User talk:Masterpha

Hello, Masterpha, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I am pleased to present you with your very first service award, in recognition of becoming a Wikipedia contributor.

I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that may help you to get up to speed:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page.

Again, welcome! You can choose to put your award in your user page by editing the source of your user page and writing (including the braces) {{Registered Editor Userbox}} (which is smaller) or {{Registered Editor}} (which is larger). Thinker78 (talk) 00:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at 2017 Tehreek-e-Labaik protest, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you for your contributions! Thinker78 (talk) 00:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great job with this page. I have two requests. Can you add a section of per constituency polls (ordered by date). It will be helpful esp. given the general lack of polls. Also, can you add the last poll pre 2013 elections by each major polling agency or let us say all polls post Fall 2012. It gives a general comparison point for the post elections polls. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:4580:E0D0:DD56:2DD8:37E0:D8CE (talk) 18:58, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (G) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Hummerrocket (talk) 21:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Conservative Party (UK), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, many political party logos are copyrighted images and can only be used on the article about the party – they should not be used in opinion polling lists or election infoboxes. Cheers, Number 57 12:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Masterpha reported by User:Saqib (Result: ). Thank you. Saqib (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Störm. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Opinion polling for the Pakistani general election, 2018, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Störm (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Saqib (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can write out what you want to say here and someone will copy it over for you. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:01, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Can someone please copy this over for me: The reporter claims that I created User: Hussain.r97 as a sockpuppet to continue my edits as me and him both supported the inclusion of the FB poll inside the article, and implies that the user was created for the specific purpose of countering my block. Firstly, the user had his first edit here, at 21:22 GMT on 27 February 2018, and his most recent edit was here at 21:45 GMT on 27 February 2018. Now, my block commenced on 01:31 GMT on 28 February 2018, so there is no evidence that this account was created by me, nor is there any evidence that the account was used to counter my block. As well as this, User: Hussain.r97 had an edit worth 354 bytes at 21:41 on 27 February 2018 here. On 21:42 on 27 February 2018, I made a substantially larger edit worth 4,595 bytes here. This indicates that we were both editing at around the same time. If we were both editing at the same time, how can we be the same person? It is impossible, and therefore I come to the conclusion that User: Hussain.r97 is not an account that I made, nor is it a sockpuppet that I created in order to counter my block. Masterpha (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copied --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Shehbaz Sharif has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. There is a difference between vandalism and good faith edits. Please see WP:NOTV.  samee  ^talk 13:19, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, any updates on the Balochistan page? I have created the map for it. Wiki.0hlic ^(talk) 15:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki.0hlic Hi. Apologies for the delay as I was slightly busy in other affairs over the past few days. Thank you very much for creating another wonderful map. The page, while it is currently very basic, has been created over here and I have successfully added your map to it. The page, however, is very small in size and needs a lot of expansion for it to not be considered a stub, which I will do in the coming days/weeks. Regards, Masterpha (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	That completes the quartet! Excellent work on creating the Provincial Assembly election pages: Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan. A very valuable contribution to election pages of the country! Wiki.0hlic (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Could you create an article ? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Would you like a page explicity for the PM or for the caretaker government as a whole, like in Australia? Masterpha (talk) 21:45, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In a first time for the office, like Acting President of Pakistan. --Panam2014 (talk) 01:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the initial page. Any thoughts? Masterpha (talk) 10:20, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why are you removing candidates from NA-2 (Swat-I), I tend to add as many as possible and you are removing them. All known results need to be in there. I do not care about you replacing one table with another as long as information is not removed and is preserved. This will be a lot of work for me to fix later. Do you mind discussing it before changing a whole lot of pages? