User talk:أسامة بن عبد الله وليد

Nomination of Ajit Singh Bhati for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ajit Singh Bhati 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/Ajit Singh Bhati 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.

DreamRimmer (talk) 17:00, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @DreamRimmer thank you for your contribution and deep concerns about this issue.

• I have made some improvement and I have putt many references from independent sources/ Reliable sources written by various different writers please check the article pages that you have taged for deletions including Dargahi Singh Bhati, Shambhujit Singh Bhati, and Ajit Singh Bhati.

I think these articles do not meet the criteria for deletion, as many reliable sources have already been added.

أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 18:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

please stop log out edits as you're doing at Chalukiya clan and Chalukiya pages by using this IP أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 19:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mabel Tung (June 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Asilvering was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mabel Tung and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

asilvering (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, أسامة بن عبد الله وليد! Having an article draft 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! asilvering (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

As the issue already solved by redirect the page to it's new destination. Good Faith

July 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for resumed disruptive editing including blanking an article being discussed at AFD, a cut-n-paste move of its contents, edit-warring to preserve the improper page-move, and baseless accusations of sockpuppetry. And all this after you were given rope with just a week-long block for disruption of another AFD by using multiple logged out IPs and for CU-confirmed sock-puppetry..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Abecedare (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare please unblock me because you block me week ago for log out edits now the same Situation other users conduct the same thing by log out and doing log out edits instead of blocking them you blocked me why?. أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 19:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Please see the explanation in the above notice. I have blocked you for the resumed disruption soon after your previous block expired, which indicates that your conduct is unlikely to change if allowed back after another short block. And there is no indication that DreamRimmer and the IP are linked, except that the latter was (properly) cleaning up after you after your attempt to bypass the AFD discussion. Behavioral evidence suggests that they are otherwise unconnected and therefore no action is warranted against either of them. Abecedare (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare but I copy-paste content on my own created pages, not someone else's. Yes, I made a mistake one week ago and faced the one-week block. You asked Yamla to increase the block duration, but he or she said no need, but now you never block the user. I request to check the user.Even if I filed a case against CheckUser for this act you used against me, This is not fair. I always respect your and other administrators decisions, but even you blocked me. For copying and pasting text from one page to another, I use my own created pages and content. I think you did this because you were biassed; you never blocked opposite components, even though he did the same thing, log out edits. أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

You are welcome to appeal the block by following the process in the notice but, again, note that I didn't block you for a mere cut-n-paste move but for disrupting an ongoing AFD by that move and edit-warring over it even after the error had been pointed to you. Abecedare (talk) 20:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare I do understand you blocked me even one week ago just for commiting same action using log out edits and you asked Yamla to increase my block time just because I applied for unblock Request I have seen the activity and the timeline when you became and Administrator by the votes or request of more then 5 7 users to became administrator before that you were doing such actions without having the Administrator right to bee honest if you're a blevier just look at your position and actions you're going being biased one day God will make his justice and when you will relies you made biased and unjusice to myself. You block me for personal reasons even you are involved with some Rajput users they're doing such activities even they are sending you mails like @RePacker&Tracker(A Rajput female). This is totally biased and unjusice but God Always gave the same in return what we did we have to face in return by GOd. أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare well I said all what I faced because of You and I can only asked for the justice to only God and I know how Unblock and All this work and influenced by other Users those are connected with the administrator who blocked you will definitely not unblock you and will not commit their injustice or mistake. أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 20:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Segregation

@User:Sutyarashi what do you think about these pages both I have created and the User:DreamRimmer first prod deletions then he log out and did the same task using log out edits trick by This IP 2A00:23EE:1CB8:5F8B:841:7BFF:FE4A:5C58 أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Unblock Request

