User talk:AMomen88

https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a40067/mariska-hargitay-hillary-clinton-endorsement/ AMomen88 (talk) 23:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AMomen88,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Indian Reunification Association for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 22:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Worldbruce. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Barind that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notifying me AMomen88 (talk) 01:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC) AMomen88 (talk) 01:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AMomen88! Your additions to

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double
  inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners
  , for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images.
  non-free content criteria
  in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you recently added majorities to the infobox of a Bangladeshi politician. In British politics, majority is a closely tracked number (e.g. [1][2][3][4]). Not so in Bangladesh. Although it can be calculated, reliable sources almost never do.

I don't know why majority never caught on as a measure in Bangladesh, perhaps it isn't as meaningful because of the country's rapidly growing population, multiple election boycotts, and irregular elections interspersed with military or caretaker rule. Whatever the reason, Wikipedia should follow reliable sources and avoid bloat by omitting "majority" from the infoboxes of Bangladeshi politicians. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:59, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of prime ministers of Bangladesh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Independent.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Government of Bangladesh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cabinet.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at Category:National cabinets, it seems cabinet is the common name for Commonwealth governments. I am not sure if the move is appropriate. Instead of moving them individually and getting into a potential edit war; let's open a discussion on a talk page and see which name has consensus?Vinegarymass911 (talk) 03:48, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh. I did not change Cabinet of Bangladesh to "Ministries of Bangladesh", I changed the article names on List of cabinets of Bangladesh. I do not think that discussion on a talk page is warranted, but if it is required to prevent an edit war, I suppose it could happen.–AMomen88 (talk) 18:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Fair enough, I withdraw my objections.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 02:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mujibnagar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amirul Islam.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of international prime ministerial trips made by Sheikh Hasina 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/List of international prime ministerial trips made by Sheikh Hasina 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.

TheLongTone (talk) 14:43, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assalamu alaykum, Abdul.

I'd like to apologize for any offence that my previous edits on the Sheikh Mujibur Rahman page may have caused you. (This wasn't my intention)

You brought up an excellent point about how the Quaid-e-Azam's page doesn't list his name in Bangla. I'll try and that in.

It looks like you work on a lot of Bangladesh-related articles. I'm interested in Bangladesh too, so see you around! :)

Historicamatic (talk) 07:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Walaikum-Salam Historicamatic. I apologise if I came across a bit blunt in the edit summary. It's great to hear you're interested in Bangladesh, I look forward to seeing you around too!—AMomen88 (talk) 18:03, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sinn Féin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestine.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here

. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Abhishek0831996 (talk) 08:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sheikh Hasina sidebar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Abdul,

Sorry for using the incorrect date for the start of Operation Searchlight… I thought it began on the 26th of March, 1971. It seems this was incorrect?

I also want to apologize for describing it as an interruption. I should’ve been more specific and linked to the Operation Searchlight page. It was not my intention to be biased.

Can you list to me all the issues that were present so I can fix them? I still think the beginning of the page is hard to read, so let’s work together to fix things! 🤝

I know in my heart, intuitively, that we can fix the page and turn it into an exemplary article.

Hussein Historicamatic (talk) 13:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

we have still

A discussion for dispute resolving is heppening here. You have to comment. Mehedi Abedin 07:21, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AMomen88: There is a discussion in progress and your comment is needed to resolve the dispute. Mehedi Abedin 06:34, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A dispute resolution discussion is happening. Please give your opinion for the selected photos here. If you give your opinion, then it will be easier to select better photo for Economy of Bangladesh. Mehedi Abedin 14:51, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nagar Bhaban, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nagar Bhaban until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.  // Timothy :: talk  03:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for naked violation of your topic ban, as you did at User talk:TimothyBlue.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ad Orientem (talk) 03:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