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:45, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: of course. I understand your concerns and understood that many users may not approve. What I am trying to do is remove minor party candidates which are unnecessary and only get a small amount of votes/percentage of votes and place them in an ‘others’ section. Currently I am only limiting the infobox to the top 3 performing candidates, but I understand why this could be a cause of concern. Whilst I understand you may want to add all of the candidates, the simple fact is that the majority of candidates in Pakistani elections are minor and irrelevant. Having their performance in the infobox is useless and overcomplicates the information. I do believe that necessary candidates should be included, although most candidates are genuinely irrelevant. The method I am carrying out is tedious, so I would be willing to come to some kind of an agreement where relevant candidates (those which got a sufficient quota of votes/percentage) are included and those who did not gain sufficient votes/percentage of votes are included in an ‘others’ section. Masterpha (talk) 02:32, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, it's not an infobox, secondly we at Wikipedia are supposed to represent facts truly so it does not make sense replacing any known results with Others, for example here you have over 50,000 votes counted as Others, this is double than the individual who won and this is misinformation at its best that we put all those votes in Others section which is akin to Unknown while we knew the people who got those votes. I am not in favor of this exercise. We know a candidate who got those votes and the votes go next to the candidate's name. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 08:16, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: look, I really don’t think you read what I just posted. I understand your concern with my changes and I would be willing to change it to a system where all of the candidates gaining a sufficient quota of votes/percentage of votes would be placed in the election box. For example, candidates achieving less than 2.5% of the vote can be included. I fully understand that it was a faulty method which is why I stopped the edits when I got to the 2013 section of the NA-2 swat page. Masterpha (talk) 08:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: what method do you suggest? Because frankly the large lists of candidates are not viable, neither is my method of only showing the top 3 Masterpha (talk) 08:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am for keeping all available information intact. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 08:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay SheriffIsInTown, this is a good idea but to do this we need to actually have a consistent election box policy. For example, here the candidates are shown with party colour and the turnout at the bottom. Here the candidates are shown with flags and the bottom has the majority and turnout figures. Here the party colours are shown with majority and turnout. The one I was doing had the candidates with their colours on the side, and at the bottom the figures for valid votes, rejected votes, turnout and majority were present. We need to have a consistent policy for election boxes if we are to put all the candidates in. What do you prefer? Personally I am against the flags being shown but apart from that I would be flexible. Once this policy is agreed upon by us and perhaps other users, then we can get to adding all of the candidates to each election box. Best, Masterpha (talk) 09:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your election box, it looks good as long as we have all the figures available, I am adding a simple box to keep things simple for new Election 2018 results as all figures might not be available for some time after the results, once we have turnout, majority and other figures available then we can add those fields. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 09:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I'll get to work adding candidates back to NA-1 and NA-2 pages at once. Masterpha (talk) 09:33, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was rethinking about using colors vs. flags in election boxes and wanted to run my ideas by you. I am now thinking that flags are better as they are more and true representative of Pakistani political parties. Almost, every party in Pakistan have their own flag and those parties chose those flags to represent themselves. On the other hand colors are an invention of us Wikipedians and I think the root of it comes from following examples of other countries but the thing is political parties of such other countries identify themselves with a color, for example Democratic Party in the United States identify with blue, Republican Party with red and Green Party with green but that is not the case in Pakistan. Then why should we use random colors to identify a party. For example, why should we use red to identify PTI, they have green in their flag as well, same way why we should choose black to identify PPP, they have three colors in their flag. On the other hand, the problem with using flags is a lot of manual work as it stands now, we will have to create flag templates for these parties. I might have done so in the past a long time ago but lost the skill and do not even know if we can create flag templates for political parties or is that just reserved for countries and territories. I will like to hear your input on this. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 03:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: The problem with this is that, as this user has pointed out for me, the flags are supposedly not meant to be used for the election boxes due to copyright. I tried adding the flags to the opinion polling page I created but they were removed. What I was thinking was that we could actually add the party symbols (such as lion for pmln, bat for pti sword/arrow for ppp, book for mma) seeing as these symbols are actually on the ballot paper. Hopefully these are freely licensed and would not cause any controversy with other users. Of course, this is all dependent on whether we can create a symbol/flag template for the election boxes. Masterpha (talk) 06:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol idea came to me but as a separate column at the end keeping the colors where they are. What do you think? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 07:54, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: Great idea, if we are ok with keeping the colours intact Masterpha (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: I was thinking of something like this:

