Talk:University of Sargodha

message: :Image:Sou logo.gif 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 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 04:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Sou logo.gif

message: Wikipedia does not allow contact information to be provided in articles per WP:NOTDIRECTORY.  This includes both contact info for the "internet officer", as well as contact info for all of the affiliates.  Second, Wikipedia articles must be summary of highly notable, key information about the school, not a complete list of every associated fact.  We do not create long lists of affiliate schools like this; instead, a sentence or two that states something like "The university is affiliated with over 270 schools across the world in countries such as X, Y, and Z" would be okay.  Finally, the "Internet Officer" or other equal position at the school probably shouldn't be editing the article directly, per our policy on conflicts of interest.  If you do, please be sure to follow all of our policies; here, pay specific attention to WP:NOT and WP:NPOV.  Please feel free to post if you have any questions.  Qwyrxian (talk) 12:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "I am doing it in official capacity.please visit www.uos.edu.pk,Prof.Dr Muhammad Akram Chaudry has vice chancellor for 7 year".
The problem is that the addition includes a lot of unsourced BLP information, and to the lead, not the 'body' text. It also reintroduces ".. non MOS edits, circular links .." per my edit summaries, (and peacockery which they were told about here). They were earlier advised about :wp:COI, :wp:RS, :WP:OWN and :WP:MOS issues in a custom note on their talk-page here. 
I have now removed this edit three times over ≈48 hours, each time with an explanatory edit summary,  and with a follow up warning or other message on the editors talk page. Warned about :WP:3RR on their talkpage after their 2nd revert here, but reverted my UoS revert here, less then 4 hours later.
They have now reverted twice in 11 hours (3 times in ≈61 hours). As of now, Itmanageruos has not replied on any talk page. Their only response has been the reverts, and the aforementioned, single, edit summary. Please discuss! Itmanageruos should be notified about this discussion automatically, but I will likely drop a message on their talk-page anyway.220 of Borg 05:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explaining removals: affiliates, contact info, and COI 

message: Interesting to read the above from March 2011/ 45 months ago, as there is currently an 'edit war' going on with  who may be the 'I.T. Manager University of Sargodha' and per their last (and so far only) edit summary here which says:
:"I am doing it in official capacity.please visit www.uos.edu.pk,Prof.Dr Muhammad Akram Chaudry has vice chancellor for 7 year".
The problem is that the addition includes a lot of unsourced BLP information, and to the lead, not the 'body' text. It also reintroduces ".. non MOS edits, circular links .." per my edit summaries, (and peacockery which they were told about here). They were earlier advised about :wp:COI, :wp:RS, :WP:OWN and :WP:MOS issues in a custom note on their talk-page here. 
I have now removed this edit three times over ≈48 hours, each time with an explanatory edit summary,  and with a follow up warning or other message on the editors talk page. Warned about :WP:3RR on their talkpage after their 2nd revert here, but reverted my UoS revert here, less then 4 hours later.
They have now reverted twice in 11 hours (3 times in ≈61 hours). As of now, Itmanageruos has not replied on any talk page. Their only response has been the reverts, and the aforementioned, single, edit summary. Please discuss! Itmanageruos should be notified about this discussion automatically, but I will likely drop a message on their talk-page anyway.220 of Borg 05:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit warring 2014 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:07, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion