User talk:BengaliHindu/Archive 29

Caution suggested at Ahmed Hassan Imran

Please see the result of this complaint about your edits: WP:AN3#User:MehulWB and User:BengaliHindu reported by User:Amortias (Result: Protected), a report which I closed. Because of the WP:BLP and copyright violation issues, I recommend caution before reverting again. One of your reverts is here. You can use the article talk page or WP:BLP/N to discuss your further concerns. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:51, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Recent block

My SPI case got you blocked but I have nothing personal with you. I disagreed with your points on Ahmed Hassan Imran page and tried my best to make it understand to you. You have also reported me to the admins. But since, you're an experienced editor thus there are lot to learn from you and I even learnt many things on Wikipedia form you but if you're offended anyhow then I humbly apologies to you and hopefully we can again contribute together. MehulWB (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Most welcome. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Dear Blocking Admin, I request you to reconsider your decision for blocking me for sockpuppetry. I have only one account and no history of previous blocks from sockpuppetry or anything. BengaliHindu (talk) 07:47, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Unblock is unnecessary as the block has expired. — Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 29 October 2014 (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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Note

I have raised this issue with Salvio giuliano here and he appears to be away.If you want I can take it up in WP:ANI.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. BengaliHindu (talk) 08:30, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but, unfortunately, I was not really the person to contact; rather, it should have been the blocking admin, i.e. Berean Hunter; as I stated on ANI, I merely wrote that, technically speaking, it was possible the three accounts were operated by the same person, which is not particularly conclusive without behavioural evidence. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I have notified Berean Hunter also .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Pharaoh of the Wizards and Berean Hunter, please refer to [1]. It might be helpful while you are discussing about the behaviour of MehulWB. In the very first comment the user mentions about "we" and "us", which implies a group. So why not explore the possibility of Nirmalya1234 being a sock of MehulWB? How come MehulWB who is apparently new to Wikipedia, have so much knowledge on WP:SOCK and opens up an SPI case? Is it very normal behaviour? Isn't it possible that the user opened up the sock Nirmalya1234 to make the SPI case look solid? Why not investigate that aspect as well? BengaliHindu (talk) 17:40, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

If there is any likelihood that editor is the puppetmaster then this person is very likely someone that you have had problems with in the past. Any long conflicts or anyone that you have gotten banned? I was honestly more expecting that Nirmaya1234 simply wasn't a sock at all though.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 03:38, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Unblock Request raised in WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. I have raised your block in WP:ANI ,if you want to copy paste any text there.I will do it.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you once again. I'm waiting for comment from the blocking admin. BengaliHindu (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Berean Hunter, your logic of behavioural evidence is not very convincing. Ahmed Hassan Imran is a controversial character in India. During September 2014, he was front page news in Indian and Bangladeshi newspapers. Its not very unlikely that edits will increase during that time. If someone creates a new user account Nirmalya1234 and edits something similar to an existing user does that make the user a sockpuppet? Abhijit4law made a COPYVIO at the same time. Why that user has to be a sockpuppet? I checked that user's contribution history just now. His first edit was in July and he made some edits on some different topic, totally unrelated. Another user, Malapati, made an edit after one year out of nowhere, but the user was not judged to be a sockpuppet. Weird logic! In the end its your decision and I'm the unfortunate victim. BengaliHindu (talk) 15:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

When you are unblocked you should take this to ARBCOM and try to get them to remove this block log from your account and the banners that say those other users are your sock removed.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 04:27, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Serialjoepsycho, thank you for the kind suggestion. Yes I'll have to fight it. Its a stigma. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

• Ya, take it to ARBCOM or anywhere, if you are confident you were not guilty. I'll be there. --Tito☸Dutta 21:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Opened a request in ARCOM. Here [2]. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:00, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

hello

Probably best not to talk in the archive. Well if they happen to be Nickaang it shouldn't be hard to prove. Melhu has a very distinctive way of talking.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 06:42, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@-Serialjoepsycho- Sorry, I didn't know where to make this comment. BengaliHindu (talk) 06:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

