User talk:Chouudry waqss ranjha

February 2020
Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Rohi (Pakistan) have been undone because they 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 help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 13:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

December 2020
Someone else will review your request, but it should be made on this page per the instructions above. 331dot (talk) 15:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

And I would not describe one edit in February as "actively involved". 331dot (talk) 11:58, 9 December 2020 (UTC)


 * So it was just a coincidence that all of that happened mere hours after another editor was blocked for doing the same thing? 331dot (talk) 13:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)


 * It must be a coincidence. I have told you that I knew that other editors are also being blocked from editing the page. I had bo idea that if I will be blocked for raising flag on COIN — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chouudry waqss ranjha (talk • contribs)
 * You only need one open request, not every comment needs to be an unblock request. 331dot (talk) 13:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I got it, please accept my appeal, sir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chouudry waqss ranjha (talk • contribs)
 * Someone else will review your appeal, but I do not believe it was a coincidence. 331dot (talk) 14:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * it's a truly unjust and biased way of making a verdict. I tried my best to be truthful on my end and promised the administration that I will be a constructive editor of Wiki in the future. The only reason I see for the blockage of my account is that the admin panel is full of atheists and us believers can't contradict their thoughts of life. Now I know why Wiki is not considered authentic. I wonder how many accounts you people block only to support your personal believes. Good day, Extremely disappointing

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. 331dot (talk) 19:41, 16 December 2020 (UTC) I have removed your talk page access due to your unfounded attacks. You don't know the religion of the people on the other end of the computer, (I don't know yours) and religion is no part of the reason that you were blocked. Should you choose to stop these unfounded attacks and adopt a more collaborative and inclusive attitude, you may request unblock as described above. Good day. 331dot (talk) 19:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And we already know that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 16 December 2020 (UTC)