User talk:Stranger43286

This user is aware of all contentious topics designations, policies, has 1000 edits. You should not be given alerts, welcome messages for him.

Hi guys. You can contact me by posting a massage in my Wikipedia talk page or by my YouTube channel!

When you make edits like this you are edit warring with a bot, which will remove the image shortly. Logos copyrighted in either Bangladesh or the United States may not be used in lists on the English-language Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Stranger43286,

I came across your contributions to Wikipedia and noticed your experience in reviewing draft articles. I am currently working on improving **Draft:Allama Imam Hayat** and would greatly appreciate any feedback or suggestions on how to enhance it for acceptance.

The draft can be found here: [1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Allama_Imam_Hayat)

Could you kindly provide guidance on whether the article meets Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards? Any advice on improving references or structure would be highly valuable.

Thank you in advance for your time and insights!

Best regards, SabujTheWiki (talk) 23:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SabujTheWiki The draft's subject may be notable, but check WP:RS, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, remove some unreliable sources. And per WP:BLP, biographies of living person should not certain unsourced content and BLPs need WP:NPOV. Check those helpful links and improve the draft. I'm not a AfC reviewer, so I can't review this draft. RealStranger43286 (talk) 02:32, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Talk pages are being used as a forum, as you did here [[2]] Bongan^® →TalkToMe← 21:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not use talk pages as a forum. I request to recheck that comment. I just mean that this "SherlockHolmesBD" websites is hosted by Substack and this is not a professional website. Sorry for any confusions. RealStranger43286 (talk) 02:13, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

Mz7 (talk) 08:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can you help by adding more citations to National Doctors Forum? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 07:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, try to help by expanding the history section. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 07:44, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page is Talk:National Doctors Forum BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 07:44, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can’t do this right now. I'm going to Dhaka for important purpose. I will be active on 20 March. RealStanger43286 (Let's talk!) 12:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no problem, you can help whenever you want. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When another editor (me) has commented and asked a question, it is not a good idea to delete your proposal. So, let me ask here: please explain what problem your proposal is intended to correct? Cullen328 (talk) 07:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The founder rights have no special powers expect honouring Wales, so I found no reason to keep this rights. RealStanger43286 (Let's talk!) 11:46, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a problem that needs solving. Cullen328 (talk) 18:24, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 April at 23:59 UTC. To reiterate what we said in the previous newsletter, we are no longer disqualifying contestants based on how many points (now known as round points) they received. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. These tournament points are carried over between rounds, and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers at the end of each round. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned.

Round 2 was quite competitive. Four contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and eight scored more than 500 points (including one who has withdrawn). The following competitors scored at least 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,233 round points from 24 good articles, 28 Did you know articles, and one In the news nomination, mainly about athletes and politicians
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 1,127 round points, almost entirely from two high-multiplier featured articles on Black Widow (Natasha Romanova) and Grace Coolidge, in addition to two GAs and two reviews
• History6042 (submissions) with 1,088 round points from four featured lists about Michelin-starred restaurants, nine good articles and a good topic mostly on Olympic-related subjects, seven ITN articles, and dozens of reviews
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,085 round points from three FAs, one GA, and four DYKs on military history, as well as 18 reviews
• Arconning (submissions) with 887 round points, mostly from four FLs, six GAs, and seven DYKs on Olympic topics, along with more than two dozen reviews

In addition, we would like to recognize Generalissima (submissions) for her efforts; she scored 801 round points but withdrew before the end of the round.

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 13 featured articles, 20 featured lists, 4 featured-topic articles, 138 good articles, 7 good-topic articles, and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 19 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 300 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:03, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]