is closed -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

is closed. The user is warned that they must address their topic ban violation and should make their unblock request here. --Yamla (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AMomen88 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I believe I should be unblocked because my conduct on Wikipedia has been generally positive, I have helped contribute to a certain degree to many key articles on Wikipedia. I am particularly active on Bangladesh Wikipedia. I am well-known for editing Bangladesh-related articles. I have improved their quality by inserting balanced and neutral content which is well-sourced. I have also repaired citations which have not been formatted correctly. I am genuinely passionate about the Wikipedia project, I joined this project as I am a staunch supporter and advocate of the principles of Wikipedia enshrined in the five pillars. This is an open source project which aims to better educate humanity, an admirable cause which is essential in light of the rise of disinformation dissemination via the use of the internet. I was originally dismayed that many Bangladesh-related articles were somewhat unkempt, as a result I joined this project and have attempted to use my skills of formatting and proficiency in the English language to try and improve the plight of these articles. It brought me immense joy and satisfaction to be a part of this project. I feel very proud to have helped contribute in a small way to the proliferation of knowledge vis-a-vis Bangladesh and other topics on this great repository of information.

I am incredibly dismayed and distraught that I was banned permanently. The rationale behind this was solely as a result of my conduct on a single article. All of the previous sanctions I was imposed with derive from thus single article also. I have already been barred from editing this article, if this ban is lifted I will without question not edit that article. I have been juggling with stressful exams and as a result have not been able to follow the Wikipedia Policies as stringently as I should have. I believe that banning me permanently because of my conduct on a single article is unfair as this is notwithstanding the productive contributions I have made to other articles for a number of years. The additions I make are not gnomish, they are content-heavy and are well-cited. The particular reason why I was banned was because I advised another user that there was an unfinished sentence on the article in question. I am committed to the Wikipedia Project, it is my desire to ensure that Wikipedia articles are to the highest possible standard and quality. Surely, an unfinished sentence does not meet the high standards required for a Wikipedia article. And surely, pointing this fact out does not warrant a permanent block. I have just checked the article and the sentence remains unfinished, no one has finished the sentence in the last few months. I believe this is emblematic of the neglect that many Bangladeshi related articles are subject to.

Regardless of the fact that I believed what I was doing was right, I should have followed the rules and should not have violated the sanctions which were imposed against me. I am very passionate about the Wikipedia project, and in particular Bangladesh, this is a subject which is close to my heart and as a result I can on occasion allow my emotions to get the better of me, which can begin to provide an explanation for my regretful conduct which resulted in my Tban. Having said all of this, I have had time to reflect and now recognise that my conduct was not inline with the high standards which are expected of an editor on Wikipedia. I would savour the opportunity for restitution, if I am reinstated I will always conduct myself in the most utmost manner which is befitting of an editor of this esteemed project and I pledge to refrain from engaging in futile squabbles regarding content which do nothing but poison the atmosphere. I commit to resolving any disputes in good faith without violating any Wikipedia Policies and I will always interpret other editors as acting in good faith.

I have now concluded my exams so I will be able to contribute positively and productively to the Wikipedia Project, whilst religiously following the Wikipedia Policies and other guidelines. If the block is lifted I will commit to follow the Wikipedia Policies to the letter, I will not edit war and will not violate any sanctions which have been imposed on me. Please grant me the opportunity to mend my ways, it is my most fervent wish to prove that I am a productive editor to this project. Thank you. AMomen88 (talk) 02:49, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There are only only a few sentences in this long unblock request that are about why you were blocked. "I will always interpret other editors as acting in good faith" is the same thing as "I will assume good faith", except that it's twice as long. Please post a new unblock request that's 1/2 to 1/3 the length of this one, and stick to talking only about the reason why you were blocked. This is a kind of generic "I will follow every policy" promise that could apply to almost anyone. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

You were not "banned permanently", you were blocked to enforce a topic ban, and not given an end date. This only means that the block will last until you convince an administrator to remove it. We all have stressful times in our lives; what will you do in the future if you experience another stressful time that may affect how you participate here? 331dot (talk) 09:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Indian Reunification Association 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/Indian Reunification Association 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 until the discussion has finished.

KSAWikipedian (talk) 05:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]