Talk:Miss Pakistan World

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is part of WikiProject Beauty Pageants, a WikiProject related to beauty pageants, their contestants and winners.

Contents

[edit] Criticisms deleted

Was there a reason why some of the crits. where deleted? Acon747 (talk) 01:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The only reason my friend is that the Miss Canada Pakistan Inc. has hired a husband-wife team PR company called Tamara Daniels PR that continuously edits the article using two usernames: Danthompsonjr (talk · contribs), real name Daniel Thompson and Tamara Daniels PR (talk · contribs), real name Tamara Atzenwiler. They remove anything that doesn't benefit their profile. I will be keeping an eye on the article for later edits that they make. I would've had done a better job if they were paying me :) Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 13:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Now even Sonia Ahmed is editing on the Wikipedia using Sonisona (talk · contribs). I have tried to explain her about her violations but she wouldn't listen and continues on with planting her point-of-view in various sections on the page. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 16:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The cristism isnot deleted, it will be added soon, and yes the team is working on adding everything... I suggest, that ARUN better not delete our true history and mix our pictures and ruin the entire format. You cannot be adding wrong information. If the government is included, then proper references should be made from the present government, not something that was 100 years old. Ever since the pageant has started the government has been kind enough not to get included. So I am warning you again. Unsigned comment by Sonisona (talk · contribs)

First of all Sonia, I would like to second Arun. This is most definitely a publicity stunt, where the correct information about the pageant is being sabotaged by some of your random editors who fail to cite anything in the article. I think that it is most necessary that any contributions made by users attempting to promote the pageant should be cited. Anything related to criticisms should be discussed on the talk page, that is BY HERE, first and once the issues have been resolved via discussion and provision of suitable source any changes to the article can be made. However, as for now no sections should be deleted, especially the criticisms section because there are plentiful sources citing the assertions made in the text.
I also must stress that Wikipedia is a community where various users contribute to provide accurate information on the article. This is not a forum to promote Miss Pakistan world, if you wish to do so then your website is a better alternative to spread your PR.
I hope that this message will deter you from making any further changed on the article which undermine the Wikipedia neutral point of view rule. SholeemGriffin (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Sonisona went ahead the next day and made a sweeping series of edits that make "Miss Pakistani World" all sweetness and light. Morenoodles (talk) 09:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Liked the article but it needs some tidying up

Okay, so now that I have seen the videos on YouTube with Mahleej's response I am convinced it was Geo on the lying end. But the articles needs to show both the side giving preferences to the MPW. I have seen the recent changed on the criticism section and would change it in some time to make is formidable for Wikipedia standards. Hope you stay in touch with you, Sonisona (talk · contribs), on this matter. Out of curiosity though; do you guys have this incident summed up in a newspaper article or a respectable source that can be added to the article. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 08:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

The criticism that you all want is added.... but the truth is being said here... and the youttube videos are there as proof....
You can see both Miss Pakistan Mahleej Sarkari and Sonia Ahmed at the airport, GEO TV took them late to the airport and purposely made them miss their flight for news....and so forth, but the camera saved them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.162.106 (talk) 08:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately enough, we can't produce YouTube videos as the basis of Wikipedia articles as they are copyrighted material. Is there any other source of information you can provide to be sourced. This rule is clearly stated here (a second consensus is placed in motion for the law). Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 09:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Another thing I noticed was that on the talk page, you have discussed the criticisms in short and vague sentences saying '...which then let to the second controversy, "I love Musharraf"'. Now, people do not look for articles on Wikipedia to look at vague sentences, they need answers to their questions, they are looking for as concise an information as they can get. Please elaborate on the controversies and explain why they happened, how they happened, and what measures were put in place to tackle the damage done, etc. I hope you understand. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 09:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I have fixed the section for Mahleej's hunkoversy. I have added citations to the text as well. In case, some of you don't know what citations are... It is the small numbers in front of every sentence that proves that the sentence is authentic. If the sentence is not authentic, then it needs to be discussed here first and then removed. Otherwise deleting it is considered very bad on Wikipedia and all users who delete them over and over again have their IP addresses and usernames banned from Wikipedia (eventually). Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 10:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Recognition is another thing, but is the pageant actually 'endorsed' by the government.
If not then the term 'official' should not be used. I suggest you to paste a link on this talk page showing where exactly in a reputable press has the Government of Pakistan declared this pageant as being endorsed by them. Thanks.
Another tip for you would be to use the pictures where the subject of the picture is discussed. For instance, the picture of Mahleej should be used within the section for Criticism as it makes for excellent commentary and relates Mahleej's face to the controversy and its outcome. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 10:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

If there is any site saying musharraf or zardaris government is against this then please do so. The government cannot endorse it...because they dont get into the entertainment part of it. No pakistani needs a license to call themselves pakistan... as i said please feel free to change the controversy part of this article. Again, you can change teh controversy part of it. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisona (talk • contribs) 04:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

