User talk:Kashk/Archive 3

persian comment

I don't suppose you know what it says (or no someone that can translate)? Without knowing it's content, the best I can do is ask them to post in english. --InShaneee 23:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Majus

Thought you might be interested in this article I just started. Also check out developments at ajam. Take care, SouthernComfort 00:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Aucaman arbitration

I'm looking at it now, but there are several other cases in front if it. It may be a week or two yet, especially as the evidence seems to be unfinished. Dmcdevit·t 05:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy Easter

(remove this again when you have read it) --ManiF 13:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Qabusnameh etc.

Please take a look at LGBT rights in Iran. There are statements about Bustan and Golestan and Qabusnameh. Are these statements correct ? I think these are written by some western editors who have no understanding of the language and style of these books and sufi poetry in general ("Moreed/Morad" and Morshed ...). Thanks. --Mitso Bel13:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy Bunny Day!

May all the eggs you find in the bushes of life be happy eggs. Woof!

Never Cry Wolf 10:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections

As Wikipedia:Community Justice has over 30 members, we are beginning the elections process.

If you are interested in becoming the chairman, the chief executive or councillor please add yourself, and a statement, to Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.

Voting shall begin on April 24th, and end on May 1st. To see if you are eligible for a vote, please see Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.

Thank you,

Computerjoe's talk 20:56, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

CJ election reminder

Hi Khashayar Karimi

I noticed that you are not registered for voting or nomination in the CJ elections, and would like to remind everyone that all Candidates Must Submit Their Statement By April 23rd. Voting will begin April 24th, and end May 1st. More details on how to nominate yourself can be found HERE.

I hope to see you at the elections!

• The Giant Puffin • 20:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

RE:Thanks

Your'e welcome, and thank you for the thanks! I was considering making it a link, yes. I'll look into it now :-) - • The Giant Puffin • 21:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

metal genres

please discuss this on Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal. Most of what you wish to know is already there. Two of the topics were moved from black metal articles as they were deemed unfit there. Iranian metal is mostly just a rather contentless page, with few editors, that much better suits in the context of Heavy metal in Islamic countries (other article title may be appropriate). Nonetheless, the latter article requires work from someone who is more knowlegdable about the topic. Maybe you can help out here. Spearhead 21:24, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

don't make this a personal vendetta.

There is no need to make this a personal vendetta. there has been much discussion going on over heavy metal genres on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Metal- so don't say there hasn't been any discussion. Your complaints are unfounded - there has never been discussion or action on deletion of Slipknot; the merge of pakistani black metal was intended as a temporary one. Also, try and read the guidelines on notability. Spearhead 21:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Projects are intended to centralise discussion and in general improve the articles related to it. Also they get more of a audience. Particular since articles like iranian metal have very few (substantial) contributor, there is not likely going to be much discussion. Spearhead 21:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Azerbaijan

Hi there,

I just wanted to let you know that user, khoikhoi (MOD) keeps including the very offensive term, "south azerbaijan" on the Iranian Azerbaijan page. We should not let him post this propoganda and false information. That term has no place in an encycolpedia article. It is not relevent to the content. What a few seperatists call that region should not be shown here. If we dont stop this, people will start including the "a#abian gulf" as an alternate name on the Persian gulf page.

KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey Kash,

Thanks for backing me up! I really appreciate it. The user apparently thinks "I have problems with the Persian editors" - little does he know! :p Cheers, —Khoikhoi 05:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

attempt to delete Iranian metal

If you want to delete an article it should go through AFD, don't trick us by redirecting it to a non-existent article. Spearhead 16:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Nationality

I'll remind you once again not to bring up other editor's personal details here as you have in this comment. --InShaneee 16:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Because, as I've said before, it's not appropriate to discuss other editors at all. --InShaneee 17:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Heavy Metal in Islamic countries

Frankly, I think it's an interesting idea for an article (I would never have thought there would be any sort of metal scene in primarily Islamic countries!) As it's listed on AfD, I'm sure that some users who have no involvement in the article will end up commenting on it (that is, after all, the reason for having them all listed in one place). --InShaneee 19:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

== Removed my comment ==--IronChris | (talk) 20:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC) Hi Kash, I just wanted to let you know that I removed my comment (and your response) as it doesn't add anything to the discussion. Sorry about that, you were right: it wasn't necessary. Regards, IronChris | (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I removed your response as well because it was just an answer to my comment, and I thought it would not be very useful (and understandable) by itself. Feel free to put it back, I didn't mean to delete any material by doing that, just to make things clearer. IronChris | (talk) 19:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah I'm sorry I didn't even realise that I only took your comment out. Thanks for correcting my mistake! Take care, --IronChris | (talk) 20:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

oh yeah, Queen's birthday! thanks for reminding me, I'll give her a call ;) IronChris | (talk) 20:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Flag of Iran

Surely, it doesn't matter. It is only a question of style. If you'll change it back, I won't revert it. I think it is a small thing, not even a dispute. Just notice related {{Germany-bio-stub}}, which is with the current German flag, but many people from Imperial or Nazi Germany are marked with this stub and also many people from the Middle Ages for example. - Darwinek 17:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Hey Kash,

I'm actually not quite sure. For now we should assume good faith until they do something very similar to Xebat's behavior. We'll just wait and see. —Khoikhoi 22:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Rumi

Hi Kash, I'm afraid I don't know the Persian wording. I had a look around to find it for you, but no luck so far. If I do, I'll let you know. I'd be interested to know too, because there are several translations of it around. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Tehran

Any way according to WP policy it is not a good reason to remove that. I don't remember Tehrani Turks were genocided since 1987. Togrol 00:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Removing people's comments

It doesn't look like nonsense to me, please just don't do it, it makes you look bad. —Khoikhoi 00:15, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

She removed my comments and I did that. It is a very bad action. lets not to remove our comments. Togrol 00:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

It looks like you've been giving him trouble as well. Please try to discuss it with him instead of just edit waring. Read WP:1RR. He doesn't seem to be a completely unreasonable person, and instead of giving him vandal warnings (which are inappropriate, because his edits were done in good faith) try to come to a compromise. Remember, don't bite the newcommers. —Khoikhoi 00:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

For the tehran population which I'm sure is Turkish since very begining I provided an evidence. I fix that in the article. We say according to that source ..."" Togrol 00:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Just remember to assume good faith, that's all. I was saying that giving him vandal templates are inappropriate becuase what he was doing wasn't vandalism, they were good faith edits. I didn't check to see if they were POV or not, but if they were, just inform him about WP:NPOV. (You could use Template:NPOV user) Anyways, just keep these mind mind in the future. Khoda-hafez, doosteh man. —Khoikhoi 00:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Your rollback should only be used for clear vandalism, like the blanking of an article. —Khoikhoi 00:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Hehehe, I assume bad faith sometimes as well, don't worry. —Khoikhoi 00:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

One last thing: a good idea is to contact other users, such as SouthernComfort for help on the situation. —Khoikhoi 00:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

It is needed. It is useful for the reader that the majority of population of a city are what. Indeed it is irrelevant and nonsense to say that the most people of say Paris speak French and here especially in Iran where the only allowed tonge is persian not Turkish. So if the mentioning of the main ethnicity of the city is not needed then the nonsense of 99% speak persian too should go. Togrol 00:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Hamedan or Hamadan

Hi there, I notice you moved Hamadan Province to Hamedan Province last month. However, the article for the city is still at Hamadan. I would move it to Hamedan but I can't find the reason Hamadan Province was moved to Hamedan Province. I'd like to know your opinion first. Green Giant 22:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I've always been under the impression that it was Hamadan but it's a minor spelling quibble. My real concern is that the articles should be either at Hamadan/Hamadan Province or Hamedan/Hamedan Province to ensure regularity. Green Giant 23:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Ba doroud

No its not, but not more than puting those stuff in the article itself. We are not here to push our religious or political believes into others. Our job as iranians here should be to solely contribute and defend our rights, not to make commercial for a religious believe. Don't you agree. Cheers --Darkred 23:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

It seems there already is a mention of it, a whole section devoted to the kurdish norouz. --Darkred 10:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, yes its too large, two sections too large. If i am right those kurdish vandalizers have been banned correct. Should be no problem shortening the kurdish section i guess.--Darkred 10:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Xebat

Yeah, I started to have my doubts that Retau (talk • contribs) wasn't Xebat when he created Category:Kurdish cities and added them to articles like Kermanshah. I'm keeping an eye on this user. Cool Cat is already looking into it. I'd like to thank you for assuming good faith at first however. All the best, —Khoikhoi 08:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Your revert at Yazidi

• "On here was uncalled for. You did not even read my full reason on the talk page. Such edits may be counted as WP:Vandalism. -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 10:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)"

How do you know what I read? For your information, I did read your full "reason" for deleting an entire section and did not agree that it was a legitimate "reason" to delete an entire section. I stated such on the talk page and gave a reason before reverting, that's not vandalism. Your unilateral deletion of content is closer to vandalism. The page is about Yazidi beliefs not Zoroaster, if your problem is with the source, insert a NPOV rebuttal, don't unilateraly blank an entire section unitl it can be hashed out in the talk page. --WilliamThweatt 14:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense can be removed from Wikipedia safely, your statement on the talk sounded like you did not read my reason and only focused only on the Zoroastar part of it, just as you have now.

