User talk:Armaanaziz

January 2014

Hello, I'm Mark Arsten. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Fail-silent system, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Armaanaziz, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hey, You are not allowed to copy picture the page Brahmanbaria, Bangladesh. Thats the official page for the city as you can see. If you love our city you can update our official page; we wont delete your sources. Thank You.

Page move

I dont think your page move [1] was a valid move. When there is a main use of a word, that topic should be at that word and not disambiguated. The major city is clearly the main use of the word and not the tiny village. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:22, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for WP:NCGN#Bangladesh

A convention for naming geographic locations in Bangladesh is proposed. You are invited to discuss. – nafSadh did say 01:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Geographic.location. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:37, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. De728631 (talk) 15:40, 18 December 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

My name Armaan Aziz. I don't using abusively multiple accounts. I have been working with integrity in wikipedia. Today I was very shocked to see this condition. Armaanaziz (talk) 20:06, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

WP:DUCK sockpuppetry. Your condition of being blocked remains stable. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:21, 25 December 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

My name Armaan Aziz. I don't using abusively multiple accounts. I have been working with integrity in wikipedia. Today I was very shocked to see this condition

Decline reason:

I've run a checkuser, and your account is Technically indistinguishable from Geographic.location (talk · contribs). In this context, I'm declining your request to be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 09:13, 26 December 2014 (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.

Please stop

putting random nonsense compiled from other people's edits onto talk pages at ANY wiki projects such as this jumble that you composed in large part from this edit of mine. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sminthopsis84, in a message but you main target me. Who is affected by the other side of me, the thing that is the wrong way, I realize now. Something is wrong, so i talk to you but you not understand me!! I realize now you trying to make me guilty. please do not try to personal attacks!! Truth is not pressed. Best wishes to you, in helping for your justice solidarity. Armaan Aziz (talk) 04:11, 01 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Something is wrong, please see

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, i'm Armaan Aziz, I do not using abusively multiple accounts. I have been working with integrity in wikipedia. I was very shocked to see this condition. I dont involve sock puppetry. Who this affected by the other side of me, the thing that is the wrong way, I realize now, someone have been guilty of trying to me and try to personal attacks!! Please try to understand and help me for truth justice. I am Bangladeshi. Best wishes to wikipedia.

Decline reason:

When (a) an account's editing looks so similar to that of certain other accounts as to make it look like the same person, (b) technical data says that the accounts are indistinguishable, and (c) much of the editing by the accounts is disruptive and unhelpful, there is no case for unblocking. When, on top of that, the blocked editor keeps wasting administrators' time by repeatedly posting unblock requests that add nothing to what earlier unblock requests said, there is a very good case for preventing more such time wasting by removing talk page access from the account. I considered doing that, but decided to leave it for now, and just warn you that talk page access is very likely to be removed if you post another unblock request that does not constructively deal with the reason for the block. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:44, 1 January 2015 (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.

Something is wrong, please see

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, i'm Armaan Aziz, I do not using abusively multiple accounts. I have been working with integrity in wikipedia. I was very shocked to see this condition. I dont involve sock puppetry. Who this affected by the other side of me, the thing that is the wrong way, I realize now, someone have been guilty of trying to me and try to personal attacks!! Please try to understand and help me for truth justice. I am Bangladeshi. Best wishes to wikipedia. 12:41 PM, November 21, 2015 (UTC)Armaanaziz (talk)

Decline reason:

A Checkuser has looked at the two accounts and said that they are 'technically indistinguishable'. To the rest of us, that means they are so closely the same that they can't be told from each other. Looking at the editing history, I would say that they were the same too. Peridon (talk) 13:38, 21 November 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please unblock me...., I realize now, someone have been guilty of trying to me and try to personal attacks!! Please try to understand and help me for truth justice. I am Bangladeshi. Please unblock me. Armaanaziz (talk) 10:46, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I believe that English may not be your first language, so I will give you one last chance. Your next unblock request must explain your relationship to Geographic.location, or you will be prevented from editing further on this page. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 11:21, 25 November 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please unblock me...., I realize now, someone have been guilty of trying to me and try to personal attacks!! Please try to understand and help me for truth justice. I am Bangladeshi. Please unblock me. Armaanaziz (talk) 05:13, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See previous decline. If your English is so poor that you cannot understand the simple directions you have been given multiple times, then you should not be editing the English language Wikipedia anyway (even without the socking problems). A number of admins have been very patient with you so far, but to prevent any further waste of time I have now revoked your ability to edit this Talk page - if you wish to appeal further, you will now need to use WP:UTRS. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:38, 26 December 2015 (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.

Speedy deletion nomination of Anailkota, Bangladesh

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Anailkota, Bangladesh, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
It covers a topic on which we already have an article - Shahbazpur Town, Bangladesh. (See section A10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Shahbazpur Town, Bangladesh, or to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

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 Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Worldbruce (talk) 22:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ashuganj City, Bangladesh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ashuganj City, Bangladesh 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/Ashuganj City, Bangladesh until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Worldbruce (talk) 06:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladeshi cities

Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladeshi cities, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladeshi cities and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladeshi cities during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ajpolino (talk) 01:13, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]