Asad29591

Undue weight

You may want to read over Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, particularly WP:WEIGHT. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:23, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

As I mentioned here one month ago, please review WP:WEIGHT. Subjects should be presented as they appear in the preponderance of reliable sources. Very small minority views do not need to be included to provide balance. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 07:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring

Your reverts are approaching vandalism at this point. Please engage in productive edits that follow policy. If you continue forcing changes through edit-warring, I'll report you to the administrator's notice board. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 17:34, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear Cunado whatever details I am putting they are logical and from authentic Baha'i sources. I shall also be forced to report your undue reverts to the administrator's notice board if you revert the edits which are valid and logical.Asad29591 (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 16:07, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Attacking someone just because their belief doesn't match your belief is not the teaching of Bahaullah. I have always seen not only with me but with other users also that you do not like when someone comes and tries to improve the Baha'i page or tries to make it factually correct. You need to understand that there is no monopoly or self ownership of Wikipedia articles. Whatever I have put in my edits is from the Will and Testament of Abdul Baha which is accepted by us (Orthodox Baha'is) as well as you (Heterodox Baha'is). lets not get internal faith issues in public forum. Just like you have right to put matter from your books I also have right to put details as per our authorized books. So if a page has space for Heterodox Baha'i view, it should also have space for Orthodox Baha'i view.Asad29591 (talk) 01:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Charles Mason Remey - Second Guardian of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:Charles Mason Remey - Second Guardian of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 17:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Cuñado. Will put the details accordingly.

POV pushing

Asad29591, your edits over the last year have been unproductive and you have repeatedly ignored attempts to engage you on the talk pages to follow policy. Your edits are POV-pushing for a tiny minority. Your recent edit on Covenant-breaker was using language and insinuations in a way inconsistent with how the issue is articulated in numerous independent reliable sources. From the point of view of nearly every author, Remey represents the largest of several tiny splinter groups that are only notable because they are the only examples of breakaway sects. Read WP:WEIGHT and apply it. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 04:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Dear Cunado, Please note that whatever edit I do, I have ensured that I put proper reliable references. I have spoken to you many times on talk page of topics which I edit, and yes I may have ignored some of your messages because more than engaging in a fruitful discussion, you are more interested in reverting my edits which are completely reliable, factual and in which I have followed the policies laid down by Wikipedia.

As i have told you in the past also that I am on Wikipedia to make pages more reliable and not one sided so I shall not support your one sided approach. I respect Wikipedia and I shall continue to follow the Wiki Guidelines but not Cunado guidelines so kindly do not expect me to do that.

Please note that what I am putting I have reliable references for that and if you want more references simply ping me instead of reverting my edit with any vague reason. Because by doing so you are actually going against the Wiki policy. So I advise you to respect Wikipedia and not treat it as your personal site or blog.

Now coming to the point. Mason Remey and his followers are regarded as covenant breakers only by the Mainstream Baha'is. So calling them as covenant breaker in general terms is insulting and slandering. We the followers of Orthodox Baha'i Faith are also Baha'is and since we believe in Bab, Bahaullah, Abdul Baha, Shoghi Effendi and continuation of Guardianship as per the Will and Testament of Abdul Baha, we cannot be termed as covenant breakers.

Just because you are from the mainstream side doesn't mean you can insult a group and call them by bad names like covenant breaker. We have a right to speak and put our point accross with due respect and with valid references.Asad29591 (talk) 03:54, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Modh Azizan Baba.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Modh Azizan Baba.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. May I request you to assist me in adding his image on his page.--Asad29591 (talk) 16:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Welcome!

The Wikipede and the Picture Tutorial. (image credit)

Welcome!

Hello, Asad29591, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.

Did you know that ...

• ...Wikipedia has a very stringent image use policy?
• ...most images from Flickr, online news websites, and other web sources are copyrighted?
• ...Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously?
• ...freely-licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a central location for images where they can be used on all Wikipedia projects?
• ...we recommend that new users use our "files for upload" process – at least until you get the hang of things?

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Manual of Style

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Theroadislong (talk) 19:12, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong Thank you for your message. I have uploaded the image on wikipedia commons and waiting for approval. Asad29591 (talk) 18:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

You uploaded a photograph from here [1] Did you take the photograph? If not it will be deleted as a copyright infringement, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, you cannot uplaod photos you find on the internet unless they have a creative commons license. Theroadislong (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Asad29591! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Putting images from google or other websites, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Reverting good faith edits

I have reverted a good faith edit on the burden of proof law article as I believe that it's standard to bold the title of an article in the lead.Dawkin Verbier (talk) 17:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Dawkin, Firstly when you say standard, can you please give examples of more articles where this is done?.

Secondly bold is done for a purpose. When the articles name itself is 'Burden of proof', it makes no sense to bold the same thing again. You should look for some other important point in that article which may need to be kept in bold.

Assuming good faith I won't revert your edit even though I have a valid reason to do so. I will leave it upon your understanding, and you may consult other editors if required.

Also, I would have appreciated it more if you would have discussed it on the talk page of the related article instead of my talk page. Asad29591 (talk) 11:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)