User talk:Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar

Welcome!
Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.
 * Article development
 * Standard layout
 * Lead section
 * The perfect article
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ASUKITE 16:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Anti-Bengali sentiment moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Anti-Bengali sentiment. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources and Needs context / history or other encyclopedic coverage or it's just a definition (ineligible per WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ASUKITE 15:39, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Fatua moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Fatua. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources and needs encyclopedic coverage (history, usage, etc) beyond the definition or this fails WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ASUKITE 16:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mufti Mansurul Haque


A tag has been placed on Mufti Mansurul Haque 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 real person or group of people that does not credibly 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 "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 deleted 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. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 03:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

May 2023
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Mufti Mansurul Haque—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 06:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar! Your additions to Mufti Mansurul Haque have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Donating copyrighted materials.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Mansurul Haque moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Mansurul Haque, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel 5969  TT me 10:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

National varieties of English; minor edits
Hello. In a recent edit to the page Ziaur Rahman, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom, use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk.

Also, you recently marked an edit as minor that was not. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Changing "Islamist" to "conservative", for example, is not a minor edit. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:10, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Bengali genocide denial
Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bengali genocide denial, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Anti-Bengali sentiment
Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Anti-Bengali sentiment, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Mansurul Haque
Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mansurul Haque, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:01, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Fatua
Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fatua, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Bengali genocide denial


Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bengali genocide denial".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Anti-Bengali sentiment


Hello, Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Anti-Bengali sentiment".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

April 2024
Your edit to Draft:Praveen Sethupathy has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Deborah Haarsma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bethel University. 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) 05:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hmm... strange. I have looked into the article, and it seems that I haven't used any disambiguation links. The link I put directly leads to the article on Bethel University at Minnesota. Thanks for reminding me regardless. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 06:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Please stop adding categories based on non-WP:DEFINING characteristics
Hey there,

I noticed that you've been adding a lot of categories such Category:Science activists, Category:Critics of atheism, and Category:Theistic evolutionists to various people where the articles don't actually discuss those topics. Please only add categories based on notable characteristics for individuals, we generally shouldn't categorize people based merely on what opinions they hold; for example, if every theist who supported the theory of evolution was put in Category:Theistic evolutionists, the category would become much less useful for people looking specifically for *advocates* of that position. Psychastes (talk) 16:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The main issue with your comment is that the list already contains such people who were or are merely just theistic evolutionists. Additionally, I would like to know which theistic evolutionists are not notable. Because majority of whom I added were in fact notable people. Additionally, the same thing can be said about literally everyone in science activists category. The people I added like Kenneth R. Miller are bigger advocates and activists of science than Etienne Vermeersch. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 16:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Additionally, majority of the people I categorized as Critics of atheism are or were notable like: Rene Descartes, Ibn Khaldun, etc. These people are or were philosophers of religion and have made notable criticism of atheism. Most of the people I categorized were as notable as the others already categorized as critics of atheism by others. Please, specify which of these categorized people should not be included in the category? Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Rene Descartes and Ibn Khaldun are both notable people, but they were not notable as critics of atheism. Please read WP:DEFINING. Psychastes (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * They were notable critics of atheism and they were as notable as most other people in the Category: Critics of atheism. As I said, both of them were philosophers of religion. Both of them went on debates against atheists and skeptics (Khaldun didn't debate against any atheists, but he debated against those who were skeptical of God's existence and he criticized atheism in those debates). Both made notable arguments for the existence of God and both criticized the belief that God doesn't exist. Additionally, it is to be noted that amount of notability varies between categories. For example, Bruce Lee is categorized as an American atheist. But, he wasn't notable for it at all. He only commented once on the existence of God in an interview when he was questioned about it where he said that he doesn't believe in any Gods. But when it comes to people's personal identity and background, the mere existence of the information is enough. The people I categorized as critics of atheism criticized atheism enough to get on the list. You can't compare these two categories with other categories such as Islamic scholars, scientists, philosophers, etc. which require much more notability to be categorized. Also, both American atheists and critics of atheism are incomparable too. The ones whom I added in the list were notable enough. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * you seem to have things backwards - if you can find examples of other people who are incorrectly categorized, you should remove them, not hold them up as arguments for your position. I agree that Bruce Lee should not be categorized under American atheists. Psychastes (talk) 17:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, I would disagree with your statements about Bruce Lee. But whatever. Let's say neither of us make any decisions and let the consensus decide it. The Category: Science activists itself makes no sense. There are already other categories where these people may suit. Before I categorized a lot of people as science activists, majority of the people categorized were straight up anti-religious and anti-theistic people like Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennet, Sam Harris, etc. Franciso J. Ayala, Kenneth R. Miller, Francis Collins, and plenty of other theistic scientists are notable defenders of evolution theory and science in general. Yet, the only ones who made it to the list were people like Michael Shermer, Euginie Scott, etc. Irony here is that both Ayala and Scott also worked together in the same organization. Majority of the people were mere skeptics who were not really that notable outside the skeptics circle. (It doesn't take much time to understand that the category was made by anti-religious atheists for purely promotional reasons) I only added those people to bring balance. If I make any kinds of edits to these articles, they almost instantly get reverted. (For example, try removing the Category: British former Muslims from the Zain Malik article, trust me, it'll instantly get reverted within a few moments and mentioning that rule won't do anything) I tried removing such categories once from articles, but they instantly get removed. So, I started agreeing with them that those people were notable enough to be categorized and I simply just started adding other people who were as notable as those people. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It doesn't take much time to understand that the category was made by anti-religious atheists for purely promotional reasons
 * You may want to look at WP:AGF because directly admitting that you are not doing so will not do you any favors Psychastes (talk) 17:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ? Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * But I have good faith. As I said, I was only trying to bring balance. The people I added were as notable as them. I do not hold any grudges against atheists. I only have issues with heavy under representation of theistic and religious scientists and science advocates who are not mentioned much. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I was trying to say that the people who made that category and those who put most of those people in those categories lacked good faith. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 18:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is to be noted that the people who argued against my edits (where I removed such categories due to lack of notability) were big wikipedians with a lot of experience and privileges. So, I didn't argue against them. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 17:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * so to be clear, you're saying that you *understand* that the categories you're adding are inappropriate, but because other people do the same thing, you felt entitled to also do so? Psychastes (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * More specifically, I once thought that they were inappropriate, but looking at how things work made me think I was wrong. Asaduzzaman Khan Shahriar (talk) 18:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)