User talk:F2416

September 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Sylhet has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Sylhet was changed by F2416 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.868413 on 2016-09-10T23:55:23+00:00.

Disambiguation link notification for September 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Mughal conquest of Chittagong
 * added links pointing to Asylum, Batavia and Arakan


 * Bengal Subah
 * added links pointing to Ghazi and Mir Jumla


 * Chittagong
 * added a link pointing to Arakan


 * Sylhet
 * added a link pointing to Indo-Aryan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 03:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thank you, very much appreciated.--F2416 (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

, You're a longstanding editor. I don't want to cause any inconvenience, but after my block, one editor simply deleted two articles, Kingdom of Bhati and Mughal conquest of Chittagong, on uncontroversial policy grounds. Can you take responsibility for those two pages please and requested them to undeleted? The articles had many reliable sources and extensive citations. Plus they are important to the coverage of regional history. From what I understand this is allowed if a long standing editor takes responsibility for articles which were deleted uncontroversially.--F2416 (talk) 13:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

just to add, the articles have full citations. there are page numbers for most of the books referenced. they can easily can be crosschecked online. it's baffling to see so much harsh prejudice among some people who claim source misrepresentation!--F2416 (talk) 16:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

he just deleted Bengali Muslim architecture, which again was reviewed and very properly sourced.

please help. you improve Bangladesh-related articles a lot. my original sock ban was flawed because there was no use of multiple accounts at the same time for disruptive purposes. but i'm not sure how to get the message across. these articles are credibly sourced and are important subjects. why is it taboo for any Bangladeshi history to be covered on Wikipedia? This is absurd.--F2416 (talk) 11:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You are now disruptively asking editors in good standing to WP:PROXYING for you and for that reason talk page access here has been remvoed, if this continues even a little bit it'll be removed for all the disruptive socks. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  12:05, 3 October 2016 (UTC)