{{{title}}}

Party		Candidate	Symbol	Votes	%	±

Thoughts? Masterpha (talk) 06:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, looks good but not sure if we can maintain it. How are we going to find symbols for previous elections especially when it comes to independent candidates? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 08:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: ECP has released a list of symbols allotted to parties. As for independents, I will try and find forms for the symbols of the independent candidates but if this is not possible we could always increase the colspan of the Candidate section so that it spans across both the symbol and candidate fields... for example if we don’t know the symbol for Shekh Azher Rizvi for the NA-120 by election last september, something like:

By-election 2017: NA-120 (Lahore-III)

Party	Candidate	Symbol	Votes	%	±
PML(N)	Kulsoom Nawaz		61,745	49.35	-11.19
PTI	Yasmin Rashid	File:BAT - Election Symbol.png	47,099	37.12	+3.08
Independent	Shekh Azher Rizvi		7,130	5.70	+5.70

Masterpha (talk) 19:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The full version will have colours as well, just had some problems with adding them... Masterpha (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great, I am fine both ways, either using a colspan or leaving the field blank (preferred) for those we cannot find the symbol. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I just want to clarify my position. It is nothing personal against you. Stay blessed. Live long WP.Jawadmdr (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do not worry @Jawadmdr: I never felt any sort of emnity towards you anyways. Regards, Masterpha (talk) 20:54, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am briefly unprotecting so you can make the edits for the poll and then I'm going to reprotect. Enigma^msg 04:24, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Enigmaman: done. You can reprotect it now. I have finished updating the results. маsтегрнатаLк 05:10, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Have you got he percentage for each party?--Panam2014 (talk) 19:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: The latest one was by herald which showed PTI 29%, PML (N) 25% and PPP at 20%. There is also a ‘poll of polls’ by gallup pakistan: PTI is in the range of 29 to 32%, PML (N) is in the range of 27% to 30%, and PPP is in the range of 17% to 20%. The race is really close, I doubt anyone would be able to call it accurately at this point. Hope this helps. маsтегрнатаLк 02:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Grand Democratic Alliance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regionalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Have you got a source for joint PM candidate for PML(N) and PPP? --Panam2014 (talk) 14:29, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The name has now been announced as Shehbaz Sharif. [1]. In exchange for this, Khursid Shah has been jointly nominated as speaker. [2] [3]маsтегрнатаLк 14:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Imran Khan will keep Mianwali-II. SO by elections will be held? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:06, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: yes, in all 4 constituencies that he leaves by elections will be held. маsтегрнатаLк 17:40, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When by-elections will be held? Also, NA-161 (Lodhran-II), NA-125 (Lahore-III), NA-28 (Peshawar-II), NA-3 (Swat-II), NA-2 (Swat-I), NA-1 (Chitral) should be updated. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: no schedule has been announced yet, although they should be held around october/november time. I will get working on the pages.маsтегрнатаLк 17:46, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How many seats will be vacants for the legislature's inauguration? What is the date of the inauguration? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: around 10 to 15 seats altogether will be vacant. I do not know the exact date for the first session but it should happen within the next 10 days. As for the PML (F) question I feel that I am not educated enough on the matter to make a judgement. маsтегрнатаLк 17:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So the vacancy of 10/15 seat could forbid Imran Khan to be elected or any candidate to be elected? Also, for PML(F), should we ask Pakistan's project? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The constitution says that you need 172 votes to be elected. If this isn’t done then another vote will be held where you only need a majority of those present. Currently PTI claims to have 175-180 MNAs in support so it is quite likely that Imran Khan will be elected on the first ballot. As for PML (F) I think wikiproject would be better informed. маsтегрнатаLк 17:55, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I think the article should be sourced and false informations removed. What is the true fondation's date? 1965, 1973, 1977, 1985, or 2002? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Have you got the name of candidates?--Panam2014 (talk) 15:05, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: as far as I know there has been no announcement for any candidate. маsтегрнатаLк 15:42, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And if the president is inaugurated after 9 September? Also, if the next general election would took place in September 2023, so the office would be vacant? And for the next election who would take place in November 2028, the president would be elected by the parliament elected in 2023? --Panam2014 (talk) 15:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: no date has been announced yet for the presidential election. Also if the presidential election is due at a time where the assemblies are dissolved, then the election should take place at least a month after the assemblies take oath. The presidential elections this year were actually due on 8 August but due to the assemblies being dissolved they could not take place and hence will occur at least a month after the assemblies take oath маsтегрнатаLк 16:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the election took place on 4 September, the new president could or couldn't sworn in on 9 September?