'll try to find sources that specifically mention Burki, so that they can be added here. Note that, to be honest, this is work that you should be doing, not me, but that I'm willing to help when I can. Finally, when you write a post on a talk page, please add four tildas ( which looks like this: ~~~~) to the end of your post, so that they are automatically signed. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:16, 8 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

In case anyone's still watching, I added info from Kasar's book to Logar Province, in the section Logar Province#Soviet occupation. I'll come back to the other source at another time. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Qwyrxian, you were going to resolve the matter, these were false promises as you did absolutely nothing. Therefore, you cannot be allowed to hijack this site, we do not interfere in INDIAN history, so why are you interfering in ours

Althought your data center may be supported out of India, this is probaly why the above para gets deleted instantly. Wiki really needs to review the conduct of some of their editors and offshore data center staff.

Please advise what is your role or qualificaiton on the Subject? We do not interefer in your INDIAN History lessons on Dalits, so why are you interfering in ours??? This certainly call for an internal review by Wikki of you and your supporting Editors who also seem to have a lot of expertise on Indian affairs.

I have checked the YouTube reference and as the reader is redirected to YouTube there is no quesiton of copyright. If there is a copyright viloation then that is the hosts responsibilit, in this case YouTube.

Here is the reference from Wiki which is very clear, kindly revert what you have deleted to correct your mistake.

Wikipedia:WikiProject External links

There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 13:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I answered this on my talk page. Please post concerns only in one place, so that we can have a single conversation; the short version of my response is that the very part you quoted says "should not be linked to", and I really don't understand why you don't see that since you quoted it right there. Copyright is not only the responsibility of the host, because Wikipedia has a policy not to link to things that are or are likely to be copyright violations. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

For an example, see CBS, where the company's own YouTube site is linked in the External Links; this is OK because CBS clearly own the copyright to their own broadcasts and choose to put such broadcasts on YouTube. Such usages would fall under the same cases as using CBS' own website as a source, for example. Black Kite (t) 15:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Your examples cleary show your lack of knowledge of the territory. Qwyrxian how dare you edit my comments on this Page, Wiki Admin Misconduct seems to be going unchecked, now we have another one giving CBS examples... give me a break.

Here is a common sense challenge for both of you, by tomorrow you Better prove that these videos are copyright and I want the copyrigh Lawyers Name and Address in Waziristan ha ha ha.. ignorance has no limit. So here is some schooling for you from your own rule book...

Well, I am very sorry but now I really question the criteria Wikipedia uses for its Admins qualifications. I have checked the YouTube reference and as the reader is redirected to YouTube there is no quesiton of copyright. If there is a copyright viloation then that is the hosts (YouTube's) responsibility, not Wikepedia as Wikepedia is not hosting the video.

For those Admins who lack common sence, then I ask them to show me proof of one YouTube video which has been qualified as COMPLIANT, and show me the Proof of this compliance on the Wiki Discussion Page. Wippocryt... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 16:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

It doesn't work like that. Per WP:COPYRIGHT, you have to prove that either the videos aren't copyright or that you have permission to use them. Black Kite (t) 16:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ok based on your argument then there is no proof that any of this matrial is copyright. therfore everything has to be removed.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 16:37, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I realise that there were discussions about who could/could not be listed in the Notables section last year but it still does not seem right to me. For example, the source for one entry is the person's company, Burki Group. If that is the level of sourcing generally required then we would have an awful lot of people listed in an awful lot of articles.

As far as I am concerned, if someone is incapable of meeting our general notability guideline then they usually should not be listed. And the best test for meeting that guideline is that we actually have an article about the person. Failing that, we really must consider the requirement for multiple independent sources for entries in this list. Thoughts? - Sitush (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oooh, I'm excited! Sitush, be sure to note this diff, because it will be lasting proof that you and I don't agree on everything :). While I do believe that lists of this type need to be limited in some way, I do not believe that limiting it only to people w/articles is appropriate in all cases. And limiting to multiple independent sources is actually just the same limitation (at most, it means an article could be written but hasn't been yet). To me, that would be like requiring that everything on Wikipedia be verified by multiple independent sources. For me, I believe the minimum line should be WP:NLIST for living people: a source somewhere indicating that the person fits the group (which could be on the person's article if they have one), and a source somewhere giving indication of the person's importance (an article would automatically meet this standard). And I believe that "importance" is intentionally and purposefully a lower bar than notability. For example, I would say that an List of alumni of College X article can absolutely be verified by an official record of the college's alumni, and that even people who would fail our notability test, like many business people, could well acceptable inclusions on such a list. I also think that, in this article, SPS are sufficient, so long as we have at least some reason to trust them (like, I wouldn't trust a personal blog, but if a site claims a person is the leader of a major Burki advocacy group, and we have some reason to believe it's really a legit group, I'm fine with that.

Having said all that, there appear to be people on this list who don't even meet my lower standards. Perhaps we can go through each of the questionable ones and discuss them? Qwyrxian (talk) 02:57, 5 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have no idea why I missed your msg above, Qwyrxian, sorry. Let's go through them one by one if needs must. I do understand your point, although it could become a maintenance nightmare. - Sitush (talk) 23:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

The Ormur are not Pashtun, they are a distinct ethnic group. However, they will surrounded by Pashtuns in three islands in Baraki Barak, Kaniguram and Nawshera. So I have taken out references to them being a Pashtun tribe. The Burki of Jalandhar however are simply a Punjabi Muslim caste now, being completely assimilated in Punjabi culture. --WALTHAM2 (talk) 22:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

This is not remotely an area in which I have much experience and I do understand that we often cannot prove a negative ("The Ormur are not Pashtun ..."). However, can we source your last sentence, ie: "The Burki of Jalandhar however are simply a Punjabi Muslim caste now, being completely assimilated in Punjabi culture." ? - Sitush (talk) 23:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Goverment Services Dr. Muhammad Naseer Khan (Shaikh Darvesh) Vice Chancellor at Bahauddin Zakariya University Adeelkhan87 (talk) 19:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Note that for caste/tribe claims of living people, we need an explicit, self-declaration of membership. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:47, 23 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

as we know that the burki tribe from pushtoon is muslim all over the world we also know that the who live anywhere was known by each other this is the only tribe who are muslim all over the world

as we know that the burki tribe from pushtoon is muslim all over the world we also know that the who live anywhere was known by each other this is the only tribe who are muslim all over the world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.203.172.224 (talk) 02:22, 18 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Lt General Wajid Ali Khan Burki was a 3 star General, a renowned opthalmologist^[1] and founding President of College of Physicians and Surgeons of Pakistan. His name may please be added under "Notable personalities".