Talk:Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can anyone tell me what the real ending of Umer Marvi is?[edit]

Can anyone tell me what the real ending of Umer Marvi is?

According to the one I have heard, Umer sets her free.

But according to two sources on the internet, Khet disguises himself as a dervish and Marvi runs away with him.

The two sources are http://www.opf.org.pk/almanac/F/folktales.htm & http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/post/pakistan/literature/moon/moon2.html

The wikipedia article on Umer Marvi is copied from the OPF website. But the ending has been changed to say she is set free by Umer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Marvi

Please, tell me the real ending.

Fair use rationale for Image:Shah Latif.jpg[edit]

Image:Shah Latif.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Comment moved from article[edit]

heer and ranjha was not at all discussed by shah abdul latif bhitai. heer and ranjha was discussed in the poetry of waris shah of panjab. those characters are not concerned with sindh and shah abdul latif bhitai. for reference shah jo risalo(the magzine of shah abdul latif's poetry) any comment on [email protected]

You are right, Bhittai never use Heer Ranjha in his poetry. Alixafar (talk) 09:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does this page need to be moved?[edit]

The subject's name is spelled "Bhita'i" in the title but consistently "Bhittai" in the article. Of course, the current spelling (presumaby a differing transliteration) can be retained as a redirect. --MegaSloth (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bhittai is correct word, in all the articles never used the word "Bhita'i". So the title Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai is more suitable. Every one can search both the words in google.com for confirmation. Alixafar (talk) 09:41, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   The keyboard, keys, and extended-ASCII codes, and the search engines you choose for searching could make a tremendous difference. And someone should consult Arabic-studies and -literature scholars at institutions with more than one PhD in those fields. Our guy-in-a-diner research methodologies can work wonders, but sometimes fiascos(? Fiasci ?) instead.
--Jerzy•t 07:51, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External link changed[edit]

Due to geocities.com closed the online poetry of Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai translated by Elsa Kazi shifted from http://geocities.com/bhittai to http://www.sindhiana.com/thebhittai/ Alixafar (talk) 09:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation?[edit]

Portions of this article are identical to parts of Life and Times of Shah Bhitai. The website in question doesn't mention Wikipedia, so someone should check if the Wikipedia article was created later than the website's page. --Jashiin (talk) 11:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

   That opinion abt what should be done is far from definitive, and likely misses the point.... If the site's newer than our first publication of the wording, it doesn't rule out a copy vio by us; if it is actually older than when we added the relevant wording to ours, it doesn't establish that the colleague who added it here got it from a copyright-eligible commentary, rather than from an unprotected work. (The poet's rights, BTW, are nonexistent bcz he wrote too early for the verse itself to be eligible for protection, and even any rights granted by sovereigns so early are unlikely to have been sustained by more recent ones!) The only relevant circumstance is a work carrying notice of a still valid copyright dated earlier than its addition to WP!
--Jerzy•t 03:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self, and perhaps to similarly situated colleagues: don't bother cursing the colleague who jumps in with a responding edit 20 minutes after yours, but (1) bear in mind that a bot is likely to do so bcz you left undated template calls in yr prior edit, and (2) copy and paste the summary for your new edit back onto the bottom of the new revision you tried and failed to save, then copy the new version plus the summary into your paste buffer, and (3) start a new edit session on the same article's same section, or same talk page's same section "that the 'architects' cast aside", by pasting over it with the paste buffer, to be "the new head and capstone", then cut and paste the summary portion from the edit box to the comment or reply box. If you remember, fill in the bot's summary in the edit comment box, followed by your own comment &/or retort, and hit save. Now, things aren't as bad as they seemed, are they? (And am I right, that you'll now be offered the opportunity for a closing and retorting summary? Let's see: Jerzy•t 06:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's called a Reply here on a article-talk page, instead of a summary. Bazinga! 

Jerzy•t 06:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I guess I lied, & I'm sorry; I think every subsequent addtion, to  a tk pg secn (at least using the

Pad2 interface i) s called a reply, and I dunno whether the first edit to each talk How the first. Is solicited.
--Jerzy•t


External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 02:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Statue of Shah Abdul Latif
Statue of Shah Abdul Latif

5x expanded by AhmadLX (talk). Self-nominated at 22:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • This substantial article is a fivefold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The image is suitably licensed, the hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shah_Abdul_Latif_Bhittai&oldid=1216427258"