So it's not official then. Morenoodles (talk) 09:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blatant advertising

This article has been tagged for the umpteenth time with a notice for blatant advertising. The only reason for that is that this articles seems to promote the subject only and does not do much justice to other points of views. Please regard these terms for content on Wikipedia. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 09:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


I completely agree. The organizers are so pathetic.I mean no one had heard of this so called pageant before they made the Musharraf comments. They are such big losers. They can't stop butting in. I've been cleaning up the article since the past two weeks, but they keep chanign the contents. I honestly hope this article gets deleted!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.208.220.12 (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Admitted conflict of interest

See this edit and its summary. It says that one Daniel Thompson is working for the outfit that runs this event and is editing on their behalf. It's quite an edit, and repays examination. I note that Danthompsonjr has also been editing this article under that name. Morenoodles (talk) 11:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Worthwhile article or deletable advertising? (Two different articles)

One faction seems intent to have this article be mere advertising, another to represent it more fully and neutrally.

Does it merit an article? I'm not Pakistani and I'm not in Canada, so I really don't know. If it should, it should be written up fully and fairly. If not, then there's no point adding stuff: let the advertisers have their way and turn it into plain advertising (perhaps with a token "controversy" or two, to convince the gullible), and then let's have it deleted as mere advertising. Morenoodles (talk) 09:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete - I would go for deletion as it is merely blatant advertising. Is there a way to block the user? Progress can only be achieved then otherwise it would be deleted and reworded again. :) Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 09:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
But does it merit an article?
Elsewhere, you've said that it does, so let's proceed on that assumption. Morenoodles (talk) 10:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "all women"

The article says that MPW continues to work hard to achieve a greater understanding as well as a strong platform for all women of Pakistani descent. Precisely what does this mean? For example, precisely how is it working hard to achieve a strong platform for physically unattractive women of Pakistani descent? And no, I am not being facetious. This is a vague claim made in what's an encyclopedia article, not a press release. So it needs to be either (a) backed up with details and evidence, or (b) deleted. And likewise for a lot else in this rather absurd article. Morenoodles (talk) 11:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I have been cleaning up the article in my sandbox and will put a version that I have edited in a few hours. I am trying to bring more citations in it. The difficulty is finding reliable ones since the MPW has been going around editing websites to increase their PR. Furthermore, if someone adds something which is not beneficial for MPW image then it gets deleted without discussion, even though there are citations provided. Any ways, I am working at it so hopefully we can either come up with a consensus on this with the other editors, or get it deleted.
PS: Thanks for your contributions. SholeemGriffin (talk) 15:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History and Controversies

I have edited the history and controversies section of the article and commented the previous material. Can we please discuss what is wrong with it before you delete my work. I have provided references to go with the assertions made. If the language is coming across as too harsh then that can be toned down. Nevertheless, anything contrary to the article which someone may wish to include must be discussed here in the discussion page prior to addition. The decision to change the article will be based on provision of reliable sources which support the assertions made contrary to the assertions in the article. Please respect Wikipedia. It is not a forum to improve PR. SholeemGriffin (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Should this article be deleted

If this article promotes blatant advertising, should it be deleted even when it is organic and the original author or the company itself changes the article content according to their desires. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 22:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm not sure on this one maybe as a last resort, if the article promotes blatant advertising then the advertising should be removed - if the author is revering changes then should be looked into, we don't want to see adverts in place of articles Pahari Sahib 04:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why is the controversy discussed only

The contributions Arun is making is only for the controversy.... the Nadia Khan show is repeated over and over again. Secondly, the Racist comments are not endorsed by the Dubai government and the police of the UAE. So why is hearsay written. There are no Sites that reported it or there have been no discussion.

A note to Arun - did you not say that youtube is not the right way or form of citings... then why the racist comments are there....... what are u trying to proove here... that you are Nadia Khan or something.

Also why are the quotes so large,.... why are you propagating about this. What do you want people to see when they come on this page. Is this why the quotes are large only so that people get distracted and start reading the controversies.

Why is teh controversy so large any ways.. There have been two controversies: Miss Pakistan Bikini and i love Musharraf

So whay is Neelam Noorani's name associated with this company , when she is not a part of it... She came directly from Pakistan not from Miss Pakistan World.

You are not doing any referenced or checking... but are blindly posting your wishes here. Seems that you want people to know this pageant as more of a Controversy that what the pageant really does. this pageant is opened to all those pakistani girls who want to represent their country... its a competition.

It think you are missing the acutal point here and are too busy with the ANdia Khan show as well as I love Musharraf.

