User talk:Faizan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
User Talk E-mail My part Toolbox Bookmarks Guestbook

Asia challenge[edit]

The Asian
10,000 Challenge

Improve/create any article on anywhere in Asia whenever you feel like it and list it!...

0.23%

Nomination for deletion of Template:East Pakistan[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:East Pakistan has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 20:10, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Unblock request[edit]

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Faizan (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribscreation logchange block settingsunblockfilter log)


Request reason:

Hi. I would like to bring this to attention that my account was hacked by an Australian user User:Towns Hill in 2017. I admit that my account security was insufficient and that my passwords were stolen and the ID was hijacked. I apologize to the Wikipedia community, This was my last edit on 4 July 2016. I have been too depressed due to the block in particular and life in general. I and Towns Hill are not the same individual and that can be seen with the difference of style in edits starting 2017. All the socks belonged to Towns Hill but since Towns Hill was associated with me, I had to get all the users as my sock puppets. I am a responsible user and that was evident by 5 years of my editing history. I never had socked nor I did this time, only the fact that Towns Hill hacked my account got me maligned. I know that does not clear me of SP, but I just wanted to tell it to the community. Nevertheless, I take full responsibility that my account was used inappropriately and against the Wikipedia policies. I assure the Wikipedia community that I have got everything back in control and have reset the password. I request you kindly for a second chance please. I assure you that this will not happen again and I will take care of it in the future. Please give me a second chance. Faizan (talk) 13:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but once an account has been compromised it can not be unblocked. For one thing, we have no way of telling if this is the original user talking to us now or the hacker. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

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.

@Bbb23:, Please reconsider! Faizan (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
How exactly did Towns Hill steal your password? Give us the full details. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Maybe he is telling the truth. I also recently received a failed log in attempt notification.  sami  talk 20:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
He could be telling the truth. But we need clarity on what is meant by "stealing" the password. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:46, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Indeed, there was a few months' break in edit history in 2016 but edits before and after the break are in the same style, concern the same topic and same articles and also have identically styled edit summaries (e.g., using - and + signs). The argument of "password stealing" does not hold IMHO. There were also other cases of sockuppetry confirmed by CU. — kashmiri TALK 15:43, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Not exactly. I have looked through the edit histories and found enough evidence to convince myself that the edits from March 2017 are Towns Hill's edits. I will be happy to provide it to an oversighter when it is time to do so.
The issue that Faizan needs to address here is to explain how Towns Hill managed to hijack his account. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Without going into too much detail of these user's edit histories and behavior which I can clearly see were different before July 2016 and after March 2017. The hacking claim by Faizan looks right to me. @Kautilya3: How can an aggrieved party (hacked user) tell, how they were hacked? Stealing the password is not the only way an account can be hacked, there are many ways of hacking!
@Boing! said Zebedee: User has already been blocked for eleven months. There are many folks who were given second chances even after long term abuse of multiple accounts such as in this case then why Faizan is not given a chance while he had a very clean four year history and over 40,000 edits. Wikipedia's blocking policies are not supposed to be punitive but in this case it is a double punishment, first his account was hacked and then he is punished with such a long block. We are not supposed to keep users blocked forever. Maybe he can be allowed to create another account or you can unblock his declared alternative account and his edits history can be transferred over to the other account that should address your concern of not blocking a previously compromised account. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
It's a compromised account, and compromised accounts are not unblocked unless convincing evidence can be provided that the original owner is back in control of it. If the original owner of the User:Faizan account wants to make an appeal and provide such evidence, or wants to ask about whether they can start afresh, they'll have to do that themselves - we can not accept a proxy request from you on their behalf. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Boing! said Zebedee: Sorry, you took it as a proxy request but it was rather an observational comment on this whole process same as everyone else such as Kautilya3, kashmiri and Samee above. It was more in relation to his already declined request and reconsideration to unblock based on previous request.
So, that everyone knows, what is considered a convincing evidence to prove that original owner is in control of the account? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:48, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
The ideal thing would be to use {{Committed identity}}, but that needs to be set up ahead of the compromise and so it's no use here. Other than that, it's really something that would need to be discussed between the blocked user and someone with access to private account details (like someone with WP:Checkuser access, or with the WP:Arbitration Committee). It might be something like communicating via the email system, then proving they had communicated with another editor via email prior to the compromise, and then confirming the account still has the original and genuine email address registered. I also vaguely remember a case where another trusted user confirmed they had seen the person in real life back in control of their account. Having said that, it is often impossible to prove the original owner is back in control, as they would need to be able to provide some verifiable information that the hacker could not provide. In such cases, it's down to negotiating a fresh start with a new account, but in this case I'd say that would have to be by discussion with a Checkuser (eg the blocking admin) or the Arbitration Committee, as it is a Checkuser block that a non-Checkuser admin is not allowed to overturn. As I say, it would all have to start with a request from the account's owner. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Operation Zarb-e-Azb[edit]

Operation Zarb-e-Azb, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. I know you are blocked, but there are options for you to get unblocked or make a fresh start. I don't think this article will retain its status without your help so I hope you avail yourself of one of these options AIRcorn (talk) 05:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Remembering Faizan[edit]

Rest in peace Faizan :'(

I learnt it from a reliable source about his death. Faizan was a worthy member of our WikiProject Pakistan. He was suffering from chronic illness for the last two years and breathed his last on 3rd June. Unfortunately, his account was hacked last year and subsequently blocked by a CheckUser. While he might not be remembered by the Wikipedia community for his contributions, the WikiProject Pakistan editors would certainly miss him. Rest in peace.

 samee  converse  03:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Can you provide some details about the concerning reliable source as soon as possible? Lorstaking (talk) 04:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
His family.  samee  converse  04:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
How his family contacted you? You haven't provided any verifiable evidence. Faizan had been already told that if his "account has been compromised it can not be unblocked". It was not really going hurt him if someone tags his page as "deceased Wikipedian" after being the first person on his talk page supporting his unconvincing theory that the account was hacked. Why it took him months to come up with such unconvincing theory? He had many warnings and general notifications on his talk page before he was blocked. It is doubtful that he would wake up only after he was notified about the block. Sorry, but you have to provide evidence that can be verified per the policy. Lorstaking (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
I won't breach his privacy by producing all details on a public forum. The news about his death is authentic and if an uninvolved admin asks for, I'd provide 'evidence' privately.  samee  converse  06:02, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Definitely, he was an asset to Wikipedia Project Pakistan. Unfortunate things and mishaps can happen with every one of us. I wish his Wikipedia streak did not end like it did and more importantly his life did not end the way it did. He was one of the very few users who awarded me a barnstar which I will cherish forever. Remembering you in my prayers. Thank you! Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 04:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • My condolences to all the friends and well-wishers. I haven't had a great deal of interaction with Faizan, but whatever I had was reasonably calm and peaceful. He was a nice man. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:38, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I join in remembering him. He was one of those rare editors from Pakistan who rose above sectarian and political conflicts. We agreed on many things, disagreed on some. I still recall the shock when I first saw he was blocked indefinitely, as his contributions were very valuable to the project. My sincere condolences to his friends and family. — kashmīrī TALK 11:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • My condolences. He will be remembered for his outstanding work on promoting many articles to GA, and high quality contributions to DYK, ITN, and article creations. A sad occasion for the Pakistani community here. The best way to remember his contributions indeed would be to continue his great work on content creation. Rest well, and rest in peace. Mar4d (talk) 14:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)