In any case "unilateral deletion of content", it was removed before and discussed in the talk before too, a user came on my talk page and said he has given correct sources for it, however when I checked back, I couldn't see any correct sources as such, yet. -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 16:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Username

Actually, since you had your account moved, your old account essentially doesn't exist anymore. Also, you might wanna fix your 'leave a message' thing at the top of the page. --InShaneee 19:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Not sure. I've been migrating email systems recently, so there might have been some wacky email lossage in there somewhere. --InShaneee 20:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Nazanin

No, use of a single name in this instance is not obvious, to me or another reader. It's obvious to you, but that doesn't mean everyone else is going to know why this is so. So please do not remove the edits of another user unless you are improving an article, which it really appears you did not do. --Kickstart70-T-C 21:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

That needs explanation, not citation, when you ask for citation that you means you need verification. You were not trying to help before, only by adding tags, and your suggestion that I did not improve the article is not very nice of you while I added a section to the article, added the correct tag and also discussed in the talk, perhaps you should read WP:Civil. --- K a s h ^{Talk | email} 23:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I encourage you to warn me

In fact, let's bring an administrator or two into this. You've undone perfectly good edits of mine throughout this process, and overall been rather rude about it. Yes, the manual of style says the following:

Articles with a single picture are encouraged to have that picture at the top of the article, right-aligned, but this is not a hard-and-fast rule. Portraits with the head looking to the right should be left-aligned (looking into the article).

It is not clear, and was perfectly fine right-aligned. Your own style preference is NOT the overriding concern here.

So, please, yes, do warn me, so that we can get the arbitration going and have your own and my edits questioned. I welcome the unbiased look at the situation. --Kickstart70-T-C 23:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I am not even going to bother with you. I have already added another picture. I said lets be nice to eachother, then you reverted my edit? Seems like someone has had a bad day! --- K a s h ^{Talk | email} 23:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy to ignore you from this point on. I ask that you continue to make edits with an eye to not undoing the work of others, but of course I can't force you to do this. Looking through your edit history it seems that a lot of people have had this issue with you. I'd rather peacefully coexist. In any case, I'll probably just give up working on this page and remove it from my watchlist to avoid your edits. Just not worth the hassle. --Kickstart70-T-C 23:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

For your information, I've been very passionate about this subject (See my blog post from last week or so here). In any case I recommend you stay Civil from now on especially when editing controvertial topics, and making comments such as you just did now and you have had on my talk page will not help with anything. Peace for now --- K a s h ^{Talk | email} 23:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom

No, it's in the correct place. It looked good to me. —Khoikhoi 00:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

BTW, keep an eye on the Persian Jews page, it looks like the edit wars have started up again. —Khoikhoi 03:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Also Geber. —Khoikhoi 03:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries

I usually do leave some sort of message, but at times I forget to or think it's too minor of an edit to explain. Thanks. Tombseye 21:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Mohammed Mossadegh

Thank you for pointing that out, i just reverted before seeing what e had done, because of his comments on the talk page. --Darkred 23:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Your statement

Sorry about the delay in answering (I'm really distracted these days). I think that's as good a place as any; you might also put it in your evidence section. Though my considered opinion as an arbitrator is that the proposals I made for banning Aucaman from all Persia-related articles are the least controversial ones, and will have no problem passing. So you should have no worries there. Dmcdevit·t 17:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, the problem is this: nothing excuses edit warring. It's just bad behavior. Always. That is something that I hope this arbitration is getting across. It doesn't matter if you are are the agressor or not, if the other guy started it or not, even if your content is right or wrong. The fact is that if some one else is the aggressor, and if they're starting an edit war, and especially if you are right, then you ought to pursue dispute resolution rather than indulging an edit warrior by warring. So if you were hoping the evidence would persuade us to reduce the Probations, it doesn't sway me in that direction. If you are hoping it will encourage a stiffer remedy for Zora, you may have noticed that I've decided not to vote, either support or oppose, on those. I won't be making any proposals in that area, either more or less severe (as there is an appearance of conflict of interest). I think the other arbitrators' reasoning there is the different degree of edit warring and single-mindedness by her compared to the others. In fact, I rather expect the current proposal to be how it ends across the board, but I could be wrong. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