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (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 make sure I will not commit such mistakes again. I made God a promise and warmly apologised for my mistakes. Please. I made a promise that I would not copy and paste content from the prod deletion page to another page and would also not make more references to my own published articles. I make sure in all my senses that I will never make such mistakes again. If I will be unblocking. One week ago, I was blocked for log-out edits and casting a vote at the AFD discussion. I apologised and promised not to do anything similar again. Now again, the same administrator blocked me by giving the Reason that I influenced or made a mistake on a page that was published by myself and was pushed for deletion. I reverted edits there, then made another new page and moved some content from one page to another; both pages and content were my own creations. The mistakes I committed were reverting and removing content from the page and transferring it to another page that was also created by myself. I just made a redirect from the product deletion page. I think the Administrator who blocked me even after one week is biassed; he blocked me for outward edits, but when I filed a case for CheckUser about one ID and IP, he also considered this action against me to block me. I think this shouldn't be considered blocking time. Please consider my apology. I will refrain from such activities if you block me. I will never do the same things again. The reason for blocking by @Abecedare was given as "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for resumed disruptive editing including blanking an article being discussed at AFD, a cut-n-paste move of its contents and edit-warring to preserve the improper page-move".Please, Please, Please! Consider my apology as giving me one last chance. I will never commit such mistakes again and will always refrain myself from making the same mistakes. With all my heart, I make sure that I will consider this last chance as an opportunity and will never again commit mistakes.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2='''Please unblock me. I make sure I will not commit such mistakes again. I made God a promise and warmly apologised for my mistakes. Please'''. I made a promise that I would not copy and paste content from the prod deletion page to another page and would also not make more references to my own published articles. I make sure in all my senses that I will never make such mistakes again. If I will be unblocking. One week ago, I was blocked for log-out edits and casting a vote at the AFD discussion. I apologised and promised not to do anything similar again. Now again, the same administrator blocked me by giving the Reason that I influenced or made a mistake on a page that was published by myself and was pushed for deletion. I reverted edits there, then made another new page and moved some content from one page to another; both pages and content were my own creations. The mistakes I committed were reverting and removing content from the page and transferring it to another page that was also created by myself. I just made a redirect from the product deletion page. I think the Administrator who blocked me even after one week is biassed; he blocked me for outward edits, but when I filed a case for CheckUser about one ID and IP, he also considered this action against me to block me. I think this shouldn't be considered blocking time. Please consider my apology. I will refrain from such activities if you block me. I will never do the same things again. The reason for blocking by @Abecedare was given as "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for resumed disruptive editing including blanking an article being discussed at AFD, a cut-n-paste move of its contents and edit-warring to preserve the improper page-move".'''Please, Please, Please! Consider my apology as giving me one last chance. I will never commit such mistakes again and will always refrain myself from making the same mistakes. With all my heart, I make sure that I will consider this last chance as an opportunity and will never again commit mistakes'''. <span data-dtsignatureforswitching="1"></span> |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1='''Please unblock me. I make sure I will not commit such mistakes again. I made God a promise and warmly apologised for my mistakes. Please'''. I made a promise that I would not copy and paste content from the prod deletion page to another page and would also not make more references to my own published articles. I make sure in all my senses that I will never make such mistakes again. If I will be unblocking. One week ago, I was blocked for log-out edits and casting a vote at the AFD discussion. I apologised and promised not to do anything similar again. Now again, the same administrator blocked me by giving the Reason that I influenced or made a mistake on a page that was published by myself and was pushed for deletion. I reverted edits there, then made another new page and moved some content from one page to another; both pages and content were my own creations. The mistakes I committed were reverting and removing content from the page and transferring it to another page that was also created by myself. I just made a redirect from the product deletion page. I think the Administrator who blocked me even after one week is biassed; he blocked me for outward edits, but when I filed a case for CheckUser about one ID and IP, he also considered this action against me to block me. I think this shouldn't be considered blocking time. Please consider my apology. I will refrain from such activities if you block me. I will never do the same things again. The reason for blocking by @Abecedare was given as "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for resumed disruptive editing including blanking an article being discussed at AFD, a cut-n-paste move of its contents and edit-warring to preserve the improper page-move".'''Please, Please, Please! Consider my apology as giving me one last chance. I will never commit such mistakes again and will always refrain myself from making the same mistakes. With all my heart, I make sure that I will consider this last chance as an opportunity and will never again commit mistakes'''. <span data-dtsignatureforswitching="1"></span> |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1='''Please unblock me. I make sure I will not commit such mistakes again. I made God a promise and warmly apologised for my mistakes. Please'''. I made a promise that I would not copy and paste content from the prod deletion page to another page and would also not make more references to my own published articles. I make sure in all my senses that I will never make such mistakes again. If I will be unblocking. One week ago, I was blocked for log-out edits and casting a vote at the AFD discussion. I apologised and promised not to do anything similar again. Now again, the same administrator blocked me by giving the Reason that I influenced or made a mistake on a page that was published by myself and was pushed for deletion. I reverted edits there, then made another new page and moved some content from one page to another; both pages and content were my own creations. The mistakes I committed were reverting and removing content from the page and transferring it to another page that was also created by myself. I just made a redirect from the product deletion page. I think the Administrator who blocked me even after one week is biassed; he blocked me for outward edits, but when I filed a case for CheckUser about one ID and IP, he also considered this action against me to block me. I think this shouldn't be considered blocking time. Please consider my apology. I will refrain from such activities if you block me. I will never do the same things again. The reason for blocking by @Abecedare was given as "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for resumed disruptive editing including blanking an article being discussed at AFD, a cut-n-paste move of its contents and edit-warring to preserve the improper page-move".'''Please, Please, Please! Consider my apology as giving me one last chance. I will never commit such mistakes again and will always refrain myself from making the same mistakes. With all my heart, I make sure that I will consider this last chance as an opportunity and will never again commit mistakes'''. <span data-dtsignatureforswitching="1"></span> |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

أسامة بن عبد الله وليد (talk) 21:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)