User talk:Ak131001

January 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you create an inappropriate page. bonadea contributions talk 11:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pir Muhammad Alauddin Siddiqui

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 Pir Muhammad Alauddin Siddiqui, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of http://baharemadinah.com/shaykh-ul-aalam/countering-islamophobia, http://baharemadinah.com/shaykh-ul-aalam/mohiuddin-trust, and http://baharemadinah.com/shaykh-ul-aalam/mohiuddin-trust/educational-institutions}. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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 deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. bonadea contributions talk 12:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pir Sultan Ul Arfeen Siddiqui moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Pir Sultan Ul Arfeen Siddiqui, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. bonadea contributions talk 12:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Noor TV UK (January 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Bonadea were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Noor TV UK and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Noor TV UK, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 19:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ak131001! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! bonadea contributions talk 19:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nerian Sharif, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 500.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Noor TV UK (January 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bonadea was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Resubmitted for the second time without any changes. There has to be coverage in reliable sources that are independent and secondary.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Noor TV UK and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Noor TV UK, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 07:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tanaa Banaa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amanat Ali.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh Na Thi Hamari Qismat moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Yeh Na Thi Hamari Qismat, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 02:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bisaat moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Bisaat, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 02:04, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Badnaseeb moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Badnaseeb, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 02:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ek Mohabbat Aur Sahi moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ek Mohabbat Aur Sahi, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ishq-e-Junoon moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ishq-e-Junoon, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teri Raah Main moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Teri Raah Main, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:23, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ghar Aik Jannat moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ghar Aik Jannat, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dekh Tamasha-e-Roshni moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Dekh Tamasha-e-Roshni, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aik Mohabbat Kaafi Hai moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Aik Mohabbat Kaafi Hai, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tum Mujrim Ho moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Tum Mujrim Ho, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:25, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kala Doriya moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Kala Doriya, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 06:26, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pir Ghulam Mohiudin Ghaznavi

The article Pir Ghulam Mohiudin Ghaznavi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Zero reliable sourcing. Not enough in-depth refs from reliable sources to show he meets WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kala Doriya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kala Doriya 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/Kala Doriya 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.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 13:44, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bisaat for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bisaat 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/Bisaat 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.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 13:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Aik Mohabbat Kaafi Hai for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aik Mohabbat Kaafi Hai 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/Aik Mohabbat Kaafi Hai 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.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 14:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While moving drafts to mainspace is allowed, it can be unwise

You are 100% entitled to move article to main space. All editors in good standing are. It can be unwise to do so when the draft is not of the required standard. If the article is subsequently deleted via Wikipedia:Articles for deletion it is very hard to re-create it. It comes under extra scrutiny.

Please try to trust the Wikipedia:Articles for creation reviewers. All reviewers are human and do make mistakes, both in accepting and in declining drafts, but those mistakes are few. The process is iterative. Drafts, when declined, are pushed back for further work. Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles.

Once an article hits AfD the process becomes very formal. Any editor in good standing may make policy based arguments to keep, to delete, or to make other suggestions, but emotional arguments are ignored.

Let's be clear, though. If the mainspace article is of good quality, meets Wikipedia's requirements, then it will not be deleted whoever moves it to main space.

I think you have misjudged the three articles I have nominated for deletion. I do not believe they are suitable for mainspace. That is why I have nominated them for deletion.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 14:28, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tum Mujrim Ho moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Tum Mujrim Ho, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. bonadea contributions talk 17:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bhag Amina Bhag moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Bhag Amina Bhag, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 00:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teri Raah Main moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Teri Raah Main, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 14:19, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ghar Aik Jannat moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ghar Aik Jannat, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 14:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ek Mohabbat Aur Sahi moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ek Mohabbat Aur Sahi, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 14:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ishq-e-Junoon moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ishq-e-Junoon, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ravensfire (talk) 14:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Parde Mein Rehne Do

The article Parde Mein Rehne Do has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Future film, fails WP:NFF, should be deleted or moved to draft until release.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 19:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Parde Mein Rehne Do for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Parde Mein Rehne Do 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/Parde Mein Rehne Do 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.

DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lillyput4455. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:42, 6 March 2022 (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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize for the inconvenience. I didn't know before that it was okay to run two IDs from one IP address but now I know, I didn't receive any warning before blocking. I would like to work on Wikipedia. Please unblock this account. I will never give a chance to complain.

Decline reason:

So, to be clear, you thought there was nothing wrong with pretending to be two people and using both accounts to cast an identical vote? You thought that was a sign of honest behaviour?!? And you are complaining that, despite this obvious (to everyone else) dishonesty, you should have received a warning rather than a block? I'm stunned. Probably best we leave you blocked. Yamla (talk) 17:16, 6 March 2022 (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.