--Panam2014 (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: yes of course... маsтегрнатаLк 17:22, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Have you got sources about the new chiefs ministers? --Panam2014 (talk) 13:05, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In KP, Mahmood Khan is the next CM after PTI nominated him. In Sindh, Murad Ali Shah is the next CM after PPP nominated him. In Balochistan, Jam Kamal Khan is the next CM after being nomintaed by a coalition of parties including BAP, ANP, HDP BNP-A and PTI. In Punjab, PTI has the majority but it is unclear who will become CM. Imran Khan has said it will be a young person, making it likely that Raja Yassir will become CM. Sources: [4] [5] [6] [7] маsтегрнатаLк 13:22, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have the dates of swearing-in of CMs and PM? --Panam2014 (talk) 14:23, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it true that PTI will form a coaltion with PMLN in Punjab?--Panam2014 (talk) 01:21, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: no, they will form a coalition with pmlq, but many n league members are said to have formed a forward block in favour of PTI. This is useless because the 18th amendment bars forwards blocks within parties. маsтегрнатаLк 09:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masterpha. I was really amazed by your little summary about you, and I pretty much agree with what you said, and I have to say, your articles have really engaged me. If possible, please if you can in some way, place a visual map and a visual of the number to National Assembly seats won in the Pakistani elections of 1985, 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1996, because when I see the Indian elections from all of the years, they have a visual map and a visual of the National Assembly seats their parties won. So it would be nice if this could be provided in previous Pakistani elections as well. Thanks! Wbhai89 (talk) 03:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wbhai89: Thanks for the suggestion. I think this is a great idea and should be implemented, however first I would need the data for the delimitation of constituencies in those elections and results of each constituency. This is possible, but I may need some outside help. Also, I believe the 1985 elections were non-party based so I struggle to see how we can make a map for that. Thanks! маsтегрнатаLк 08:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for considering this, because it really would be great it Pakistan, like India, had all of its elections results maps and the visual on the amount of seats won in the National Assembly. Also, if possible, please let me know what outside sources are supposed to be consulted, so I could also try to do something about putting up the election map results and so forth. Wbhai89 (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wbhai89: I’d need the delimitation maps of the previous constituencies to do that. Alternatively, if we are talking about indian election pages, all of the elections before 1971 do not have maps constituency wise but show the amount of seats won by each party in each province in a box on the province. Would you be ok with something like this? маsтегрнатаLк 12:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, thanks for your time. Wbhai89 (talk) 03:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you guide me how did you calculate swing on NA-28 (Peshawar-II)? Also how do you calculate the change for majority if winning party is different from previous election? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:16, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The swing is measured in relation to the top two parties of the last election and the winning party of the current election. For example, the 2 largest parties in the 2017 NA-4 (now NA-28) by-election were PTI and ANP. Because PTI won the seat, the swing would be measured from ANP to PTI. To measure the swing we need to find the difference between the vote change and divide it by 2. The difference between +16.36 and -3.74 is 20.10: so dividing this figure by two gives us the figure of 10.05. If the winning party is different you would do it the same way. For example with NA-95 you would measure the swing from PMLN to PTI, because they were the top two parties in the 2013 by election and since pti won the 2018 election the swing should be measured towards them. I know this might sound confusing, do you want an example of some sort? маsтегрнатаLк 15:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check my swing calculation for NA-53 by-election? I am not sure if that should be increase or decrease there? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: yes, that looks fine. If you’re unsure in the future, a good way to look at it is to see which party is gaining more ground. In this example PMLN had a larger increase than PTI so it would be a negative swing for PTI. маsтегрнатаLк 19:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Have you got a source for the name? The alliance collasped when PPP refused to vote for Shehbaz. --Panam2014 (talk) 16:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: name for what? I don't understand the question... маsтегрнатаLк 17:27, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of the PPP-PMLN's alliance. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The official name was “Alliance for Free and Fair elections” маsтегрнатаLк 19:14, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		It would be criminal not to recognize your contributions before, during, and after Pakistani general election, 2018 especially the way you have with polls, graphics, and mathematics. Thanks for teaching me along the way as well. You had a very short journey from me asking you "What are you even doing?" to this i.e. from viewing your contributions with suspicion to viewing them with praise. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Words cannot express how thankful I am to you for this Sheriff... Keep up with the good work! :) маsтегрнатаLк 23:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi How many new ministers have been created and how many have been kept, renamed and replaced?--Panam2014 (talk) 17:26, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are 17 ministries, of which the interior ministry has been kept to Imran Khan himself. I don't know exactly the numbers for the ones that have been renamed or replaced. But this cabinet is significantly smaller than previous ones. маsтегрнатаLк 18:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is the second time when a PM took a portfolio? Like Shahiq Khaqan Abbasi? And the ministers are members of what parties?