NK Userbox

Yes, I've seen it. See Wikipedia:Userboxes for Jimbo's quote. I think that pretty much explains it. —Khoikhoi 19:35, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Reza Pahlavi II

Well i don't really know much about him except that he is a good man, and he is trying. --Darkred 02:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Acuaman

I see, but how long does it take to bann 1 vandalizer? lol. When did you request for arbitration? --Darkred 09:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Reward

Cool man, Does it mean I could get 40 USD if I do all the work ? Just kidding. I'm gonna make it FA asap my end sem exams are over (most probably first of June). Best wishes. Amir85 13:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Crown

Since you're working on the pahlavi pages, here is the pahlavi crown pic i uploaded, i am sure you will put it to good use. Pahlavi_Crown.jpg --Darkred 15:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

It's about them so they should be consulted

I didn't target anyone, but I did let a few Azeris know about the vote about them as opposed to letting just the Persian editors decide for them. Since you've all claimed that Azeris are 'Iranian peoples' I asked a few Azeris to participate. I didn't tell them how to vote or what to think so your indignation aside, I didn't do anything wrong. Tombseye 21:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Reza Pahlavi

Kash, don't change text around a link to say the exact opposite of what a link says. That is not how links are used. A link is a citation to a source. Changing text to give a different meaning to what the citation states is seen by many as vandalism. I know you did not intend it that way. Just be careful not to do that. It is a simple, but serious, error to make. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 00:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

That is baseless accusation. You reverted my sourced info, that is vandalism. Not what I did which was to make the explanation less POV --- K a s h ^{Talk | email} 00:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't show any evidence of a change, which is what your text implied. Vox pops aren't great, but in the absence of opinion polls they are all we can rely on. And AFP aren't exactly fans of the Islamic Republic. They weren't going out to get critical comments. They just got it. The problem with the article is that it is so overloaded with hagiographic stuff about the guy as to run into serious NPOV problems. Any source that suggests a contrary view has to be recorded under NPOV rules. We can only report 100% supportive rules if there is no evidence whatsoever of criticism. If you think I am being critical, you should see what would happen if other Wikipedians got near that article. They would tear it to shreds and accuse it of extreme bias towards Pahlavi.FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 00:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Aucaman case

It would be a shame to lose contributing editors, but if they cannot edit within policy then the Arbitration Committee must take appropriate action. This applies to all participants in the case. Jayjg ^(talk) 15:30, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah

I know what you mean, I'm feeling pretty bummed out myself with Jayjg's additions to the ArbCom. Don't worry, things don't seem to be final yet. Perhaps a Wikibreak would help? —Khoikhoi 01:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am not a fan of George Bush either, nut I feel exactly as you said. Some people just hide behind semi-democratic slogans to justify their hatred of the likes of Bush and to conceal their misunderstandings of history, whereas their own ideas are (provenly) by far more dangerous, undemocratic, and totalitarian. This, of course, is not to say that there are not a lot of bright people crticizing right-wing ideas. Shervink 11:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)shervink

Reza Cyrus Pahlavi

Hi, may I ask why you keep removing this part:

":This article is about Prince Reza Cyrus Pahlavi, for Reza Shah, his grandfather please see Reza Shah. For other uses please see Reza Pahlavi"

The guy is called Reza Pahlavi, he is known as Reza Pahlavi, not many people know his middle name, he is linked from Reza Pahlavi disambig too, so can you please explain to me why oh why you would remove this?! --- K a s h ^{Talk | email} 14:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

As I explained on the talk, that disambiguation note is no longer necessary given the new title. generally such notes are never placed unless it is possible that someone typing in the name of the article would want those articles. Given that Reza Pahlavi is a disambiguation page, this is further unecessary. As you say, very few people know his middle name so if someone typed in "Reza Cyrus Pahlavi" there is 0 chance that they were looking for one of the other two. Additionally, the note is not NPOV because it is an attempt to sneak in the honorific "Prince" even though that is not a title he currently claims. Thought no one would notice, eh? :) savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 18:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Category: User archives