User talk:Saudahmed97

Speedy deletion nomination of Vozax


A tag has been placed on Vozax requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the importance of the subject,. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Vozax. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's . Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Vozax
- SDPatrolBot (talk) 12:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear SDPatrolBot, I request you not to Delete Vozax, however, you may change its text. --Saudahmed97 (talk) 12:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Vozax
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Vozax. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's . Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 12:15, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

The article Vozax has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Musalimaam
Musalimaam? Are you sure? The last letter ن is a nun. And Arabic? Shouldn't that be Persian? See مسلمان in Wiktionary. --Lambiam 22:16, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh ,Sorry You are right it would end with nun, I have corrected it now! It was my Keyboard Mistyping Still I am very good in Urdu terms.--Saudahmed97 (talk) 10:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Darwaza (Urdu)


The article Darwaza (Urdu) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * WP:NOTDICT

While all 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 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 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. Toddst1 (talk) 14:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Muslim. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Toddst1 (talk) 14:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I didn't understand what do you mean by Edit War?--Saudahmed97 (talk) 15:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

April 2012
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at United Mobile ‎, you may be blocked from editing. ''I realise that this was some time ago, but no one seems to have warned you about this. What was particularly bad was that it meant a major change in the subject of the article.'' Dougweller (talk) 17:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Abbas Hussain.png
Thanks for uploading File:Abbas Hussain.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tahir Ul Qadri's banner for March.png
Thanks for uploading File:Tahir Ul Qadri's banner for March.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:46, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Islamec


A tag has been placed on Islamec 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 web content, 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, you can place a request here. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:44, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Islamec, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I see at the talk page that you claim the article does express the importance of the subject, so I read it again, and it doesn't. But note anyway that it would have to be a credible claim, which is difficult in the case of a website that doesn't even exist yet. I looked for online references to it in reliable sources and didn't find any. So even if there was an indication of its importance, the article could be deleted following a discussion. There will be a better chance once the website is up, if it does receive external coverage. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Fatwa against Deobandi Scholars
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Fatwa against Deobandi Scholars, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://sufimanzil.org/fatwa/akeedahfatwas/arabic-fatwa-against-deobandis.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:00, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyright
It is up to you to show it is not copyright. If you can't follow our policy you can't continue to edit. All you have to do is stop copying. Dougweller (talk) 19:30, 23 July 2014 (UTC)