User talk:Zahid131: Difference between revisions

Clarification and Final Note from Zahid131

I would like to respectfully share my side before stepping away from Wikipedia.

I don’t know much about Alirana24, but my real name is Zahid Iqbal (username: User:Zahid131). I want to confirm that we are two different individuals. Alirana24 is Muhammad Ali Rana, and you can verify that through LinkedIn. I work at his company. I started editing Wikipedia out of personal interest, and he became interested later after seeing my involvement. So yes, we both use Wikipedia, but we have different accounts, different editing histories, and are not the same person.

I’m not here for promotion or personal gain. I’ve respected Wikipedia for many years — as a student, I relied on it. Recently, my younger cousin, who is also a student, told me that Wikipedia has been restricted in some universities due to questions about trust and accuracy. That motivated me to try contributing positively, to help restore confidence in this great project.

Over the past few days, I didn't make many edits, but I did try to help someone working on an essay about peace. Unfortunately, that’s where issues began. The essay was not political or promotional — it focused on peace and humanity — but the discussion around it felt rushed and dismissive. It was disappointing to see responses like "del" without deeper engagement.

Yes, I sometimes use a VPN, like many people in Pakistan, for privacy and security. That may explain any IP overlap. But again, I emphasize: I cannot delete or speak for Mr. Ali’s work, and he cannot speak for mine. We work independently.

I also read Wikipedia’s guidance that allows users to have renamed or separate accounts for privacy. So it’s difficult to understand why this situation is being seen differently now.

Someone also mentioned AI as a threat. In my view, AI is a tool, not a replacement. It can help improve the quality of work when used responsibly, and many editors — including myself — use it to support their efforts, not to replace human judgment.

If the final decision is to keep my account blocked, I accept that. I won’t request an unblock. But I do want to say this: I came here with good intentions. I didn’t expect this kind of experience, and it has made me feel unwelcome despite trying to contribute sincerely. That said, I still respect the mission of Wikipedia and the efforts of many dedicated editors who work hard to keep it strong.

As for Mr. Ali (Alirana24), I cannot speak for his decisions. That is entirely up to him.

With respect and thanks for the learning opportunity — I now take my leave.

Goodbye, Wikipedia.

— Zahid131

Hello, Zahid131, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Zahid131, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Zahid131

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Zahid131, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

June 2025

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guidelines. It is intended for basic information about yourself, your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia, as well as disclosures of conflicts of interest and paid editing. Although a lot of freedom is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not:

• an encyclopedia article (and should not be styled to look like one)
• a workspace for a draft article
• a personal website, blog, or social media site
• a space for self-promotion or other advertising
• a CV, resumé or lengthy autobiography

The user page guidelines have additional information on what is and what is not considered acceptable content. Please use your user sandbox or the draft article space to practice editing or to create new articles. Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:44, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

@Drm310

ok I understand I am new here I admit my mistake this is not my profile I am not that person I just know him I was trying to introduce a new person as article I didn't found user sandbox so I write here

I am extremely sorry

I will delete that page Zahid131 (talk) 20:11, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Balance of Coverage Between Political Figures and Successful Entrepreneurs

I’ve noticed that Wikipedia often has detailed and frequently updated profiles for political figures, even those who inherited their positions or come from privileged backgrounds. In contrast, many hardworking and self-made businesspeople, especially those who overcame significant challenges to achieve success, are underrepresented or lack depth in their articles.

This raises an important question: Shouldn't Wikipedia also place equal emphasis on documenting the stories of entrepreneurs who have worked their way up from difficult circumstances? Their journeys can serve as valuable inspiration and motivation for future generations, highlighting perseverance, innovation, and resilience.

While political figures often receive attention due to media coverage and public records, I believe the life stories of self-made business leaders are equally deserving of detailed documentation. Their contributions to society and the economy can be significant, and their paths to success are often filled with lessons that can inspire readers.

