Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:58, 2 August 2017

Archives

Archive 1

Talk page access

• Per your unblock appeal at UTRS I've restored your talk page access to allow you to post an unblock request here in the interest of transparency. As I noted to you in my response at UTRS, any use of this page outside of making an unblock requests and/or answering questions regarding an unblock will result in the talk page access being revoked. Good luck with your appeal. --Jezebel's Ponyo 18:15, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I would try to abide and get fellow admins confidence back.Md iet (talk)

__Unblock Request__ This request is for making an appeal to fellow Admins to consider my case so that I can rejoin Wiki for making positive contributions.

I feel ashamed at looking at the sock puppetry page on my name. It was only adamancy that fellow associate with independent view are not sock, but now I fully understood that any of your influence or help will also matter and you are still a defaulter, whether Wiki notice it or not.

I was also adamant in accepting friendly advice of fellow editors/admins to restrain from DB related articles, but I could further understand now how to avoid such editions and why neutral looking information with proper source are critical for making Wiki more powerful and effective.

There were problems and allegations that I was having pro tilt toward DB related article. Everyone has some tilt toward toward his POV, but it is to be presented in consideration all POV. I would try to correct my self in this line. Till I improve further, I will voluntarily not edit DB related pages and work with their talk pages.

I apologize for the inconvenience caused to Wiki because of me, and feel isolated to make any positive contribution in Wiki platform most admired by me.

Hoping to have a fair chance.Md iet (talk)

Unblocked

Hello, Md iet, I have restored your basic editing rights, as per the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive278#Standard_offer_unblock_request_from_Md_iet. However, you may only continue editing under the following restrictions:

1. You will not edit any articles which relate to Dawoodi Bohra, even distantly.
2. You will not participate in discussions on Talk:Dawoodi Bohra, nor on talk pages of Dawoodi Bohra-related articles.
3. You will not participate in discussions regarding Dawoodi Bohra or related topics on English Misplaced Pages.

If you are not sure if a topic in which you interested would fall under this ban, then ask an uninvolved editor for advice before editing articles or participating in discussions about that topic.

Please review the policies on WP:Neutral point of view, WP:Reliable sources, and WP:Original research before resuming your editing.

I look forward to seeing your positive contributions to the English Misplaced Pages.--Aervanath (talk) 21:35, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks @Aervanath:, with hope that my new inning is as per your expectations. Md iet (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Condition 1 and 2 are perfectly clear and there is no confusion at all.

Regarding 3, I am in no mood to discuss DB related matters.

I will be thankful to fellow editors/Admin if it is acceptable that I just point out my POV to neutral editor like Ajaymehra/Qwerrtus on their talk page, no discussion, and let them decide to put forward or not in their own manner wherever they want if they feel it right.

Thanking again to all concerned to give me a chance to prove myself. Md iet (talk) 15:59, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Husayn ibn Ali's children

I saw that you made some edits to the infobox of the article on Husayn ibn Ali regarding his children. According to one of your edit summaries, your change was so that "children listed in sequence of age and as per reliable sources." It would be really helpful if you would modify the section on "Family" to list the children in chronological order, giving their mother's, and citing the reliable sources that you referred to. This would improve the article a lot.-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Done, thanks for suggestion.--Md iet (talk) 01:51, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:India

Hi. You've been proposing removing the word "Gaṇarājya" from the lead of India ever since April, without getting any consensus (or indeed any agreement whatsoever) for it. And every now and then you come back to say "Hope by now I can presume having consensus". You keep very politely inviting people to comment, and I get the impression that you think if they don't comment, they can be presumed to agree with you. But that shows a misunderstanding of how Misplaced Pages works; without active agreement, you don't have consensus. Everybody on Misplaced Pages is a volunteer, many of them busy in real life, and you have to be satisfied with them registering disagreement once. Silence does not give consent! All that happens when you keep making the same proposal, and suggesting that there's probably consensus for it 'by now', is that people get impatient with you, as I'm sure you've seen. Please realise that nobody agrees with your suggestion and stop making it. It's time to move on. Bishonen | talk 09:13, 22 June 2016 (UTC).

@Bishonen:, Thanks for taking time to put your comment and advice. It seems you have not properly understood my proposal and motive behind. "Ganrajya" means republic and it is associated with "Republic of India" as "Bharat Ganrajya". 'Republic of India' given alternate Hindi word but main name 'India' remain without alternate. My aim is to add alternative Common name "Bharat" (known to billions English literate) along with main name 'India'. People have objection for adding alternative with both 'India' as well as 'Republic of India' of clumsiness. As 'republic' is secondary word and clarified else at Information box, it can be avoided in the lead.