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sir, I don't mean that at all. I have been working on Wikipedia for 4 months and only from this account. Seeing me, my brother also got interested in contributing to Wikipedia. I created an account for him. He doesn't have a device so he can login with my device. A few days ago he voted on my own article ( which is nominated for deletion) yesterday. After that I was blocked because this guy is casting vote from his two accounts.I've had nearly a thousand contributions and 27 articles so far. I've worked hard to get this account up and running. If I stay blocked my hard work will be wasted. I will not allow such a complaint in future.I shall be very thankful to you for this regard.

Decline reason:

The only thing that strikes me about this convoluted request is that it seems like a new variation on "My little brother did it" ... instead of "he used my account when I left it logged in", it's "I created the account for him." Otherwise ... you now admit on top of your admissions in your previous request that you have a) created an account for someone else who b) uses your computer to log in since they don't have one of their own.

Honestly, after reading this I hope for your sake that you were socking, because that at least would have been more intelligent and show forethought and planning. Because in the event that you are telling the truth, you are so reckless in your personal computer security practices that we're better off blocking you indefinitely.

I would strongly suggest that if you consider making yet another request, you seriously rethink the roads you have taken so far. Because if there's another one just like this, as polite about it as you have been, I would strongly recommend the next admin not only deny it but revoke your talk page access when doing so as well since we really can't have this waste of administrator's time. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:30, 8 March 2022 (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.

Ak131001 (talk) 17:42, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Haroon Kadwani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Haroon Kadwani 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/Haroon Kadwani 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 05:51, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teri Raah Main moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Teri Raah Main, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. bonadea contributions talk 16:14, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bhag Amina Bhag

The article Bhag Amina Bhag has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This film appears to fail WP:NFILM. Should be deleted or moved back to draft until it can pass the notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 21:58, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bhag Amina Bhag for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bhag Amina Bhag 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/Bhag Amina Bhag 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.

DonaldD23 talk to me 23:09, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Teri Raah Main for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Teri Raah Main 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/Teri Raah Main 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.

Ravensfire (talk) 14:41, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Badnaseeb for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Badnaseeb 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/Badnaseeb 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.

Ravensfire (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sultan Ul Arfeen Siddiqui

The article Sultan Ul Arfeen Siddiqui has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG, not notable cleric - no claim of notability/coverage presented.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Tum Mujrim Ho

Hello, Ak131001. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tum Mujrim Ho".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:47, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ek Mohabbat Aur Sahi

Hello, Ak131001. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ek Mohabbat Aur Sahi, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Unblock

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello sir I am requesting to unblock after 6 months. At first I didn't understand much about the block and unblock mechanism. Then I have created 2 or 3 accounts to contribute to Wikipedia and contribute to Wikipedia by creating some articles. But after some time I got blocked due to sockpuppetry. My contributions and articles have been deleted from Wikipedia. A month ago when my account was blocked and my articles were deleted as before, then Ravensfire(talk) told me on my talk page that it is better to request for unblock the main account with a good reason than creating a new account. At that time I thought I would request for unblock and today I made the request.

Decline reason:

You haven't gone six months without editing. You haven't gone one day without editing. Confirmed block evasion as of today. You are now banned by the community as per WP:3X. Yamla (talk) 15:39, 13 September 2022 (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.

Concern regarding Draft:Dekh Tamasha-e-Roshni

Hello, Ak131001. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Dekh Tamasha-e-Roshni, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sir kindly unblock me. I want to work for Wikipedia community. Now I am aware of Wikipedia's sockpuppet policies and much more. Now I deserve a chance. Try unblocking me once. I will never give you a chance to complain. If I make any mistake in the future, I will be blocked forever. If you have any doubts about me you can ask to me and I will answer it.

Decline reason:

I would not normally decline an unblock request from an account that I have blocked, but am doing so in this case on procedural grounds - you are banned, not just blocked. The only way you would be eligible for unblocking would be via a discussion at WP:AN, which would have precisely zero chance of going in your favour after you have just been discovered operating yet another sock account. Go for six months without editing here at all through any account, then try again. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:20, 17 December 2022 (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.

To the reviewing admin, note this user was just caught with yet another sockpuppet account, Zimi09. That account caused a meaningful amount of trouble with copyright violations. --Yamla (talk) 13:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Girth Summit and Yamla Sir, I want to work with Wikipedia. I have learned a lot from my mistakes. I had previously made a request to unblock this account but that too was not accepted. I deserve a chance. Now I am very familiar with Wikipedia's policies. Please give at least one chance, I won't disappoint you. Ak131001 (talk) 14:57, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have a chance. WP:SO and WP:UNBAN. All you've done so far is to demonstrate how very, very clearly it would be a terrible idea to unblock you. Now, zero edits. Zero. Until 2023-06-17 at the absolute earliest. --Yamla (talk) 16:19, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla (talk) Up to six months can I edit through my IP address ? Ak131001 (talk) 17:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No - six months of no editing at all, and then you may request unblock. Your request will need to be copied across to WP:AN for review, because you are not blocked (WP:BLOCK), but banned (WP:CBAN) - no individual admin can unblock you at their own discretion, the community needs to come to a consensus to unban you. If your appeal is successful, only then may you continue contributing. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Badnaseeb for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Badnaseeb 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/Badnaseeb (2nd nomination) 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.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 22:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Yeh Na Thi Hamari Qismat

The article Yeh Na Thi Hamari Qismat has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to be notable, nothing found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2022

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 19:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I requested for unblock about 7 months ago but I was told not to make any edits for six months and then request to unblock. So I waited for seven months, now i am back please unblock me and give me a chance to work for wikipedia. Ak131001 (talk) 11:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. You are banned, not just blocked. See WP:UNBAN. Additionally, you evaded your ban as Confirmed sock, Maliknazir129, last month. That resets the six month timer. Yamla (talk) 11:47, 16 July 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.

