This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks for uploading File:Noureddin Afi.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 08:41, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
This deletion certainly occurred ages ago, so I admire you for even finding it! The article was deleted according to an AfD, the chief complaint against it being that it constituted " original research." I will restore the article and place it in your userspace at User:Mhhossein/Hadith of Persians and belief. This will allow you to salvage whatever content you think is useful. According to the content that is present in the article, this Hadith has no formal name. I would humbly suggest that you choose a name that sounds more natural in English, such as "Hadith regarding the Faith of the Persians." I have no idea whether such a name is supported in sources; I only know that the current title of the article sounds awkward in English, and that this poor title was cited in the AfD as among the reasons for deletion. Best wishes, Xoloz ( talk) 20:34, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.
I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:
This applies to infoboxes, too.
Thanks, and my best wishes.
Tony (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Noureddin, Son of Iran is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noureddin, Son of Iran until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Super Mario Man ( talk ) 20:38, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:One woman's war.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi.. it is ok to use sources in Persian/Farsi. If you can find any Persian/Farsi sources with Google. The more sources the better chance it will Keep. We can read it with Google Translate. Thank you. -- Green C 14:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Musnad and Quraysh ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Risalah al-Huquq, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Director ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 12:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I think you deserve this barnstar for adding much needed information to the ISIS article, particularly the section on ideology and beliefs. Well done! P123ct1 ( talk) 09:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC) |
I certainly agree that the new section should have greater prominence, but it could only be moved to a main heading near the beginning if it applied to all of ISIS's predecessor organisations (as listed in "Names & name changes"), because although the article calls itself "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant", it is just as much about those organisations as it is about ISIS itself. If you feel confident that the "Ideology and beliefs" applies to all of them, I would go ahead and put it right near the beginning as a main section (although I guess some of the wording would have to be altered slightly). I am absolutely no expert on Middle East matters, so that would be for you to judge, but if you feel confident, why not do it and see? (I have chopped up and swapped around bits in this article and the al-Bagdhadi one mercilessly, and never had any complaints! Mind you I only did it when I felt on safe ground.) Even if people do object, at least it would get them thinking and realise how important the question of ideology and beliefs is in this case. To me the ideology is ultimately more important than the historical aspect, for it is that which drives events in all religious wars at all times in history. Personally I think this article is too history-biased as it stands now. If people object and say ideology and belief is for another article, I will support you; there should be at least some mention of it in an article like this. And, of course, now the caliphate has been established, this question of ideology becomes pre-eminently important. Be bold! -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
You mentioned me in your post on the Talk page as having reverted you. Please can you tell me what that was? I am not conscious of reverting anything. Was it the removal of "even"? The last thing I want to do is edit-war. I have restored your "even" to be on the safe side. I have not touched your new section on women. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 08:23, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
On 10 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the c. 8th-century medical text Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah, attributed to Ali al-Ridha, is also known as the "Golden Treatise"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 21:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
this is for good help and editing pages on Islam. well done. Mehdi ghaed ( talk) 21:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC) |
I appreciate your attempt but the entire background section is still in violation. I've done it myself while adding info so I completely understand how hard it is. Fixing some of the wording is not sufficient. You plagiarized the structure as well. It needs to be removed and completely restructured or else you put Wikipedia in an inappropriate position. Furthermore, the piece used says a lot that could be disputed.Please remove/heavily edit it.
"Facts cannot be copyrighted. It is legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate the concepts in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia. But be careful not to closely paraphrase; the structure, presentation, and phrasing of the information should be your own original creation. The United States court of appeals noted in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service that factual compilations of information may be protected with respect to "selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a minimal degree of creativity," as "[t]he compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers."[1] You can use the facts, but unless they are presented without creativity (such as an alphabetical phone directory), you may need to reorganize as well as restate them to avoid substantial similarity infringement. It can be helpful in this respect to utilize multiple sources, which can provide a greater selection of facts from which to draw." -
WP:COMPLIC (emphasis added)
I refer you to this exchange I had with Technophant.about adding wikilinks to "BBC News". The wikilinks were deliberate.