--Panam2014 (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: PM’s have taken portforlio’s many times, Nawaz Sharif kept the foreign ministry to himself 2013-2017. Most of the cabinet members are PTI, but coalition members have some portfolios. IT and Law have gone to MQM, Defence production has gone to BAP and Railways is with Sheikh Rasheed (AML). Inter Provincial Coordination has gone to GDA. маsтегрнатаLк 21:41, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abbasi haven't advisor in Energy but Nawaz had in Foreign Affairs. And Imran Khan in Interior? --Panam2014 (talk) 23:17, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: what abbasi did was split the energy ministry into petroleum division and power division. So he inherited the petroleum division and awais leghari got the power division. I suspect that Imran Khan will actively work as Interior Minister and Prime Minister in some way... маsтегрнатаLк 23:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But. Khan is also minister of Energy. So should we add it in Imran Khan's infobox? --Panam2014 (talk) 14:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Like Muhammad Mian Soomro, what members of PMLQ, PML, PPP have joined PTI? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:49, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: with all due respect, do you expect me to list all of them? Sorry, but I don’t know everything. :( маsтегрнатаLк 03:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of them but only the main figures. --Panam2014 (talk) 03:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are we supposed to calculate percentage by valid votes or by total turnout? I have been doing it by turnout but I see By-election 2018 on NA-161 (Lodhran-II) has it by valid votes? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 10:11, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: I think the chart which the ECP uses for the results is calculated by valid votes... I’m not sure which is the best way though... i usually calculate by valid votes and then put the valid votes and rejected votes as a percentage of the total turnout... маsтегрнатаLк 12:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you refer me a source please? Also do we have an example from election results for other countries? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:35, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: ECP measures it by valid votes as per this source. As for other countries such as the US and the UK, I believe they don’t use rejected votes as part of the total figure to calculate percentages from. This US page shows that they use total valid votes (displayed as total votes) for percentages and if you look at this UK page it calculates percentages via total valid votes, but they use the term “turnout” instead of total valid votes. маsтегрнатаLк 14:45, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check here, if I calculated a) swing, and b) change for majority properly? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:34, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: the majority is absolutely fine. As for the swing, the difference between +7.28 and -6.59 is 13.87, so the swing would be +6.94. маsтегрнатаLк 15:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check the majority change not the percentage? Do you think both majority change and percentage are fine? Yeah, made a mistake on the swing. So, it does not matter whether the result was hold or a gain, the swing will be calculated from losing party to winning party in current election! Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:45, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: seems fine to me! маsтегрнатаLк 15:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Like to Imran Khan, should we add in the infobox the ministries led by Benazir Bhutto, Youssaf Raza Gilani, Nawaz Sharif and Shahid Khaqan Abbasi? --Panam2014 (talk) 19:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fazal Ilahi Chaudhry have been elected on 14 August 1973. If the presidential term is 5 years, why his term ended in November 1978 when he resigned? --Panam2014 (talk) 20:58, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) 😁 Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:20, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mohammad Aslam Bhutani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Balochistan National Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I just saw you just created Next Pakistani general election, what does the article title enclose by saying Next? Next is a complex word to be used on an event title - when 2023 comes and passes, the article will still remain Next Pakistani general election. I suggest you change the title to name to clarify that but I need to know your reason behind that title name. If you wish to change its name and may need help for that, do ping me here User:SkillsM674, reply here or leave a message on my talk SkillsM674 (talk) 22:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SkillsM674: the term next is used because it is not certain that the election will be held in 2023. The fact is that the ruling coalition currently has a slim majority, so the Assemblies could easily be prematurely dissolved if a few coalition parties withdraw support or if the PM decides to call early elections to try and gain a simple majority. 5 years is a long time, but if 2023 comes and there has not been a premature election, the title will be changed to Pakistani general election, 2023. Hope you understand. Regards, masterpha маsтегрнатаLк 22:10, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, many articles in other countries also use the term next when they specify next elections, take for example Next German federal election, Next Spanish general election, Next United Kingdom general election, Next Irish general election etc... There is a consensus to leave the year ambiguous unless it is confirmed. маsтегрнатаLк 22:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Its now well understood. Thank you for your explanation. I thought of moving it to 2023 Pakistani general election at the first glance of the article. But then I realised I needed to find out the reasoning of the creator before taking any step. Regards SkillsM674 (talk) 22:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Next Pakistani general election, Masterpha!

