User talk:C.Fred

Welcome to my talk page.

Please sign and date your comment (by adding ~~~~ at the end) to assist the bot that archives this page.
Please add a new thread to the bottom of the page if you wish to leave me a new message. If you're following up on a previous message, keep your comment in that same place:
- If you leave me a message here, I will reply here and {{Mention}} you here or leave a {{Talkback}} template on your talk page, unless you indicate that you are watching my page or no talkback message is necessary.
- If you are responding to a message I left on your talk page, please reply there so the discussion stays in one place. Please {{Mention}} me in the message there or leave a {{Talkback}} template here so I know about the message, unless I indicate that no talkback is necessary in my message. If you are commenting here on a message or warning I left there, don't be surprised if I move the discussion back to your talk page.
This page is set for automatic archiving every 7 days. I will remove talkback messages as acknowledgment that I have read the related reply, and I reserve the right to summarily remove any uncivil comments or frivolous warnings.

Thank you, and happy editing!

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be auto-archived by .

Dear, stop removing my edits and just edit the sentence

Hi, I noticed you removed my edit while the other user accepted my sentence and did not edit? Please, I advice you not to do this and instead just correct my sentence. Meghmollar2017 (talk) did not remove my edit and accepted it. He already reached a consensus and accepted my sentences finally. May i suggest you to stop removing my edits that Meghmollar2017 (talk) accepted? Thank you very much. 04:02, 19 September 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abrarward (talk • contribs) [reply]

@Abrarward: There is no evidedence that Meghmollar2017 "accepted" your edits. The talk page indicates the opposite. —C.Fred (talk) 15:24, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No he did and he did not remove my edit after i posted it. You are the one that keeps removing my edits even after he said i can post my sentences. He did not remove my edit after i posted and only you did. Please will you stop that since he accepted my posted sentence? Thank you Abrarward (talk) 15:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Meghmollar2017 - Wikipedia did agree to my edit and did not remove my sentence only you are doing that. He said i could add my sentence as long as i dont disrupt the first sentence. I beleive that you are the only person on wikipedia that has a problem with me adding a very detailful and important sentence since people living in chittagong do speak pure bengali. My sentence is needed to be there to make people aware of the bengali speakers in chittagong since its a multilinguistic immigrant place . The sentence of people considering chittagong to be a non standard bengali dialect isnt good enough to explain the stratus of bengali speakers in chittagong.Therefore, i request you to stop removing my sentence since User:Meghmollar2017 - Wikipedia does not have a problem with it. Thank you. Abrarward (talk) 16:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with @C.Fred. The excerpt you added was redundant and grammatically incorrect. I started a conversation at the talk page, and I didn't want to engage in an edit war. IMO, you couldn't convince us why we needed to change the lead section the way you did. — Meghmollar2017 (U T C) — 16:32, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, User:Meghmollar2017 - Wikipedia

I agree we shouldnt change the lead section.

But you did tell me that i could add my sentences please check your comments.

I did not say I want to change the lead sentence I just said i want to add a sentence since there are people living in chittagong who speak bengali.

You said i could add my sentence without disrupting the lead sentence.

What happened? Abrarward (talk) 18:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Abrarward, hello! There are some points you may have missed from the talkpage. I remember saying ... it is better not to change the lead sentence and the lead section as a whole without comprising the policies and MOS of English Wikipedia. here on Talk:Chittagonian laguage. As C.Fred has mentioned, your edits were redundant and grammatically incorrect, and I find them not adhering to the MOS. Secondly, you have to establish a clear consensus at the talkpage before jumping into the article, which is not the case here. Thirdly, anyone can edit Wikipedia provided that the edit is in good faith and complies with the norms, policies and MOS of English Wikipedia. Your edits lack the second ones. Here are some pages for your help: WP:LEAD, WP:LEADDD, WP:MOS, WP:Consensus, and WP:SIMPLE. Thank you for your time. — Meghmollar2017 (U T C) — 19:56, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not change the lead sentence. Please clarify when I did? I believe that I did not.

Would this sentence be a good one?

"Chittagongian is often referred to as a dialect of bengali as well due to the growing number of people living in chittagong region identyfying themselves as a bengali."

I beleive that this sentence is literally a huge improvement as a information which is important to know for people wanting to know about chittagong. Could you please confirm if this sentence is okay.

I have not removed the lead sentence and I will put this sentence after the lead sentence. Can you please reach a consensus here. Abrarward (talk) 22:11, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Chittagongian is often referred to as a dialect of bengali as well by many linguistic experts due to the growing number of people living in chittagong region identyfying themselves as a bengali."

Is this a good sentence to add after the lead sentence Abrarward (talk) 22:14, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Abrarward The introductory paragraph already contains the sentence, "Chittagonian is not inherently intelligible to other varieties of Bengali, although it is considered by some as a nonstandard Bengali dialect." This is properly capitalized and grammatically correct. Looking further at the source you cited, the claims about Chittagongian as a dialect of Bengali is not made by linguists: it's made by computer scientists attempting a programmatic translation. I don't see anywhere in the paper that people identifying as Bengali renders Chittagongian a dialect of Bengali. As a result, it fails verifiability. All that aside, at no point have you discussed this on the talk page and had a consensus emerge among editors that these claims should be added. —C.Fred (talk) 01:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

Well i may have some gramatical mistakes

However some authors and journalists have made a conclusion that there are growing number of people who speak standard bengali as first language. What is the issue if i just say linguistic experts since the person does say something about language.

How about this sentence?

" Chittagongian is often considered as a dialect of bengali by some linguistic enthusiasts in Bangladesh due to the growing number of people in chittagong speaking standard bengali as first language."

Is this a good imrovement? Please look at some of my links and stop trying to remove them since I have given a very good detail and a needed information since chittagong bengali is listed as there is a growing number of bengali speakers in chittagong thank you. There is no sentence of growing number of bengali speakers in the chittagongian language section so I beleive that this will stop the confusion of chittagongian bengali ok Abrarward (talk) 02:01, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Abrarward Again, what's the source that says makes the connection that Chittagongian is a dialect of Bengali because of the number of people speaking standard Bengali. If there were a growing number of people speaking English, that would not make Chittagongian a dialect or English. —C.Fred (talk) 03:13, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok have edited the page without mentoining this and instead wrote that chittagongian bengali is named due to growing number of people speaking bengali in chitagong thank you i accept my mistake Abrarward (talk) 03:20, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:17, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

For your effort on "recent changes".

Kvinnen (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Vivian Dsena. Notifying you as an interested party who's had to revert edits on the Dsena article multiple times recently. Ravensfire (talk) 14:25, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).

Administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]