You have undone some carefully thought out changes. I have not reverted you, but perhaps you might like to reconsider your reverts. You will notice, if you look, that many references in the footnotes have been highlighted (by others, who put in the footnotes), for exactly the same reason: to help readers unfamiliar with the sites they are looking at. Wikipedia is about helping readers to learn what they are reading about.
You say you used Reflinks to make the changes. Reflinks is a tool that was withdrawn from use on 1st July this year (see Village Pump archived discussion), so I cannot understand how you managed this. Perhaps it has been reinstalled after all the fuss about removing it. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 10:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
سلام به شما. من در
Reactions to the 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict#Demonstrations and protests#2014 Quds Day
با تحقیقات زیادم توانستم آمار خوبی از راهپیماییهای روز قدس در سال 2014 را جمعآوری کنم. چون دیدم شما در مقاله روز قدس در ویکی انگلیسی، زحمت ایجاد این بخش را کشیدید، پیشنهاد میکنم از اطلاعاتی که من جمعآوری کردم، برای تکمیل بخش مربوط به سال 2014 استفاده کنید. موفق باشید. Gire 3pich2005 ( talk) 14:43, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
خیلی عالی است. بنده به دلیل اینکه سواد انگلیسی قابل توجهی ندارم، هیچگاه نتوانستم در اینجا در نوشتن متن مؤثر باشم ولی هزاران ویرایش در خصوص تصاویر و رده و ویرایشات جزئی دارم. البته اسم من در ویکی فارسی، لرزه بر اندامها میاندازد. :) امیدوارم در کارتان موفق باشید و اگر کمکی از من بر میآمد، مطرح کنید. انشالله شرمنده نشوم. Gire 3pich2005 ( talk) 15:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
سلام مجدد دوست من. بنده دیشب مقاله
2014 Israel raids on UNRWA schools
را شروع کردم ولی به دلیل ضعف در جملهسازی در زبان انگلیسی، قادر نیستم آن را گسترش دهم. از اینرو میخواستم به شما زحمت دهم دانشنامه را در گسترش این مقاله مفید یاری دهید. پیشاپیش ممنون. Gire 3pich2005 ( talk) 08:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.-- Shrike ( talk)/ WP:RX 09:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I have attempted to clarify your addition about Salafists and Hamas to this section. It was not very clear how the second sentence related to the first, so I looked at the article and have added some words for clarification. Could you check that this what you meant, please? I would not like to put words in your mouth. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 12:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I noticed you did not mention Wahhabism in your section on "Ideology and Beliefs" and I wondered if you could briefly describe in this section the relationship between ISIS and this brand of Islamic belief. Gazkthul says in #13, "Wahhabi movement", in Archive 2 of the ISIS Talk page, that ISIS are not Wahhabists, while confusingly, the Wiki article on the Wahhabi movement categorically states that ISIS does subscribe to Wahhabism . The "Wahhabist" reference goes in and out of this article like a yo-yo, i.e. it is the subject of many reverts, some people believing ISIS are Wahhabist and some not. Maybe there is genuine controversy over this, so a few words on the subject in this section for this reason alone I think would be a good idea. Could you contribute a paragraph here, or should I ask Gazkthul to do it? I suppose I could give a resume of what Gazkthul says on this, but I would not be very confident doing so, especially as the Wiki article on the subject contradicts what he says. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 13:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind my lightly copy-editing your new edits sometimes. I only do it so that the sentences run smoothly and blend in with those before and after. In fact, when I first started copy-editing this article, I went through the whole lot making small changes here and there to make it read more smoothly. The article is very long, so it was a mammoth task! -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I have replied here. Kingsindian ( talk) 11:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Salam Alaykom, As you do your best to improve the articles, this Baklava will help you. God bless you. Seyyed( t- c) 08:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you for your considerate review of Islamic calligraphy,
the most troubling part I think is indeed finding reliable references. If you would address which references is unsuitable, I'll try to find it in other references. But my sources are pretty limited. Regarding the lead section, I think I could come up with something.
again, thx. Sorry if it took a long time to fix this Alteaven ( talk) 02:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I've found this website later in my edit. It's quite broad and includes credit, would it serve as suitable replacement for above websites? Alteaven ( talk) 10:47, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications.
