User talk:Persan en japon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Persan en japon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Azerbaijani 13:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Persian Gulf

Thanks for the balanced way in which you are approaching this subject. I am sorry that I jumped to judgement on you, but these kind of editorial disputes always attract a multitude of anon IPs that raise suspicions. Whatever your view on the lead, I hope for more of your constructive engagement, which is an antidote to some of the unedifying, lengthy and tedious statements.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 17:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No worries. It takes a while to understand Wikipedia's opaque procedures and internecine editorial conflicts. It's not a great way of doing things and intensely frustrating, particularly as if we do manage to get consensus, it will be overturned in a matter of weeks or months by people who seek to drag up the whole issue again.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 17:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I think that many of these repetitive and lengthy statements could be deleted altogether as they count as disruptive. If it continues, then it may be worthwhile suggesting the intervention of an admin. But regrouping the statements is fine so long as it is conducive to making the talk page clearer to follow.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 13:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, regrouping/editing other editor's comments, is widely considered inappropriate, and in severe cases can be considered as a blockable offense.AlexanderPar 13:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
In the case of this user's edits, I think he improved the flow of the talk page as it is obvious that one user doesn't understand the most appropriate place to put comments. Persan en Japon's moves were entirely legitimate. Deleting nonsense from the talk page and removing personal attacks is also appropriate under the rules.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 13:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I'd like to be cautious in this regard so I didn't save my changes. I shall write a note on the talk page. However, can someone please archive the older part of the page? The page is too long.

[edit] Question

Are you the same person as User:210.2.198.2? AlexanderPar 16:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you ask? --Persan en Japon 16:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I am curious as to whether you're actually the same person. AlexanderPar 17:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
This is interesting! Why are you curious to know? Is this a witch hunt? --Persan en Japon 17:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
It's a simple question. Why must you avoid it? It's not like you have something to hide, is it? AlexanderPar 17:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I have nothing to hide, and will answer when satisfied of your intentions. I just found such a random question like that odd, especially when the answer can be found on Wikipedia. --Persan en Japon 17:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Or can the answer be found on Wikipedia? Sometimes things aren't as they appear. AlexanderPar 17:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Are you trying to tell me that you're someone else? --Persan en Japon 17:26, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
No, what I am trying to tell you is that I don't think you are the person who originally edited with User:210.2.198.2.... Time will tell if I am correct. Meanwhile, make sure to read WP:NOP. AlexanderPar 17:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I did mention before that due to privacy laws in Japan (where I reside) most high-speed Internet Service Providers have a default system-wide proxy service for their users. I hardly think that justifies it as an OPEN PROXY. --Persan en Japon 17:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Persian Gulf mediation cabal case

Just to let you know a discussion over the inclusion of "Arabian Gulf" in the lead of Persian Gulf has been opened over at the mediation cabal here. You are welcome to add your viewpoint to the discussion; as mediator, I look forward to a speedy conclusion to the case, and your input will help. CloudNine (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Persian Gulf protection

You do realize that only administrators can lock pages, and that you are not an administrator, right? I saw your edit [1], and became curious. You only added the tag, but that is of no consequence; editors can still edit the page.--Agha Nader (talk) 18:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you have misunderstood - "Sometimes" is about the frequently of the usage of the term "Arabian Gulf" in English, not the controversial nature of it. Do you still have an issue with this?--Sia34 (talk) 17:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)