Wikipedia editor Xyzspaniel just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for the article, Can you please add to some categories and some notable newspapers maybe mentioning this election in the reference section.

To reply, leave a comment on Xyzspaniel's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

XyzSpaniel Talk Page 22:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Masterpha Wasn't it a bit too early? ☺ Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: if you think about it, PTI does have a slim majority... With around 7 parties which support it, there’s huge potential for the government to collapse seeing as if a couple withdraw support, the national assembly would have to be dissolved and new elections would be called. Even if that doesn’t happen, there could also be a chance that the PM decides to call for snap elections before 2023 to actually gain a simple majority... all I’m saying is that there’s huge potential for the government to collapse at any given time... маsтегрнатаLк 00:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you did not understand my question, I meant that isn't it too early to create the article as we are just done with an election? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:00, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown: and I’m saying that another election could come very soon. 😀 маsтегрнатаLк 09:08, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Next Pakistani general election 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/Next Pakistani general election 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. Saqib (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Can you improve electoral system?— Bukhari (Talk!) 18:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Will Imran Khan appoint an interior minister? Also, when the new ministers will sworn in? --Panam2014 (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Imran Khan ministry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ali Zaidi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I trust your results might be correct but can you please complete the job and add the source on NA-69! ☺ Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:53, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done маsтегрнатаLк 15:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Pakistan Barnstar of National Merit
		For your contributions to Wikipedia articles about Pakistan! Pyramids09 (talk) 04:12, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! маsтегрнатаLк 10:10, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed the results you added at 2008 Pakistani general election#Punjab are different to those at 2008 Punjab provincial election (specifically the number of seats). Cheers, Number 57 16:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just to note, independents always go at the bottom of these tables, below 'other parties'. Cheers, Number 57 16:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57: Hi, thanks for informing me about the position of independents in these tables. I've just looked at the two pages and the vote totals are the same, although you're correct in pointing out the difference in seats. These totals seem to be disputing the count of PML-N and PML-Q elected MPAs. Specifically, the main page gives PML-N 7 extra MPAs. This could be possibly due to confusion around the similar names of the parties (PML-Q is officially registered as Pakistan Muslim League), but if I'm honest I don't know exactly why they differ. I believe that my source (electionpakistan, supported by FAFEN) is more reliable than the UrduPoint source from the main page. If I'm honest, I don't see the need for separate pages for federal and provincial elections so long as the provincial results are sufficiently covered in the main general election page (even though I did begin the tradition of creating separate pages for provincial elections in Pakistan, sorry!). It makes a lot more sense to have a single page containing both federal and provincial results, especially considering that these elections are held on the same days and that the assemblies dissolve at the same time. маsтегрнатаLк 21:45, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, just thought I should bring it to your attention in case you wanted to correct one of them. Cheers, Number 57 21:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly dont made edits, at National Assembly of Pakistan and Next Pakistani general election until situation goes clear Currently matter is in Supreme Court of Pakistan wait for Court decision. 103.141.159.74 (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I respect your view, edits are necessary because the current status of the articles imply that nothing has changed. A lot, however, has changed and the articles must show that. My edit to the election page showed the date of the election as uncertain precisely because of the Supreme Court hearing. маsтегрнатаLк 17:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Why for First Time provincial will not be held alongside NA elections? Panam2014 (talk) 18:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing is confirmed yet. If PA and NA elections are held seperately then this will be because there is no obligation for them to be held together in the constitution, it is simply a precedent. маsтегрнатаLк 18:13, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Do you have information of the NA terms of Benazir? --Panam2014 (talk) 13:05, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no маsтегрнатаLк 17:55, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you could find them? Panam2014 (talk) 22:32, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have information as I have not tried to look for them маsтегрнатаLк 23:47, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Why not all MNA does not resign from NA? Should we create article about By elections? Also, why PTI mass resigned and will PTI contest by election? --Panam2014 (talk) 22:24, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