Oh! I've checked that but I thought that counts as self-published. Right, since she provides definitions of kufic and other styles, It can replace many things cited from the defunct websites. Thanks a lot! I'll edit it ASAP Alteaven ( talk) 13:23, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Someone today has made an edit to your "Ideology and beliefs", first para. You may want to check they have understood what you meant to say. I think it's all right. (I watch all new edits!) -- P123ct1 ( talk) 22:17, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello & thanks I have problem in referencing & I didn't get the difference between reference list & footnotes.ofcourse I know I must study wiki rules more. Being bold is very difficult. How can I improve that this definition for this word is better? Salman mahdi ( talk) 17:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Salaam! Great job brother! Strivingsoul ( talk) 15:36, 11 August 2014 (UTC) |
Salam, please pay attention to her article as it is on the main page now. -- Seyyed( t- c) 05:51, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't know whether you are still watching your contributions to this page, but I see someone has altered your "Ideology and beliefs" section, adding "violent" to the first line, tipping the balance away from what I think you intended. It is in line with other recent changes in the Lead, where even more intemperate language is being used now, clearly flouting NPOV. The two history search tools are not working at the moment, so I don't know who edited this. I would take out "violent" myself, but am up against a 1RR and have other important changes to make after that expires! Perhaps you think how it stands now is okay, but thought I had better notify you in case not. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 17:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
salam You've sentme a message, but I can't see it on my talk page; what's the problem? Salman mahdi ( talk) 09:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Salam, how can we have an easy access to our friends in our user page? thanks for ur help and just u should be patient and kind until we be professional.( where is its guidance in Wiki?) Salman mahdi ( talk) 06:33, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
A disagreement has arisen over whether ISIS should be called Sunnis or Kharijites. Yesterday I put "Sunni Islamism" into the second infobox and it was changed to this [4], which at least attempts to indicate there is controversy over this. I have read your interesting essay about Sunnis and Shias on your userpage but am not clear if ISIS call themselves Sunnis. There is no mention of "Sunni" in the "Ideology and belief" section though it does say that whether they are Kharijite is a matter of opinion. I think you wrote most of this section, didn't you? I know very little about this subject, so I wonder if you could add a few words about "Sunni" on the ISIS Talk page [5] and in that section as well, please. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:04, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 13:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
The article Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 18:42, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of The Fifteen Whispered Prayers (Munajat) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 23:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
You may not have seen Jason from nyc's comment, which appears before yours today. I was trying to move the whole section "Ideology and beliefs (3)" to the end of the Talk page and forgot to delete it when I had done the move, and Jason added his comment to the old section. I have now moved his comment to the section at the end before yours, as he hadn't seen our comments. Sorry about this. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I can't figure out what this means:"The members of the Muhammad family who were expected to participate is no modified in some of the sunni sources while some others mention Fatima, Hasan and Hossein as the participants. Meanwhile, some of the sunni sources are in agreement with shia believe and saying that Ahl al-Kisa, including Ali, participated the occasion." Dougweller ( talk) 14:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
On 6 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Fifteen Whispered Prayers, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that The Fifteen Whispered Prayers by Imam Zayn al-Abidin contains different prayers to be recited in accordance with one's present mood? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hadith of Mubahala, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hasan and Fatima. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Using this tool, we see that on the edit before Hadi.anani started, the character count was 6,457 (not including subheads, charts, captions or lists). After the most recent edit, the character count is 10,880. Hadi.anani did a great job improving the sources and the presentation, but it's not a 5x expansion. Yoninah ( talk) 12:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2014 Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's speech at UN is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's speech at UN until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Serten ( talk) 03:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kirchner un speech. Since you had some involvement with the Kirchner un speech redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Serten ( talk) 05:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Chris Troutman ( talk) 19:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
