User talk:HistoryofBangladesh
HistoryofBangladesh, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi HistoryofBangladesh! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC) |
@SpacemanSpiff: @SheriffIsInTown: @RegentsPark:, I don't understand why you all find me so harmful. My edits are completely supported by sources. Why don't you cross check them? There are full citations with page numbers. I opened this account to improve the bibliography of some pages. You might think that my area of editing is single purpose, but it's not. Plenty of editors engage in just the history of their countries. Again, my edits are supported by sources. I do not represent any special interests, but I have time to build the coverage of my country that's why came.
You see all this harshness from your side has really impacted me personally, there are limits to harshness. I think its plain damn unfair. I've worked very hard, believe me, to improve Wikipedia based on credible sources. This is just not fair. This is not how things are in real life.
The initial sockpuppet block that was given was flawed. I did not use multiple accounts at the same time for disruptive use back then. I was initially blocked (that block was justified), but I did not use multiple accounts at the same time. You might find this amusing, but as a person in real life, I find it very painful and harsh. The least you can do is cross check my sources and restore my edits. I am sorry if any of engagements with you two seemed personal, but I have received tremendous, unjustified and falsified personal attacks myself. You people should go after the real POV-pushers, instead of me. I've made some mistakes with regard to dealing with editors, but nothing "super" extraordyinary.--HistoryofBangladesh (talk) 05:48, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
@Aditya Kabir:@Kmzayeem: @Vinegarymass911: @Nafsadh: look at what you've all done. for minor differences, this is what it has come down to. I understand Wikipedia policy and it will be probably be many years before I can be unblocked, but this is so unfair. In fact its a POV War against me, just because I tried to improve the country's coverage. @Sminthopsis84:, Wikipedia should stop playing around, seriously. This is not a joke. My work is supported by the sources and I've worked hard on them, and instead they are being reverted wholesale without any reason.--HistoryofBangladesh (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- If you want to be unblocked then stop creating sockpuppets and see WP:SO. ANy additional sockpuppets or disruptive activity will reset the clock. —SpacemanSpiff 06:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- the original block was flawed (it wasn't sockpuppetry per se, despite what few people claimed back then). the standard offer makes you wait for years essentially. i'm miffed that my hard work, supported by credible references, is being reversed just on policy grounds and without proper reason.--HistoryofBangladesh (talk) 06:14, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- I will withdraw the talk page access soon as you aren't interested in the standard offer or addressing the reasons for your block. —SpacemanSpiff 06:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- the original block was flawed (it wasn't sockpuppetry per se, despite what few people claimed back then). the standard offer makes you wait for years essentially. i'm miffed that my hard work, supported by credible references, is being reversed just on policy grounds and without proper reason.--HistoryofBangladesh (talk) 06:14, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Email to Bureaucrat mailing list
[edit]This is to advise you that your message has been received and no action will be taken on the part of bureaucrats. You were blocked by and admin, and you will need to work with administrators to be unblocked. Please see Wikipedia:Appealing a block for more details. Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- In response to your email to me, I'm not going to restore your talk page access as all you're doing is pointing fingers at other editors (here) and asking other editors to proxy for you (on other socks). However, I've removed Sheriff's post above, thereby negating your need to reply and I'm also asking SheriffIsInTown to not post here or on your other sock talk pages. —SpacemanSpiff 09:02, 4 October 2016 (UTC)