Can we discuss ways to encourage more balanced coverage—possibly through notability guidelines, outreach, or editorial focus—so that Wikipedia better reflects a diverse range of impactful individuals? Zahid131 (talk) 21:03, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

The relevant inclusion criteria here is Wikipedia:Notability (people). For politicians specifically, there is the subsection WP:NPOL and also an explanatory essay about subnational politicians, Wikipedia:Notability (people)/Subnational politicians.

Wikipedia articles are not meant to inspire, they are meant to inform. They are plainly factual, neutrally worded summaries of material previously published in reliable and independent sources. The articles here are not meant to influence the reader's feelings about a topic. They summarize the facts about a topic in a dry, emotionless tone, and the reader can decide for themselves how they feel about it.

You are welcome to debate the merits of the notability criteria here: Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:56, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

@Drm310 Thank you for the clarification and links to the relevant guidelines, particularly WP:N, WP:NPOL, and the essay on subnational politicians.

I fully understand that Wikipedia prioritizes neutral, verifiable content based on independent and reliable sources, and that notability is assessed based on coverage in such sources, not the perceived inspirational value of a subject's life story.

My earlier point was not to challenge the neutrality or reliability principles, but to raise a broader question about systemic coverage imbalances. Businesspeople, especially those from underrepresented or marginalized backgrounds, may not receive the same level of media attention despite having notable and impactful careers. This can result in fewer available sources, which then affects their eligibility for inclusion under current guidelines.

Would it be appropriate to discuss whether the notability criteria — or how they're applied — might unintentionally favor certain types of public figures (e.g., politicians or celebrities) over others (e.g., entrepreneurs or innovators who aren't as publicly visible)? If there’s an appropriate venue for that kind of meta-discussion — such as Village Pump or a notability guideline talk page — I’d be glad to continue it there.

Appreciate your insights and the work you do to uphold Wikipedia’s standards.

— Zahid131 Zahid131 (talk) 07:39, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

I still believe that Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) is the appropriate venue to raise such questions. You can search the talk page archives to see if similar matters have been discussed previously. Someone else at the WP:Teahouse, a forum for new Wikipedia users, may have other options that I don't know about.

I might be wrong, but it looks like part of your last post was written using an AI tool. Please note that the use of AI tools is highly discouraged to write original content, generate references, or create replies on discussion pages. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for using more than one account with the intention of deception.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  JBW (talk) 20:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

@JBW I don’t know much about Alirana24, but my real name is Zahid Iqbal. I’m not here to earn money or cause any harm. Like many students, we used Wikipedia during our studies, and I always appreciated its value. One day, my younger cousin, who is a student, told me that Wikipedia was being blocked at some universities because people felt it lacked trust or truth. I checked and even saw the Google rating was lower than expected. That really concerned me, and I decided to contribute to Wikipedia to improve its quality, especially for others like him.

I’ve been here for several days now and haven't even found much to do. But I recently helped someone with an essay about peace. It had nothing personal or harmful in it — just a message about humanity and peace. Sadly, that’s where this issue began.

Now I see my account is being questioned, and you’re thinking about blocking me. That’s your decision, and I won’t try to stop you — but I’m disappointed with how new contributors are treated. On the essay deletion page, someone just wrote “del” — no explanation, no effort to understand the message. It wasn’t political or biased — it was about peace, something that should matter to all of us.

Yes, I sometimes use a VPN — it’s common here — so maybe that explains any IP confusion. But your own username change page says users can take separate accounts if they want to protect their privacy. Why is it okay there, but not now?

Lastly, someone mentioned AI like it's a threat. But AI is just a tool — it helps us improve and simplify our work. It won't replace thoughtful, kind human editors, but it can support them. I still believe in Wikipedia’s mission — but I can’t work in an environment where people aren’t heard or respected.

Goodbye, Wikipedia. Zahid131 (talk) 21:34, 21 June 2025 (UTC)