I would suggest you do a good detailed research and since you are so interested, you should really get a statement by the people in power rather than some opposition party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisona (talk • contribs) 23:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Of what I know, I did not make those changes. I am not the only editor making changes here. Other editors did. What I say here is that there needs to be a neutral point of view, which means all points of view. If someone is criticising something in the article and has provided a link for it, then it is valid and should not be removed.
You do not care for what other people have written (which is what this encyclopaedia stands for) rather you just change the things in the article and make them sound all sweet to your tastes.
Furthermore, you disrespected the tags that were placed on the article and removed all of them. There is plenty of proof in the history and everyone knows who's right here and who's wrong. See here, here, and [1] and even when editors like SholeemGriffin (talk) try to clean your work, you end up adding your point-of-view over and over again. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't care about the controversies. Even the history section is not cited or anything. What history shall a person write when there is no respectable source out there telling about the history of the pageant. For us reading this article, the history is hearsay and published out of imagination, until you have the backing of some reputable sources. Are you using any source at all. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I believe my views when I changed the article were just a bit tilted towards one POV as well but you disregarded the edits and deleted all of them instead of changing them. And if you may see I tried to source your organisation's history. You instead chose to advertise by writing all the falsely positive stuff about the organisation that wasn't even sourced. I never changed the article since then. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Daniels who

Please be advised that there is no Daniel workign for the company... go to the main website and check yuor self... so again get your facts straight.

As we said you cannot change the company mission, as it is stated on their site. their blogs.. you can do so in the controversies, BUT YOU CANNOT HIGHLIGH THOSE STATEMENTS IN YOUR OWN WORDING AND MAKE IT BOLD. CONTROVERSIES CAN BE DISCUSSED.

AND IF YOU ARE PRESSURIZINF IT TO BE DELETED THEN DO SO AS NO INFORMATION IS BETTER THAT FALSE INFORMATION

THANK YOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisona (talk • contribs) 23:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your association with the company, see their blog which clearly shows in the address bar saying What We're Doing. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Daniel Thompson was kind enough to leave his email address here. This is his quotation:

I have been asked on behalf of Miss Pakistan World to make these changes. You may contact me, Daniel Thompson, regarding this matter through daniel@tamaradaniels.com or 647-343-3105. All the best.

Do not deny more, please accept that you have wronged. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 00:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Who is Sonisona?

Above, Sonisona seems to show a proprietorial attitude toward this article. This puzzles me. Arunreginald then writes Regarding your association with the company, see [link], but the page linked to doesn't seem to mention "Sonisona". This puzzles me again. Is Sonisona related to "Miss Pakistan World", and if so then exactly how? Morenoodles (talk) 03:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The linkage of the page with Sonisona wasn't being discussed. The edits were made on the behalf of Miss Pakistan World infused with their POV with the help of Tamara Daniels PR. The link just proves that. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 03:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Improving on the sections

I am not that much of a fan of deleting stuff and I would rather write this article with proper prose and neutrality. I have added some tags in the article. Kindly discuss them. For people who don't know how Wikipedia works, the places where it says [citation needed] or [dubious - discuss] etc. need to be replaced by citations. Now citations work with a link to the source from where the mentioned line could be matched against. Once that website URL is yielded, add the following where it says {{fact}} or {{dubious}}

<ref>[http://www.website-url.com Title of the page]</ref>

Once this is done, the article would be free of dispute. Removing these tags without providing references would just make the matters worse and would suggest that the person removing them is the culprit. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 01:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I dont know what I did just now...

I tried giving references... but all the references went under the references area and therefore cannot be seen.

Here is what I have got from media sites: This is when they won International pageant titles for one pageant Miss Tourism Queen International 2005

http://english.people.com.cn/200506/28/eng20050628_192774.html http://www.missosology.org/missearth2005/beautytalks_me05pakistan.html ( this is a pageant site for all pageants) http://www.pageantopolis.com/international/tourism_queen.htm http://www.pakpositive.com/opinion/2005/07/miss-pakistan-wins-miss-talent.html http://www.newsindia-times.com/nit/2005/07/15/dias30-miss.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Earth_2008 (This is a Wikipedia site reference for Miss Earth where Pakistan participated)

http://www.pakpositive.com/opinion/2005/10/pakistan-in-third-largest-beauty.html


Here is Wikipedia references that Pakistan dis particiapte in Miss Earth for the first time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Earth

Please check this site as well for Pakistan's particiaption http://www.globalbeauties.com/tqi/2008/tqi.htm --Sonisona (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Fixed it. You forgot to end the "</ref" tag with another ">". And please remove the Hindi text as this contest has no association with India or has it? Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 05:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep one thing in mind. If you need to add a reference, do not use the following way, for example:
<ref>http://www.pageantopolis.com/international/tourism_queen.htm</ref>
..instead use the square brackets "[" and "]" for the links as below. Don't forget the title comes after the link.
<ref>[http://www.pageantopolis.com/international/tourism_queen.htm Tourism Queen]</ref>
Cheers, Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 05:41, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blantat Advertisement

This article is a baltant advertisment by the organizers of this so called pageant and needs to be deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.208.220.12 (talk) 16:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)