There is currently an requested move underway here and I am trying to get as many users to provide input as possible. I appreciate your contributions! - SantiLak ( talk) 23:58, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
In regards to your revert of my edit. I would advise you to look more carefully and see that I actually updated the OCHA figure with a more recent/newer one (you reverted to an outdated/older one); added a newer source for the 70% civilians Ministry figure (which you removed); moved about a few sources (from places that one source instead of three was enough) but did not remove the said sources from the article altogether. The only thing that comes to my mind when you said sourced material is the OCHA women/children breakdown that I removed from the infobox. I removed it because it has no place in the infobox. The infobox is there only for the number of civilian and combatant dead. The breakdown among children and women is already talked about (with the said source) in the main body of the article and in multiple paragraphs, not just one. Hope this clears it up. Cheers! :) EkoGraf ( talk) 09:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@ EkoGraf: It's clear. Using the same motivation, there's no need to have "including 1 native of Thailand" in the infobox. Mhhossein ( talk) 10:20, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! You said you sometimes did not get pinged when your name is mentioned in the Talk page. I looked into this as I was puzzled, and the WP Help Desk said users must be careful to sign any comment which includes the pinged name, otherwise the pinging doesn't work. They spotted that I had not signed my message where I had pinged you in the Talk page, which is why you never had notification that time! They also said that getting notifications/being pinged depends on how "Preferences" are set up. If you go to "Preferences" and click on "Notifications", there is a section headed "Notify me about these events". There is a column for "Web" and one for "Email". If you want to get notifications on screen for the various events, just tick in the "Web" column all the ones you want to get notifications of. I have ticked all mine so I can't go wrong! Hope this helps. (You may know it already!) ~ P-123 ( talk) 15:06, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I only meant where are you based. I knew you were Iranian! If you don't reply, I will know you prefer not to disclose. :) ~ P-123 ( talk) 18:37, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
@ P-123: That's kind of you. I contributed in some articles and created some other. Thanks God, I made a GA. I'm going to ask you help me with The Fourteen Infallibles. We tried to promote it to the Featured List level but the language is not fascinating as the reviewers say. Fortunately as a native speaker of English, your role is very beneficial. Is it OK with you? Mhhossein ( talk) 19:26, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Reading the article as it is now, I understand less about the Fourteen Infallibles and the concepts of Ismah and Imamah than I did when I read it the first time! I think it may have been condensed too much, but I am no judge of that. I only speak as an uninformed reader. I am not sure a prohibition can be incumbent upon someone. I have never heard that before. It is quoted in Google, but only twice and from a very strange-sounding translation. ~ P-123 ( talk) 21:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Three things:.
I haven't looked at the Family Tree yet, but I will. When you answer my queries I can do something with those three parts I didn't understand. This is more fun than ISIS! There is too much stress involved in editing ISIS now. The editors are so quarrelsome! I was very surprised to read your comment to Greg that you like editing the ISIS page now! ~ P-123 ( talk) 16:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The same editor is back and I am not happy with the way he is changing the wording. He seems the sort of editor (from his edit summaries - and from the Talk page!) who will revert any changes made to his wording, and as I don't want to edit-war over grammar (!), I think I had better not do any more. For example, he has: "Shias also believe that the Fourteen Infallibles are superior to the rest of creation, even the major prophets other than Muhammad." It is already clear that Muhammad is one of the Infallibles, so why add "other than Muhammad"? I also do not agree with his reason for including semi-colons in the list. Commas are fine, here; readers can count up to 14! (I cannot understand why "include" at the beginning was there (which he has correctly changed to "are") as I am sure I altered this to "are" much earlier on.) The editor has only started recopy-editing, so I expect there will be other changes. He is clearly not a collaborative editor, going by his comments in the Talk page. ~
P-123 (
talk) 20:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
@ P-123: OK Thanks for your valuable efforts in this article. Is your physical (or emotional?) problem to the involvement in ISIS Talk page? You're pushing yourself too hard! Mhhossein ( talk) 16:09, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you put an AfD template on the Wilayat al-Sina (ISIL) and the Wilayat Barqah (ISIL) articles. However, the AfD link on the Wilayat al-Sina (ISIL) article article goes to the wrong page [6]. Just thought I'd let you know. David O. Johnson ( talk) 22:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate it if you would be able to take time to either assess or review this article:
Hello Mhhossein, I have just posted this tag on the above mentioned article. The tag advises I also contact the author, so I am. I put the reason on the tag as:
There are hundreds, if not thousands of different topics in Hadith. This article is pushing a POV. Please consider for deletion.
Thanks Mbcap ( talk) 19:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
The history of the critical content was that, some months ago I was breaking consensus on a particular issue, another editor was edit warring so as to reduce the critical content of both the lead and the rest of the article. P-123 was the editor with the smarts to notice a couple of the significant departures of content. I was presented by the same editor [the edit warring one] as being the only one that that wanted critical content to remain in the lead. Discussion on the inclusion of critical content was then conducted from a position within which there was significantly reduced content. It took me a while to get my head together in the situation but, in the context of some welcome support, I produced and presented a record of the edit warring. There was a resulting conflict in the threads concerned but, despite efforts, the article has not been the same since. GregKaye ✍♪ 16:50, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for adding your voice to the discussion on the new ordering for the article. There are only three editors who think the characteristics section should go before the criticisms for clearly logical reasons as befits an encyclopaedia, or any account of the subject for that matter, but I fear the prominent editors on the page are no longer trying to write an encyclopaedia at all. As you will have read I have been outspoken about this, but the opposition has discounted everything I have said and I don't think anything can be done to stop the way the article is going. It is acquiring the stamp of two editors and the old editors have dropped away one by one. I am grateful for your support although I don't think our views will carry any weight. ~ P123ct1 ( talk) 10:06, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
You will be interested in this AfD /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wilayat_Kirkuk_(ISIL) Legacypac ( talk) 19:58, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi and happy holidays for whenever you have them in Iran.
Enjoy
I was curious about the Hadith of Virtures of Persian People article but could not find it. Is there a link? GregKaye ✍♪ 14:44, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
I took an interest in the title of the Hadith when I saw it as I have strong opinions on the benefits of Patriotism as more important than Nationalism. Perhaps, last time I spoke too much about my views on religion but I can still recognise a beautiful text .
I would also be interested in knowing how people in Iran view the Iraqi conflict. I started a thread for the sake of clarification at Talk:Iraqi insurgency (2011–present)#Insurgency or civil war? (RfC).
Thanks GregKaye ✍♪ 13:41, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
You asked about this, thanks. Basically I disagree too much with the way the article has been going recently. I don't think it has good encylopaedic content now, or rather the content is fine but the presentation of it is not neutral. It is showing what I see as ant-ISIL bias in the Lead and I do not agree with not stating facts as facts, as I have often said on the Talk page. There seems to be a reluctance to be straightforward; there are too many qualifiers throughout the article like "self-declared" and "caliphate"s and "Islamic State"s in inverted commas, which again to me shows anti-ISIL bias. However, Gregkaye and Legacypac strongly disagree with my views and I have no support from other editors. There is a clear difference of view on how WP:NPOV should be interpreted and I am losing the battle. There are at least two discussions on the Talk page about this. I am not happy about text not being properly backed up by citations either; you will have seen some of my misgivings on that on the Talk page as well. I am regarded as too pedantic, but I think accurate citations are important. This has no connection with my being taken to AN/I by Gregkaye, by the way, which happened after I put up that notice about copy-editing. I don't know if you have looked at the AN/I. There is a link to it on the Talk page. As you probably know, Gregkaye and I have gone from being very good colleagues to very bad ones. I cannot say much about it as it would be unfair on Gregkaye. But you would probably find the AN/I content enlightening. Again, I cannot comment on the AN/I for the same reason. I am not used to belligerence and aggression and so am finding the going pretty hard in the AN/I. I have no problem defending myself but it is currently a war of attrition between us. I really cannot say any more, for fear of Gregkaye saying I am canvassing your support, and that might be added to the AN/I as a charge against me. . P-123 ( talk) 19:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mhhossein,
Knowing that you are a Muslim from Shia background I thought I would mention that I had found category templates appropriate to be placed at the bottom of articles. They are found at Category:Anti-Shi'ism which contains Category:Violence against Shia Muslims. I have added the first of the templates to the 'SIL article. This is just in case categorisations are in your interests.
Happy new year
Greg Kaye 15:39, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Of possible interest to you. [7] Legacypac ( talk) 01:38, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
P-123 is topic banned from ISIL and interaction banned from Gregkeye. Therefore they can't talk about either so your question is problematic as they can't respond. Legacypac ( talk) 17:15, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I have started copy-editing the article again, and as I did before, I have asked some questions about passages that did not make sense so I could then copy-edit them. An IP has just left a message on the Talk page where I did this to say that I should not copy-edit the article, although I have explained the background. All my WP activities are being watched very closely now! ~ P-123 ( talk) 17:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Mhhossein. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Dating Arba'een. Thank you.
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Awarded for your efforts to keep Wikipedia free of non-notable articles that promoted the claims of a terrorist organization. Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 04:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hi Mhhossein, I am currently working on Draft:List of states by official designation given to Daesh, ISIL, ISIS and wondered if you could find any relevant government reference to the use of Daesh / daash or any other relevant reverence. Reference can be in Persian or whatever but a relevant English reference would be preferred. I think that this type of article should have been produced some time ago but I guess I got to thinking about it in conjunction with the recent request move at talk:ISIL. Cheers Greg Kaye 17:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
@ Legacypac:Which region do you mean? The so called middle east? Mhhossein ( talk) 04:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I have just started editing Wikipedia and I noticed some of the articles like ISIL have explicitly cited the Koran and taken verses out of context and being anti-islamic and justifying rape .In accordance with wikipedias neutral policy, can you please remove those verses? Muhammad atta al-salam ( talk) 14:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello Mhhossein, seen as you have made a sizable contribution to Shia related topics, I thought you may be able to lend me some assistance. Do you know of any reliable non-partisan sources on Al-Hilli. So far I can only find Shia sources which are full of praise and Sunni sources which completely discount him and his contribution, so it is slightly difficult to get a neutral account of him. There is the brill sources but there must be other accounts as he made a big contribution to his field in his time. If you can let me know of any other good reliable source, I would be grateful. Regards Mbcap ( talk) 15:42, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I am working on al-Sahifa al-Sajjadiyya in my sandbox, and it seems you are experienced user about Islamic topic. would you help me for copy-edit of this article? M.Sakhaie 10:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
You accused me of posting copyright material which is false .The content is taken from this this website is not copyright protected.All the other sources are specified to support the claim, the content is not derived from any of the other sources other than the provided.If you wanna still argue the claims are repeated and echoed in all the sources many of them aren't even copyrght protected.Might wanna check all sources before reverting Hand snoojy ( talk) 14:30, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Just pinging you about this. Sorry about the Russian doll syndrome! ~ P-123 ( talk) 14:51, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
On 15 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article To the Youth in Europe and North America, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Iran's Supreme Leader, Khamenei, is alleged to be the first senior Islamic cleric directly addressing western youth about his religion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/To the Youth in Europe and North America. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:51, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Talk:To the_Youth_in_Europe_and_North_America#Paul_Craig_Roberts". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Anders Feder ( talk) 18:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Mhhossein::salam alaykom! I decided to delete Fadak (TV channel) because of following reason:
More content of the article don't have any sources. A few of them have, but their accuracy is controversial. Because of that the notability of the article is imprecise. According to Wikipedia:Notability, Only being one of the TV channels (or being famous) does not mean that is notable. So it should be deleted.