It would probably be best to mention it in the open ARBCOM case. But if you you think that Nickaang may be this individual you might want to look for more behavioral evidence. Look at you for a moment. You have a very distinct way of talking. In the ARbCOM you mentioned that the ADMIN who banned you adjudicated you. You have some peculiarities in your speech. I understand them all and you do speak properly but generally I don't hear people talking like you. Now in the few discussions that Mehlu had with you they also spoke rather uniquely. While they seem proficient in English it seems to be a second language for them. Read the section above this one for instance. "I have nothing personal with you." or "tried my best to make it understand to you." ECT ECT ECT. If they are Nickaang then you should find that Nickaang has spoken in similar broken English.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 08:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker of English. Indian English, maybe quite different from that in West, both in written and spoken forms. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:30, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

The point about you is that you speak unique. If you personally tried to use a sock the way you talk might give you away. If Melhu is Nickaang then if you go back to one of the times that Nickaang talked on a talk page you should find a similar pattern of speech. If you find a similar pattern of speech then that is evidence.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 20:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I got your point. It is painstaking work. It will take time. Meanwhile edit war and possible sockpuppetry is still going on. Please have a look [3]. BengaliHindu (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

You should stay away from the article if you are going to make accusations like the ones you recently did on that articles talk page. That will just look like sour grapes.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration declined

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Feel free to see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee, → Call me Hahc21 15:36, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Hahc21: Thank you for the update. However, I feel that I'm victim of circumstances. Had the admins taken note of User:MehulWB's suspicious activities earlier probably I would not have been blocked. BengaliHindu (talk) 16:21, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Ahmed Hassan Imran

MonaPisser and MehulWB were both banned as socks based off CU evidence. None the less I think we should continue discussing the the article piece by piece. Even though they are socks I can say that there was one minor issue found with the article.

By the way I wasn't sure if you were still looking at your sock block. I just recently found that there was a Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/India Against Corruption sock-meatfarm. Excluding monapisser have you had any problems with those editors?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 21:31, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Serialjoepsycho: Thank you for pointing out, but I didn't have any issues with the users mentioned in Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/India Against Corruption sock-meatfarm or [4] at any point of time.

I'd definitely like to contribute towards rebuilding the article. But I'm so upset about the block that I haven't made any mainspace edit in Wikipedia after the block. I also feel bad for the other two users who are indefinitely blocked as sockpuppets of me. BengaliHindu (talk) 14:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't be distraught over them getting banned. It's very likely they were socks. The question is who's. I would have personally liked better evidence. But my main doubt from the available evidence has been they weren't yours.I actually wonder if they may be Mehul's. They uncovered like 10 or so.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 22:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

BNA access

Hello, BengaliHindu. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 00:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sree Angan massacre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Faridpur. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Banglastan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Banglastan 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/Banglastan 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. Rahat (Message) 17:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Islamism in Bangladesh

A tag has been placed on Template:Islamism in Bangladesh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an unambiguous misrepresentation of established policy.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. -AsceticRosé 01:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rape jihad

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 Rape jihad, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Rahat (Message) 07:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bongal Kheda

The article Bongal Kheda has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Misinterpretation of references and full of original research. According to this encyclopedia source the movement was not against the Hindus, but against all Bengali people. Bongal means a foreigner (in Assam).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Rahat (Message) 07:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Malaun for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Malaun 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/Malaun 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. Rahat (Message) 14:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Deda (ethnic slur)

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Deda (ethnic slur) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – nafSadh did say 00:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bongal Kheda

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 Bongal Kheda requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – nafSadh did say 00:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Rape jihad for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rape jihad 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/Rape jihad 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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Rudra Pratap Chattopadhyaya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rudra Pratap Chattopadhyaya 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/Rudra Pratap Chattopadhyaya 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. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 17:12, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of 2008 Murshidabad beheading for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2008 Murshidabad beheading 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/2008 Murshidabad beheading (2nd nomination) 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. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hindusthan National Guard

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 Hindusthan National Guard requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Islamism in Bangladesh

Template:Islamism in Bangladesh has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 21:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of CAAMB

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 CAAMB requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 21:57, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Surya Kumar Bose

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 Surya Kumar Bose requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cover page of Insurgency of Titu Meer.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cover page of Insurgency of Titu Meer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Rape jihad for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rape jihad 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/Rape jihad (2nd nomination) 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC)