User:NAHID/Talk01

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 User:Captain Future 2 Image:USTC building.jpg 3 CSD listings 3.1 Image deletion 4 Number of students 5 re Dept. of Pharmacy, Jahangirnagar University 6 Nahid is not Arabic 7 Hello Nahid 8 Thank you 9 Cheers 10 About Universities 11 WikiProject History of Bangladesh 12 Re. Appropriate form 13 Image licensing 14 Book of Muscle 15 Greetings 16 Re. IP problem 17 Image:Ianking.jpg 18 Huh? 19 I'm actually replying to your question now 20 You have a large number of questions about image copyright and wikipedia policy 21 Your question about tennis images 22 Thank you! 23 Template talk:Private Universities of Bangladesh 24 No hard feelings 25 And also 26 bit out of my field :) 27 Ian King 28 Articles on food 29 Re: comments 30 Sorry, a billion times, that I have hurt your feelings

[edit] User:Captain Future

Thanks for your help or reather the welcoming!.

[edit] Image:USTC building.jpg

Assuming this building is still standing, then somebody could easily take a new photo of it and release it under a free license. We therefore cannot use this fair-use photo. —Chowbok ☠ 15:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No, none of those images are okay to upload because they don't have free licenses. The best thing would be to get somebody with a camera who lives in the area to go down there and take pictures of those buildings, and have him/her release them under a free license.—Chowbok ☠ 15:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite understand your point. Those other images you point me to were taken by Wikipedia editors and released under free licenses—exactly what I'm saying you or somebody else should do with that building. What we can't do is simply take pictures off other websites and put them up. As for those fair-use photos you point to, they'll be deleted sooner or later. —Chowbok ☠ 16:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, if you look at the source website for Image:000976 34bb218f.jpg, you'll note that it says right there that the photo is released under the CC license. This is unusual; most sites do not do this. The site you copied the building photos does not, for instance. As for Image:11SSMen-Narva.jpg, that depicts a German regiment from 1944; obviously, we can't just recreate a historical photo like that, so in that case fair-use is justified. —Chowbok ☠ 18:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and Image:Selena.jpg is acceptable because Selena's been dead for 12 years. If she was still alive, and especially if she was still performing, a fair-use image would not be usable. —Chowbok ☠ 18:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The rule here isn't really that difficult. If we can replace the fair-use image with a free one, then we can't use the fair-use one. Picture of a building that is currently standing: replaceable. Photo of a battle from World War II: not replaceable. Photo of a living pop star: replaceable. Photo of a cartoon character: not replaceable. Basically, just ask yourself, assuming I could fly anywhere in the world for free, could I take a picture of this subject? If "yes", then we can't use a fair-use image. —Chowbok ☠ 19:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

No, the problem was not with the sentence. Yes there are thousands without but as I said, this rule only applies to FU images uploaded after May 2006. And I'm sure there are FU images uploaded after then that do not have FU rationale, but hopefully in due time all of those will be addressed.--NMajdan•talk 15:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

To ensure that the photo does not get deleted, yes, every fair use image should have more detailed rationale. Especially if the article ever expects to become a GA or FA.--NMajdan•talk 16:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't see a problem with that. Logos of universities will all probably have the same rationale.--NMajdan•talk 16:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CSD listings

[edit] Image deletion

Hi anon, these images should be deleted: 1. Image:IUB-image.gif 2. Image:IUB-logo.jpg 3. Image:IUB.jpg 4. Image:SCSM.jpg. I've added {{db-repost}} on each images. I think you mentioned it before and I noticed it in the history page. Give me feedback Thank you NAHID 18:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Got your message, I'm not an anon(ymous) person :) I deleted 3 of those images (one is still on commons) as orphaned fair-use images; as for Image:SCSM.jpg, I rarely delete free-licensed images. I delisted it as a repost, as I couldn't find the prior WP:IFD on it. If this is a repost, please feel free to retag it for deletion, but include a link to the IFD. Thanks and happy editing! — xaosflux ^Talk 18:22, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as Image:SCSM.jpg goes, I'm not going to delete it on that basis, but one of the othetr 1000+ admins may. I pretty much don't delete images that are free-licensed. My complaint on the listing is that you are tagging it as a speedy-delete candiate under the rule that it has been reposted after an xfd. I delete reposts all the time. If there WAS already a xfd on deleting this image, then when you mark it as a repost, include a link to the prior deletion discussion such as by using a tag like {{db-repost|Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 January 13}}. If there is not a prior deletion log for page (and there is not on this one) admins would need to spend a lot of time researching where there was prior consensus to delete the page, that apparently you have already located. By providing this information, the process runs 1000x faster. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 19:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Now with all that benig said, thanks to your talk message I've found the duplicate image at Image:SECS.jpg and deleted the original media as a redundant image, the normal tag for this would be: {{Redundant image}}. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 19:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like this was mostly a taging confusion issue, there is a list of all the speedy deletion tags list at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates, these may come in useful in the future for you. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 19:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of students

Hi,Johntex. I'm having trouble with number of students on an university article. If an university claims to have more than 2000 or approximately 2000 students in their website, then what should be the exact number in infobox? Will it be 2000 students or more than/approximately 2000. How can I rectify this? Thank you NAHID 14:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I think I would use the tilde symbol to represenent "approximately", so "~ 2,000". I guess you could also use the greater than symbol, "> 2,000". That is probably sufficient. Enrollment vaires from year to year so that should be close enough. You can also include a footnote to your source. Let me know if you have any trouble with that. Best, Johntex\^talk 23:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re Dept. of Pharmacy, Jahangirnagar University

OK. Herostratus 03:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

In further answer to your questions... basically there are three kinds of deletion:

• The normal deletion process is through WP:AFD, which allows many editors to review and comment on an article, after which an administrator decides if the article is to be kept or not. Anyone may comment on the article, but no one may remove the deletion tag until the process is complete.
• Since this is time-consuming, two quicker deletion paths also exist:
  • speedy deletion is for obvious vandalism, nonsense articles, articles about someone's boyfriend, unnotable garage bands, and the like. If an article is nominated for speedy deletion, you may not remove the tag, but may add the {{hangon}} tag and make your case on the article's talk page.
  • WP:PROD is what happened to this article. An editor nominates an article for deletion, and if no one objects in five days the article is automatically deleted. You did object, therefore I removed the tag (you could also have removed it yourself, that is your right). It is often the case that when a WP:PROD tag is removed, the article then is sent to WP:AFD to get a thorough review. However, in this case, I found your argument on my talk page sufficiently convincing that I decided not to do this. Someone else may send the article to WP:AFD in the future

So, it is OK to remove a WP:PROD tag, it is not OK to remove a speedy deletion tag (but you can contest it), and it is not OK to remove a WP:AFD tag, instead you should comment in the discussion. Hope this helps, cheers, Herostratus 03:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, any editor can remove the PROD template, including the article creator. The Larry D. Alexander article was not PRODded, it went through WP:AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry D. Alexander)where 7 of 7 commentors agreed that it should be deleted, therefore it was. The deletion of any article may be contested or reviewed at deletion review.Herostratus 15:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nahid is not Arabic

Hi, When I saw you're username, I was interested to know more. And just to let you know, Nahid has it's roots in Persian (Iranian) and not Arabic. It's another version of the more ancient name Anahita. --Arad 00:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Nahid

Hello, How are you bro ? hope fine. Actually I am working here since 2005 but never took it seriously. But, finally I have taken this task seriously and trying to do it in a professional manner. I have a plan to add some pix on EWU's page. I am waiting for some 'real data' from EWU authority, as I approached them with my goal at wiki and they agreed to provide me all the necessary information that I might need to develop wiki page of EWU. I hope it will be a nice page with in a few days.

Hope to hear from you again. For today, its Allah Hafiz from Niaz. Take care and a very good day.

(Niaz bd 17:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Thank you

Thank you (that you found my baby picture cute). And also in Iran Nahid is usually used for girls. Have nice weekend ;-). --Arad 21:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cheers

		The Barnstar of National Merit
		Keep up the good job. You're a real example to all Wikipedians, and a real inspiration to all Bangladeshi Wikipedians. Cheers Aditya Kabir 16:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About Universities

Hello NAHID, thank you for your message. I am honored that you think I might be able to help with this.

I don't think I am able to give an easy answer that would work in all cases, but I do have some thoughts on the issue.

On the one hand, our articles are meant to be neutral. We don't want to just be a billboard for showcasing the very best things about a University and ignoring all bad things.

On the other hand, some criticisms are generic criticisms and are not very notable. For instance, it seems to me that all universities (in the United States at least) have student activist groups that want the school to hire more minorirites, or to stop building on vacant land that might be animal habitat, or to remove restrictions on student rallies, or to improve the free bus service, etc. I would not consider any such criticism to be notable unless it has garnered lots of mainstream press. We would probably want at least some of that press to be national, and not just in the local newspaper.

When something happened is also factor. If a university has been around for 100 or 400 years, we don't want to list every scandal that has occurred in its whole history.

A very important point is "what became of the problem or scandal?" If a scandal led to the university being reorganized completely, that may be a pretty notable scandal. Likewise, if they got a bad rating and that led to them replacing a lot of the faculty and going on a campaign of self-improvement, then that may very well be relevant.

There are two articles that may be instructive as examples: University of Michigan has made it to Featured Article status. University of Oklahoma is almost there. The latter article does mention some recent negative events, such as the student who blew himself up with a car bomb.

If you would like me to look at a specific article and give my thoughts, I would be happy to do so. Johntex\^talk 16:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject History of Bangladesh

WikiProject History of Bangladesh has started. It needs members and participants. Aditya Kabir 11:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re. Appropriate form

Hello NAHID. You can choose either "undid" or "reverted", it's the same thing really. I usually use "reverted" because I fight vandalism with Vandalproof and this tool always uses "reverted" when it, well, reverts. :-) Keep up the good work. Regards, Húsönd 13:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image licensing

We welcome free images here (and if they are compatible even more so at commons:). If you create a new image the simplest way to deal with uploading it here and to other sites is to upload it here first, then upload to the other sites. When uploading to the other sites, you can disclaim that your original work THERE is freely licensed, even if the site as a whole is not. If uploading to another site first, then here, making a disclaimer at the other site that you are now licensing your original work freely can be done as well. If uploading locally on en:, you should attempt to incorporate your image in to an article as well, orphaned images are much more likely to be removed. If your image is freely licensed, but doesn't have an article home yet, consider uploading it to commons, where it can be used by all wikimedia projects. Did this answer your question? — xaosflux ^Talk 13:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Proof is hard to establish on many parts of the Internet, but we try to assume good faith here. You can use the GFDL,PD,CCbySA, etc licensing anywhere you publish your work. Most other websites have somewhere you can leave a comment or a description. You are not required to link other places you have also published your work when publishing them on wiki. Here, you use the licensing templates when you upload a file, and you can choose the one that you want, or manually edit the licensing section of the image and include any additional, but compatible, licensing you would like. Use of release statements should cover you in other sites as well. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

As for Fair Use, I'm not an expert on it. We prefer not to have a fair use image, if a free image is available. You might want to see WP:FAIR for much more infomration about Fair Use on Wikipedia. In a nutshell fair use media can be used for critical commetary about THE MEDIA or as a clear example of the subject of media. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Book of Muscle

As an administrator, I can see deleted versions of the article and their history. This article has actually been deleted twice:

• 03:32, 2007 February 6 Lectonar (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "The Book of Muscle" (prod, nn)
• 13:13, 2007 February 25 . . Theredfandango (Talk | contribs | block) (moved The book of muscle to The Book of Muscle: Two of the same page. No need.) - this is where the article got recreated. Theredfandango moved another copy to this name.
• 13:46, 2007 February 26 . . Uucp (Talk | contribs | block) (dd) - this is where a user tagged it for deletion as being non-notable
• 01:05, 2007 February 27 Irishguy (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "The Book of Muscle" (G4) - this is wher it got deleted again.

The "G4" is a reference to Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion which states "Recreation of deleted material. A copy, by any title, of a page that was deleted via Articles for deletion or another XfD process, provided that the copy is substantially identical to the deleted version and that any revisions made clearly do not address the reasons for which the page was deleted. This clause does not apply in user space, to content undeleted per undeletion policy, or if the prior deletions were proposed or speedy deletions, although in this last case, the previous speedy criterion, or other speedy deletion criteria, may apply."

The first deletion may have been "out of process" in the sense that the required process may not have been followed. I don't see evidence that the required waiting period was followed.

However, the article is problematic in that their are no "outside sources" given about this book. That makes it look like an advertisement. Worse, it makes it look like the book is not notable enough to have attracted the interest of anyone but the publisher. I suggest that if you want to keep the article, you need to add some reliable verifiable third party sources consistent with our policy on attribution. You can work on it in your name space (E.g. User:NAID/sandbox) and then move the info when it is ready.

Below is the most recent version of the article in case you want to work on it. Johntex\^talk 14:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

{{Infobox Book | name = The Book of Muscle | title_orig = | translator = | image = [[Image:The Book of Muscle.jpg]] | image_caption = | author = Ian King and Lou Schuler | illustrator = | cover_artist = Susan P. Eugster | country = | language = English | series = | subject = | genre = [[Health]] and [[Fitness]] | publisher = [[Rodale Press]] | release_date = [[September]] [[2003]] | english_release_date = | media_type = | pages = 364 | isbn = ISBN 1-57954-768-0 | preceded_by = | followed_by = }} '''This is a book about building [[muscle]]'''. It comprises: *Three muscle-building programes, one each for beginner, intermediate, and advanced exerciseers. *Descriptions of more than 100 [[exercises]]. *Advice on warming up, stretching, and recovering between workouts. *Information on how to eat to make muscles grow. The Book of Muscle gives comprehensive muscle-building programes from a world class trainer (Ian King). ==External links== *[http://www.bookofmuscle.com The Book of Muscle Official website] *[http://www.rodale.com Rodale Press Official website]

I didn't list every edit. Here are all the edits in 2007:

The page history is:

1. 13:46, 2007 February 26 . . Uucp (Talk | contribs | block) (dd)
2. 13:22, 2007 February 25 . . Theredfandango (Talk | contribs | block)
3. 13:21, 2007 February 25 . . Theredfandango (Talk | contribs | block) (I tried to make the pov more neutral.)
4. 13:13, 2007 February 25 . . Theredfandango (Talk | contribs | block) (moved The book of muscle to The Book of Muscle: Two of the same page. No need.)
5. 05:53, 2007 January 31 . . Uucp (Talk | contribs | block)
6. 01:51, 2007 January 31 . . NAHID (Talk | contribs | block) (reediting and removing advert stuffs)
7. 17:38, 2007 January 29 . . Uucp (Talk | contribs | block)
8. 20:39, 2007 January 17 . . Darklilac (Talk | contribs | block) (typos)
9. 20:39, 2007 January 17 . . Darklilac (Talk | contribs | block) (typos)
10. 11:07, 2007 January 13 . . NAHID (Talk | contribs | block)
11. 11:06, 2007 January 13 . . NAHID (Talk | contribs | block)
12. 07:22, 2007 January 7 . . SmackBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Date/fix the maintenance tags using AWB)
13. 06:08, 2007 January 6 . . NAHID (Talk | contribs | block)
14. 22:39, 2007 January 5 . . 141.149.174.74 (Talk | block)

The deletion history is:

1. 01:05, 2007 February 27 Irishguy (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "The Book of Muscle" (G4)
2. 03:32, 2007 February 6 Lectonar (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "The Book of Muscle" (prod, nn)

If I click on the Jan 31 UUCP version, it looks like UUCp prodded the page. Then on Feb 6 Lectonar deleted it. On Feb 25 the article got recreted by Theredfandango. On Feb 26 UUCP tagged the page again and on Feb 27 Irishguy deleted it. To see an admins deletion/block log, you can click on the link to my log on my user page and then just replace my name with the name of the admin you would like to check. Johntex\^talk 22:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• I have replied to your recent posts on my talk page. Best, Johntex\^talk 15:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I have replied to your 3 new posts on my talk page. Best, Johntex\^talk 05:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • More replies on my talk page. Johntex\^talk 08:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Replied again. Johntex\^talk 15:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greetings

Hi. Please add new topics/questions on the Help Desk (as well as discussion pages) to the bottom of the page, so that others would not miss the question. Cheers. Xiner (talk, email) 16:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Btw, there's no need to start a new topic for every question, if you're discussing the same subject. Just start typing on a new line and someone will respond. Also, one question mark is enough in most cases. Cheers. Xiner (talk, email) 16:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Please add new topics/questions on the Help Desk (as well as discussion pages) to the bottom of the page. Thank you. Xiner (talk, email) 21:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I've also noticed that you've been leaving edit summaries (good) that could be more descriptive. For more info, please visit Wikipedia:Edit_summaries#Recommendations. Thanks! Xiner (talk, email) 22:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re. IP problem

Since you are a registered user, you don't have to worry about your IP being blocked because of someone else using it. When IPs are blocked, registered accounts using it are usually not affected. There is no need to specify your IP number in a userbox. Regards, Húsönd 18:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

If that IP is blocked you will still be able to edit as long as you use your registered account. The block will only affect users using that IP without logging in. If you really want that userbox, you should state the IP that Wikipedia recognizes when you edit without logging in. Regards, Húsönd 19:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ianking.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ianking.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —xyzzy_n 10:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Huh?

What about Image:Bashundhara city.jpg? By the way, sorry about the many sections above; I use a script to tag images which posts those notices automatically. —xyzzy_n 11:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I don’t know the answer. I’m rather confused about the question, too. Why would I need to tag that image? —xyzzy_n 11:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Very well. The reason that I can’t tag it is that I have no idea why I should tag it. Now stop the riddles, please. —xyzzy_n 11:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The reason for tagging Image:STU-siddeswari .jpg and Image:STU-dhanmondi.jpg is that you copied them from a website and tagged them as being freely licensed, but the website from which you copied them says otherwise. —xyzzy_n 11:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

In the case of Image:Torchy-b.jpg, I decided that per Bridgeman v. Corel it was adequately sourced. Regarding Image:Bashundhara city.jpg, I’m currently not inclined to investigate; if you are, feel free to ask the uploader to post the permission on the image description page. Neither case is relevant to the images uploaded by you which I tagged. —xyzzy_n 12:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I'm actually replying to your question now

Give me a few minutes.... :) Megapixie 12:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You have a large number of questions about image copyright and wikipedia policy

NAHID - It's not a productive use of either of our time to keep asking and answering these questions. It's all laid out on the various policy pages in wikipedia. If you want to know about GFDL or Share-alike then it's easier to carefully read the policy pages than to ask me a lot of questions. Additionally a large number of images are mistagged on wikipedia, bringing every single one of them to Wikipedia:Media Copyright Questions is a massive waste of time. Once you've read Wikipedia:Image use policy (and all linked sub policies), Wikipedia:Fair use and understand the concepts of Public domain, Fair use and Copyright law (in particular the US version of it). If you think an image is mistagged - correct the problem - or put it through Wikipedia:Images for deletion. If you have a specific question about your own images please ask away at Wikipedia:Media Copyright Questions]] but it's very difficult to answer broad questions about copyright because it's a complicated subject area. Megapixie 03:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, please do not move sections on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. It’s annoying and does not at all improve that page’s legibility. —xyzzy_n 14:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, man. I like what you are doing with the private universities in Bangladesh articles. A lot of effort there. But, I guess, you're trying figure out ways and loop-holes in the Wikipedia policies and guidelines to do what you want to do. Why not just follow the policies and keep improving the articles. Whatever bias you have in mind may not be useful for an encyclopedia. Please, don't get me wrong here. You're doing much better than most of the Wikipedians. But, searching for loopholes or such things is a waste of your efforts. You could put it to better use. Like, instead of images, why not focus on the copy for sometime? Cheers. Aditya Kabir 15:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your question about tennis images

See [1] that would be {{attribution}}. Megapixie 21:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Thank you very much for the barnstar. It is a pleasure to try to help an inquisitive editor to grow in Wikipedia. Please keep up the editting. We need more articles like the ones you are making. Johntex\^talk 23:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, NAHID. I have only uploaded a lower resolution version of this image. You may want to contact User:Aditya Kabir (the original uploade) about this image. Indeed, I have once tagged this image as replaceable fair use, but some user (wrongly) removed the tag right after. You may want to read the discussions. Best regards, --Abu badali ^(talk) 13:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, you haven't contacted me, yet. Posting a notice on User:Abu badali's page was fine, but I guess, you could have contacted the original uploader as well. And, that's me. Well, I'm contacting you, now. I have disputed the replaceability of fair use on the image aforementioned. Please, keep me posted about what you're doing with it. BTW, it's good to see you caring for fairness of image use. Keep the good work going. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 15:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template talk:Private Universities of Bangladesh

I have left a message for you on Template talk:Private Universities of Bangladesh. Please, check. Aditya Kabir 16:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No hard feelings

I am sorry if I have misunderstood you again. Even more sorry that I seem to forget the first instance of misunderstanding. I know you have only the best of Wikipedia in your heart. You may have noticed that, because:

• I already have repeated that many time (POV sure, vandalism it probably was not)
• I have awarded you with your first barnstar
• I have lent my hand to help you with your efforts with private universities - saved them from redirects, started articles for a few of them, brought your example of creating a template to public universities, and yes, eidited and re-edited a lot of those articles, along with providing all the advises I could manage
• Forwarded my goodwill when your wikistress blew through the top
• Have attempted to help you (not very successfully, I must admit) through the ways of WP when you started editing
• I have always kept you posted whenever I did something drastic to any of your contributions, which more than what you can claim when you did something to my contributions
• And, I left you alone when you though Admins would understand you better (though they probably didn't, as understanding right is more important than understanding better when you're an admin)

Repeating again - Sorry, dude, if I have hurt your feelings. I am happy that you finally have answered to any of my postings that concern you. You have ignoring my postings to your talk page, deleting them, too, for long. It is good to see you responding, even if on a more public talk page and even if slightly disturbed. Have a cupcake, dude. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 06:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sigh--- nice comments but mixed with jesting. It's easy to mocking at someone by writing such essay.--NAHID 23:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] And also

Regarding on comments of user aditya kabir...

• You said BTW, it's good to see you caring for fairness of image use.-- No need to be good here. Be normal.
• You said I know you have only the best of Wikipedia in your heart.-- thanks for the comments !!
• You said I already have repeated that many time (POV sure, vandalism it probably was not)-- don't need to repeat it rather we should follow it.
• You said--I have awarded you with your first barnstar-- thanks for the barnstar.
• You said--I have lent my hand to...-- yes we should help each other BUT again engaging edit war isn't acceptable.BTW You always put memorising negetive materials than infobox and other valuable information in the articles.
• You said--Forwarded my goodwill-- that was really sweet of you.
• You said--I have always kept you posted whenever I did something drastic to any of your contributions, which more than what you can claim when you did something to my contributions-- I should've checked the image (Image:Riya Book.png) page and posted Rfu tag on your talk page.Sorry for that.
• You said--And, I left you alone when you though Admins would understand you better (though they probably didn't, as understanding right is more important than understanding better when you're an admin-- I don't know what do you think about yourself? Are you trying to take control over user / admin? Please refrain from that.

After tagging Image:Riya Book.png (uploaded by User:Aditya Kabir. He also removed Rfu tag [[2]], when it was once tagged by another user) User:Aditya Kabir attempted to engage in edit war and he was scoring my contribution. Few months ago, He tried to do the same thing . He also attempted to target User:Prince Godfather when he removed Aditya Kabir's images from article (though the fault was Prince Godfather). See discussion User talk:Misza13/Archives/2007/02#Two images unfortunately deleted by you, can you help?. There, Aditya Kabir's statement I am checking this user as much as I can, though without the tools available to admins it's quite an arduous task---as he has / had wide interest to do that. Simply, if someone disagree with Aditya Kabir in any matters, he starts to score that user's contribution, mocking at him (probably Aditya Kabir also does it in his own User Page or any Talk Page regarding on that user) and attempt to engage in edit war. But wikipedia is not the right place for targeting user.--NAHID 20:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• WOW. Not a lot of argument, but definitely a lot of anger there. Okay. Keep complaining, and see if it gets you anywhere. I apologized (posted on 00:47, 12 March 2007) on Template talk:Private Universities of Bangladesh to you and this is what I get in return, so I don't think I'll apologize again,not now. It's nice to find a really civil and respectful contributor. And, I guess, telling you relax will actually fuel your anger, not help you. Aditya Kabir 03:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

• To Carry the Truth is difficult and I think that's not possible to be carried by you. So be Patient --NAHID 20:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • You may be interested to know that User talk:Prince Godfather has been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia. This is the user I targetted a few months ago (according to the text above) and I complained to User:Misza13 about (I am checking this user as much as I can...). Apparently mocking User:Aditya Kabir was not his only crime. Anyways, good try. Aditya Kabir 21:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• Are you trying to hide your fault? Don't be emotional. Huh! Good try, nice try- fits to you and take those words back to you.--NAHID 07:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• Me wikidemon-- Aditya Kabir called me wikidemon at User:Bsnowball's talk page by mentioning this statment: You see, I am making this roaster of Wikidemon, and this would come handy (See User talk:Bsnowball#Hi and User talk:Bsnowball#The borges quote on your user page. He left that message just after my message. Again, He's Mocking at Welcoming committee members (Paragraph starts with: If you are new here) --NAHID 13:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] bit out of my field :)

being more than a little bookish i'm not quite the person for sports articles :) have put the relevant categories on the article you sent me. ben  ⇒ bsnowball  14:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ian King

Hi Nahid, thanks for thinking that I could help significantly with this article, though it is in an area where I have zero expertise. I had a look at it and, while there is really nothing much wrong with it as a stub, the subject does appear to lack Wikipedia notability. Maybe that is just my limited perspective. It would be good to find some independent sources rather than what seem to be self-promoting websites, plus some further information - what birth year? what Pacific Island? which Olympic athletes did he train (names, dates etc)?. There is a lot more hype than detail. Cheers, Maias 01:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles on food

Well, this is just my own opinion of course, but most food has been written about somewhere. If you can find enough reliable sourcing to write a substantial article on a food, go for it! (It might be a good idea to do a quick search to make sure it's not already here but under a different name.) Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Well...those are one of those things in the "tolerate but do not condone" category, and a lot of articles that stay sourceless are eventually deleted. We do require sourcing, and just because some people don't do it, it should generally be done. Any source is better then nothing, cite a cookbook if you need to (though generally we don't allow recipes, but quite often cookbooks often actually will give some information as to what a dish is, its history, and so on). Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: comments

Hi Nahid, We have a very small number of Bangladeshi editors in Wikipedia, so if we quarrel among ourselves, the net loss is to Bangladesh.

Having spent 3 years editing in Wikipedia, I've been through a lot of disagreements with other users. The best way to deal with something you feel is not right, is to ignore it. That works quite well every time.

If you still feel you have any problem, there are several ways to resolved disputes. WP:PAIN is for personal attacks, WP:ANB/I is for administrator's noticeboard incidents. WP:DR for dispute resolution.

However, I still don't see any reason for you two to have a dispute (talk pages fail to show any big disagreement, except for a few minor ones).

In the end, I'd suggest both of you to calm down, and settle this, and focus on many more articles we need to write on Bangladesh. Thank you. --Ragib 22:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry, a billion times, that I have hurt your feelings

I have just come across you comments about my poor self on Ragib's talk page, and I am happy that I did. It seems that I have hurt your feelings seriously, but had no clue that I was doing that. I guess some of the stuff that made you sad needs a bit of clarification to remove the misunderstanding. This may be long, but I guess it is worth it.

• Always insulted me in his talk page archive by calling me newbie and has placed a derisive template box. -- You were a newbie back then. Since, you have ceased to be newcomer a long time back, you'll notice that my discussions with you are no more included there. My talk page archives mostly exist as lesson in what is not to be done. If I was not good enough to help a newbie with patience, it must be there. It should not make you look bad, rather should make me look like a bungling goof. I also have archives for my troubles with image uploading and my battles with other Wikipedians - all serving the same purpose.
• Also he's mocked at me 'coz I'm a member!! -- Please, don't feel that way. If read the whole text of what you have mentioned then you'd find out that it also mentions Wikipedia adoptation project and the Kindness Campaign in the same spirit. Are you member of all of that? Then I am doubly sorry.
• Called me Wiki demon at User:Bsnowball's talk page by refering the statement: You see, I am making this roaster of Wikidemon, and this would come handy -- It is a pretty cute list of WikiDemons - Wackos, Angry Mastodons, Headless Chickens, Bots, Tolls, Gnomes, Faeries, Doppelgangers, Vandals and Sock Puppets - all with appropriate links. It has got nothing to do with you (if you don't declare to be one of this group, LOL). If you read the Borges quote on Bsnowball's userpage, you'd know it fits the list of demons elegantly. BTW, Borges remains one of my favorite writers and while making the list of demons I missed one of his works very much - The Book of Imaginary Beings.
• He tried to target another user in this talk page. -- That user was actually disrupting Wikipedia, and got banned for that reason. I have already told you that. Unfortunately it seems that he is back with yet another sockpuppet. What I did in that case was a research through the Wikipedia for 2 days on end, not following him for weeks. In fact I found out about the ban when you posted a complaint aganist my targetting of him. I am sure you don't find guarding Wikipedia as an insult to you.
• I am sorry that I called you troll. That comment was silly, and I have already said that on Ragib's talk page, where the original post was made. But, to answer your question - So, should we judge someone as a troll if he asks some questions there? - I can lead you to Wikipedia:What is a troll#Pestering. Again, I regret my comment very much. It goes against the principle of assuming good faith.
• I also regret that I accused you for trying to recruit other users. (It was about - Very few BD wikipedians have the courage to expand private university related articles on wikipedia - on Niaz's talk page and also about - in some cases private universities are doing better compare to some so called 'Public' universities.--Concured. Yeah, Bro you're right :) Regards - on the East West University talk page). I am not envious of you. In fact I suggested Niaz to talk to you, and awarded a barnstar to you for you efforts regarding private universities in Bangadesh.

• Finally, please, check your contributions to find that for quite some time now all you are doing is monitoring my edits. I am sure you have a reason for that. That reason until now was quite obscure to me. Now I know that you are doing it because you feel wronged and hurt by me. Very sorry. But, please, if you keep editing mostly my edits and commenting on my comment, sooner or later it may considered as disruption by someone. I have full sympathies for you, not everyone may have that.

I hope this clears up some of the bad blood. I really am sorry (though there were times when I was quite irritated, but now I can very well see the reason). I also hope that we can collaborate on the private university articles. Quite a few still exist only as redlinks on the template, and most others are only loosely structured or poorly referenced. Let's improve the situation (can I hope for a treat now? A cup cake or an ice cream, may be?). Cheers. Aditya Kabir 05:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Hahahahaha...Now That's become your proof !! Umm you'r trying to be a good man by providing this epic(in the name of a billion times, that I have hurt your feelings). What about your hidden bad blood? However that was good approach. And might make you happy.No hard feelings.Keep up the good works :). Thanks--NAHID 20:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)