some members defected from PTI (not officially but they said they wouldn't support IK's leadership), the number of them is 22. I'm not sure about the remaining 10 who haven't resigned. As for by elections, no we shouldn't make an article yet. It's possible that the by elections won't happen and that NA may be dissolved before they can happen - PPP have said they want early elections right after electoral reforms and NAB abolition, Zardari is rumoured to believe that the government won't last for more than 2 months. маsтегрнатаLк 23:49, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PTI mass resigned to put pressure on govt to accept their demand to early elections. With ~40% of the assembly vacant it leads to the assembly lacking legitimacy to an extent. маsтегрнатаLк 23:51, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Do you have sources about full portfolio repartition? --Panam2014 (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no маsтегрнатаLк 02:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And for the partial repartition, is it official or only speculation? Panam2014 (talk) 11:18, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

as far as I know, the majority of ministers have not been given portfolios yet. this will be updated in the coming days. маsтегрнатаLк 13:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Could you update the articles about new ministries, ministries abolished and others renamed? --Panam2014 (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

it should be added Panam2014 (talk) 20:22, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

so add it маsтегрнатаLк 11:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

how many seats are vacants? 12, 13, more? We need article about by elections. Panam2014 (talk) 12:56, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps, but i'd like to wait until the courts hear the pti appeal on the acceptance of the resignations маsтегрнатаLк 11:46, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One seat became vacant after election in Punjab. Panam2014 (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Panam, I am not active on wiki anymore, please make these pages yourself or ask someone else маsтегрнатаLк 09:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please give your opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistani politics.Ameen Akbar (talk) 18:48, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Caretaker Prime Minister of Pakistan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The powers of the caretaker prime minister are not different from the 'regular prime minister' except in a few areas which warrant a completely separate page, When the caretaker prime minister succeeds Shehbaz Sharif, whose photo and name will be published on Prime Minister of Pakistan? A subsection was sufficient on the Prime Minister of Pakistan is sufficient in my opinion

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. Jibran1998 (talk) 17:02, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

According to Pakistan's constitution, Ministers of state are not members of the cabinet. We should add it Panam2014 (talk) 15:29, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]