User talk:M Imtiaz

Hey M Imtiaz, could you please take a look at Ramsha Khan and Noor Bukhari? There has been some slow edit warring of sorts by SPAs on the relation sections of the info boxes, and you can tell what I probably suspect. Could you restore the correct info? Thanks Pahunkat (talk) 19:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya

don't need that in the infobox ;-) I'm sure someone (me, perhaps?) will get around to re-adding that line in the template when her marital status does eventually change. Warm regards, M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 18:57, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Actually, on second thought, I've gotten rid of the marriage info in Noor Bukhari's article for the time being for the reasons mentioned in the editsum. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 19:06, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks M Imtiaz, would be clueless on this without you. On another note, if you see the last SPI it looks like IrzaKhanz69’s changes tactics slightly - you should get what I mean, but I can email if needed. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, interesting, Pahunkat. I'm guessing that was just a mistake on their part, but I could be wrong, of course, in which case the effort needed to clean up after them will grow greatly... I've also filed yet another SPI, although this one also seems a bit different, if you can tell what I mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M Imtiaz (talk • contribs)

Yep, I can tell what you mean. Your thoughts are in alignment with mine. Mz7 CU-blocked an IP range, but they are still getting socks through. We might need to confer by email on this one, I’ll let you know if I do send one - conversely, please notify me if you decide to email me directly. Pahunkat (talk) 16:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pahunkat, I sent you an email a few minutes ago. Best, M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 03:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks M Imtiaz, replied - it’s lengthy but hopefully worth the read :-) Pahunkat (talk) 08:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello dear, can you please take a look here and let me know what you think? Thanks in advance.--TheEagle107 (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assalamu alaikum TheEagle107, and sorry for the late reply (I haven't been feeling well for the past few months). Personally, I think that Sahih International is the only one of the translations that you list which actually belongs in an encyclopaedia, and the others, while surely having their uses, are far too minor to merit presence here. This isn't meant to chastise you, of course; I'm just letting you know what my opinion is on the matter. Best, M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 02:54, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And upon you be peace, God's mercy and His blessings. There's no problem, I fully understand that people can be busy, overwhelmed, forgetful, not interested, or whatever. Life does not stand still, ups and downs are part of it. Try to be always positive and optimistic, never give up and look at the glass half-full instead of half-empty. Seeing the glass half full always makes the day by day so much easier. Keep smiling and enjoy every moment, because you deserve it! Wishing you all the best in your future endeavors.

As for our topic, it is not about what are the best English translations of the Qur'an. This is something that differs from one person to another. The problem is that this site: (Perseus Digital Library) is not a user-friendly, and contains only few old translations! It should be changed to IslamAwakened or Quran.com. I hope you have got my point now.--TheEagle107 (talk) 12:47, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assalamu Alykum. I hope everything is well and fine. How is your health nowadays? Missing your presence. ─

]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tich Button trailer.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tich Button trailer.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) 17:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Parchayee.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) 17:33, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for updating the visa policy map for Singapore. However, there's two other issues that the map doesn't yet reflect, which I have highlighted in that article's talk page - specifically here. If you could also add the omitted information into the visa policy map, that'd be great! JaventheAldericky (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thanks for writing 2004 Nosratabad fuel tanker explosion. It’s a great article! - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 02:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 June 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2004 Nosratabad fuel tanker explosion, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2004 Nosratabad fuel tanker explosion highlighted the high rate of road accidents in Iran, one of the worst globally? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2004 Nosratabad fuel tanker explosion. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2004 Nosratabad fuel tanker explosion), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Izn-e-Rukhsat.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) 02:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]