Yamla (talk) Sir please check it again, this is not my account, I have not edited from the IP address for the last 7 months, so how and why will I edit wikipedia with the account? Ak131001 (talk) 12:16, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Begging the question is a fallacy. --Yamla (talk) 12:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla Sir, it is not like thay, you go and check that this account(Maliknazir129) was joined 11 months ago, but my last one sock was caught 7 months ago and I myself disclose that it is my account but this account is not mine. Ak131001 (talk) 12:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Girth Summit and Yamla Sir can you help me in this regard? . I shall be very thankful to you. Ak131001 (talk) 13:02, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to help you with. I found you evaded your ban. At no point have you followed the instructions in WP:UNBAN in any case, so there's nothing to discuss. --Yamla (talk) 13:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sir i am telling you that its not my account. Ak131001 (talk) 13:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I hear you. I don't believe you and in any case, it's not relevant unless and until you contest your ban, which you have not attempted yet. --Yamla (talk) 13:26, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understand anything. Even if I came after six months, you would have found another account for which you would accuse me of being his sock account. Ak131001 (talk) 14:14, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have waited for 6 months+. Last time, i requested for unblock after 6 months but my request was declined due to a sock account, that exactly didn't belongs to me. And again I waited for 6 months, niw i am requesting for unblock. I agreed that I have missed used my accounts in past. And I regret it.

After unblock, I will work on islamic and Pakistan articles and try to improve them along with others editors belings to WikiProject Pakistan and Islam. I shall be very great full to you.

If you have any query, kindly free to ask.

Decline reason:

According to our data, you are lying. You edited just a week ago using sockpuppet accounts Skt34 and Kkb091. Declined. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:41, 14 January 2024 (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.

Ak131001 (talk) 12:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not just blocked, you are banned. See WP:CBAN. I have Confirmed you have evaded your ban with Skt34. The technical data is entirely clear. You are not eligible for WP:SO. I'll leave your unblock request to another admin to review but I have to say, there's absolutely no chance it will be granted and frankly, this makes it extremely unlikely a request will be granted if you ever do go six months without evading your ban. --Yamla (talk) 12:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tumhare Husn Ke Naam for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tumhare Husn Ke Naam 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/Tumhare Husn Ke Naam 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.

—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Well, I have waited for 6 months+. Last time, i requested for unblock after 6 months but my request was declined due to a sock account. And again I waited for 6 months, now i am requesting for unblock. I agreed that I have missed used my accounts in past. And I regret it. * After unblock: I will work on islamic and Pakistan articles and try to improve them along with others editors belings to WikiProject Pakistan and Islam. I shall be very great full to you. Ak131001 (talk) 04:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. Again, you are banned, not just blocked. You must follow WP:UNBAN. As of 2024-07-24, there's no CU evidence of recent ban evasion. Yamla (talk) 20:29, 24 July 2024 (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.

Unblock request

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).

Ak131001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Well, I had requested for the unblock but administrator said you are not blocked but ban and you have to appeal for unban. Administrator declined my the request.

And then I appeal for unban on portal provided by the administrator (Appeal Link: [1]) , but they also declined request by mentioning the given reason (Reason: As you still have access to your talk page, and as there is no private information associated with your appeal, please post your unblock request to your user talk page for administrator review. You can follow the guide at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/)

In short, they say that you have access to your talk page, so you have to post your unblock request to your user talk page for administrator review.

So that's way i am here again with an another un ban request. As of 2024-07-24, there's no CU evidence of recent ban evasion against me as above mentioned by administrator Yamla (Talk)

After unblock: I will work on islamic and Pakistan articles and try to improve them along with others editors belings to WikiProject Pakistan and Islam. I shall be very great full to you. Ak131001 (talk) 09:39, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This request is unlikely to succeed, so it is not worth transferring it to a noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 21 August 2024 (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.

WP:UNBAN says "Post an appeal {{unblock}} template or comment there, by email or other off-site means such as the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS), and ask for it to be reposted to the appropriate discussion board. This is a voluntary act and should not be abused or used to excess." You've posted an appeal here, but this doesn't really have any chance of passing at the Administrators' noticeboard. If you rewrite the unblock request such that it complies with the guide to appealing blocks, someone can copy-paste it there, to be discussed by the community. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]