Thank you for your comments From what I ve seen recently and consistently on wikipedia the amount of anti Pakistan Islam bias is quite obvious and though I haven t for the most part taken part in such discussions I can see the implications hence being burnt twice and social association rings out loud here too possibly why I reacted as I did You may argue as you have that I don t have the credentials to be taken seriously well I won t argue as you are probably right but will just say that my other edits largely can be taken on their own merit if people are willing to look past my society of course As for neutrality no offence intended but when people claim to be neutral but then paint everyone with the same brush so as to speak by explicitly mentioning society when referring to individuals and even talk of security at airports it s impossible not to see the funny side though I am sure the editors that belong to the society being mentioned probably do not see the funny side not any more at least Without mentioning Freud s projection I would say the legitimate editors from this society though few and far between these days still being here is in itself a testament to their tolerance I myself have been confronted with a fair share of overtly snidey comments recently from Indians here on wikipedia so I assume society works both ways still I try not to generalise simply based on society or how I am told to perceive matters especially here in the west however if recent wikipedia articles are anything to go by the word neutrality becomes paradoxically an oxymoron I guess it s only natural that when you hear something long enough you start to believe it However thankfully certain values remain resilient even in the most turbulent of times