User talk:Sameeerrr

Welcome!

Hi Sameeerrr! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No offense, but I find it interesting, or maybe a bit suspicious, that a newbie like you just joined WP and is already participating in AfDs. Anyways, happy editing! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Saqib, being a writer in my personal life, from a reviewers perspective it's quite easy to look and establish an opinion about an article for me. Definitely things here at Wikipedia are different therefore I'm not engaging in all the AfD's but the ones where I feel there are clear WP: Notability issues. Indian Television is my area of interest and I did nominate an article from there, Bhagyavidhaata as clearly it doesn't meet Wikipedia standards of a notable show. Thank you for your help! Sameeerrr (talk) 16:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if it's safe to ask, but is this your first account, or have you been editing before? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:00, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is my first experience having a Wikipedia account. Sameeerrr (talk) 17:02, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib can I not participate into AfDs? Sameeerrr (talk) 17:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, then. Happy editing! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to ', a topic designated as contentious'. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look - I posted this here because I've observed you adding sources that are clearly unreliable as citations on topics related to Pakistan. It's important to remember that Pakistan-related topics fall under WP:CTOPICS and editing in this area should be approached with care. If you have concerns about why I'm labeling those sources as unreliable, please feel free to discuss them at WP:RSN. However, I kindly ask that you refrain from adding such references to articles. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hina Khan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tollywood. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing your comment at WP:Articles for deletion/Sachal Afzal

Hi Sameeerrr, please see WP:TALK#REPLIED. After someone has responded to your comment, you should not make substantial changes to it so I reverted your change. Correcting typos and the like is fine, though. S0091 (talk) 16:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I had no idea about this. Sorry. Sameeerrr (talk) 18:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed you did not know. You can, of course, can add additional comments but I will caution against saying things like your Google search found several sources. You need to present them (i.e. WP:THREE) and ensure they meet all the WP:GNG criteria. If you list several and they are mostly poor, editors are not going to take the time to go through all of them. S0091 (talk) 18:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:ANASKHAN777 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ANASKHAN777. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 12:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

Hey, Provide the as to I'm a WP:SP. Merely, on the basis of edits I have been blocked. I have actively been engaged in editing Wikipedia. I want to contest my block as there's no similarity between me and the account I have been linked with. I wonder this place is nothing but a monopoly of certain administrators who block the users when they're not inline with their required motives. WEIRD!

Decline reason:

This request is almost incoherent. Regardless, I concur with the findings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ANASKHAN777. Yamla (talk) 12:52, 18 May 2024 (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.

I wonder why you guys have blocked my account when there's no evidence as such. This is how it works here? Like you did with User:Qwef1234?