I will be happy if both name "India" as well as "republic of India" are with alternate word in the official language of India, but "India" should have the alternate name written along with it first.

Earlier my proposition was to add "Bharat" as alternate English name. Due to lack of sufficient reliable references it was dropped. Now this is a separate proposal with altogether different reasoning. With above explanation I request you to revisit my proposal and advice.--Md iet 04:08, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. But none of the other editors on the article agree with you. I'm not here to get into the reasons for your suggestion or for other people's lack of enthusiasm for it, but purely as an uninvolved administrator to advise you to drop it now. Repeating it on the article talkpage is becoming disruptive. Also, as regards the article Germany, it seems obvious that the case there is different, as there are no political angles with regard to the name Deutschland, but there are with India or Bharat, as you mention yourself ("Tamil people of India which are a minority part are against Hindi for political reasons"). I'm sure both you and people like User:RegentsPark and User:SpacemanSpiff know far more about those angles than I do, so I decline to enter into a discussion of them. The other people on talk also seem to feel that they have come to the end of discussing it — you see how they first referred you to WP:IDHT, WP:TE and WP:DE (did you click on those links and read?) and then stopped answering you altogether? Please be more sensitive to the exhaustion of other volunteers. I'm sure you have other interests on Misplaced Pages than simplifying the first sentence of India to make it "short and less clumsy" — don't you? To me that seems a very minor matter. Unless there are underlying political motives which I don't understand. But in either case, please drop the issue or I will have to consider article banning you from India and Talk:India. Bishonen | talk 13:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC).

Thanks, My motive is to give reader a common name at the beginning itself, but I also feel, there seems to strong political motives and a group denying the same, which shouldn't happen at fare Misplaced Pages. Anyway I am dropping it at present as per your advice, but experience admin like User:SpacemanSpiff (seems to be Tamilian) should work in the interest of Wikipedian mass users.

Please don't blame me for hidden motives. My motives were made very clear in my explanation. When I proposed 'Bharat' addition and not removing 'Bharat Ganrajya', people just deleted it claiming that it is making sentence more clumsy. My explanation of clumsiness was given due to that reason. My main intention was never to remove clumsiness but only give fare ness in expression on which Misplaced Pages shouldn't bulge.--Md iet (talk) 04:14, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Directorate General of Mines Safety

I have removed some of the content you added to the above article, as it appears to have been copied from here or elsewhere online. Perhaps the Indian mine safety directorate performs the same functions as that in the United States, but regardless, it's not okay to copy this content without saying where you got it. — Diannaa (talk) 17:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Now allowing you to comment about Dawoodi Bohra

Per my decision as the banning admin, which I've logged at AE, you are now free to edit talk pages and other pages regarding the Dawoodi Bohra, except articles. The article ban remains in place. Let me know if you have any questions, Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks EdJohnston, hope this would help me to point out/propose contribution. I understand that articles 'regardingDawoodi Bohra' covers all the Dawoodi Bohra specific articles topics having involvement of the community. General Islam / earlier history article common with other section of Islam covers vast subjects and no way directly interfere with Dawoodi Bohra interest.--Md iet (talk) 03:24, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Ways to improve Fakhruddin Shaheed

Hi, I'm Robvanvee. Md iet, thanks for creating Fakhruddin Shaheed!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. The article still needs references and expansion.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Robvanvee 16:17, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for suggestions, specific categories added. Will appreciate if you can help further in the matter suggested.--Md iet (talk) 05:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Result of your appeal

Your topic ban has been lifted. Please remember what EdJohnston advised when editing this topic. --NeilN 15:01, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Abdul Husain Husamuddin

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Abdul Husain Husamuddin, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for Deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages'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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 12:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Muhammad ibn Isma'il

Material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright web page http://www.ismaili.net/heritage/node/10624. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I would recheck.--Md iet (talk) 02:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

chart syedna

unblock request

My IP address is blocked for some reasons on host IP, unblock.

Md iet (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. Place any further information here. Md iet (talk) 10:06, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. You forgot to tell us your IP address, so we can't investigate your claim. You can find this using WhatIsMyIP. If you don't wish to provide this publicly, you may use WP:UTRS. Yamla (talk) 10:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

File source problem with File:Sword Zufiqar on old Cairo wall.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:Sword Zufiqar on old Cairo wall.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Your recent editing history at Kaaba shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --HyperGaruda (talk) 04:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)