I do process, according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, but it seems that there is some problem. Can you help me? Thanks! Samaneh-davoudi ( talk) 08:49, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
Thanks for your contribution in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmad Keshvari. AliAkar ( talk) 14:45, 14 February 2015 (UTC) |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article One Woman's War: Da (Mother) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Woman's War: Da (Mother) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 08:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A City Under Siege: Tales of the Iran-Iraq War is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A City Under Siege: Tales of the Iran-Iraq War until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 07:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article That Which That Orphan Saw is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/That Which That Orphan Saw until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 07:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 07:33, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hadith of Virtues of Persia People is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of Virtues of Persia People until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mbcap ( talk) 01:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
A Barnstar! | Please participate
There's a voting going on here. It needs to close, but consensus is not certain. We need more participation. The issues can't remain without a resolution. Please, check it out. Closure of the discussion has started. ( refresh) Please, hurry. 78.149.193.255 ( talk) 16:24, 10 April 2015 (UTC) |
There is consensus to move, but supporters are divided on including or omitting years (a time period) in the title. -- George Ho ( talk) 06:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Why did you close it? WP:RMCI didn't encourage nominator to close it as if the request is supported. -- George Ho away from home ( talk) 23:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Many discussions result in a reasonably clear consensus, so if the consensus is clear, any editor—even one involved in the discussion—may close the discussion." That's why, I did the job!. By the way, which part of WP:RMCI does not encourage me to close the proposal? Mhhossein ( talk) 12:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I worked on Borunsi, this is a book related to the Iran-Iraq war. As you created Noureddin, Son of Iran and One Woman's War: Da (Mother), could you help me to improve it? Munifi3nt ( talk) 04:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hadith of Golden Chain you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Royroydeb -- Royroydeb ( talk) 18:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journey to Heading 270 Degrees is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journey to Heading 270 Degrees until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ism schism ( talk) 20:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
You requested dispute resolution about the deletion of a subpage that appears to be a polemic. That request has been declined as premature. Also, DRN is for discussing improvements to articles, not for discussing deletion of things. You can, if you wish, nominate the subpage for deletion via miscellany for deletion. Robert McClenon ( talk) 15:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Assalamualaikum. Thanks for your note. I've responded on my talk page. - User:bakura82
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article One Woman's War: Da (Mother) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Poltair -- Poltair ( talk) 08:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
The article One Woman's War: Da (Mother) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:One Woman's War: Da (Mother) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Poltair -- Poltair ( talk) 09:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
The article Hadith of Golden Chain you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Hadith of Golden Chain for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Royroydeb -- Royroydeb ( talk) 09:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
You were mentioned at WP:ANI in this discussion. Just FYI. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 01:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Javad Ramezani (جواد رمضانی) is a prolific sockpuppetteer trying to get his name into Wikipedia (see SPI). He started by pretending to be a great singer, but has moved on to pretending to be an ethologist, and inserting his name alongside that of Konrad Lorenz with edits like [15]] in articles about geese and animal behavior. He uses too many IP addresses for a range-block to be possible, and if his target is semi-protected he moves on to another.
I notice that he is doing the same on fa-wiki at fa:رفتارشناسی جانوران, and I am letting you know so that fa-wiki admins can be alerted. A search for his name may find other instances, and would be worth repeating from time to time, because he is very persistent.
The master account User:جواد رمضانی شوراب is blocked on fa-wiki with reason "حساب ایجادشده برای خرابکاری: فرد آمده است که اسم خود را در مقالههای ویکیپدیا وارد کند", and globally locked, and some of his other accounts like User:Javadramezanishorab are blocked on fa-wiki, so they know something about him already.
Regards, JohnCD ( talk) 13:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Birmingham Quran manuscript.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Armbrust
The Homunculus 14:36, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
|
I request you to arrange the page of I. K. A. Howard Ph.D. Lecturer in Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Edinburgh, died in March 2013. He deserves to be included in this encyclopedia. I could not find him at EN:WP. Thanks Nannadeem ( talk) 18:23, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Anders Feder ( talk) 07:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
For excellent work at Qods Day. LavaBaron ( talk) 22:51, 26 August 2015 (UTC) |
لطفا عکس منو بزار برای عزاداری محرم. -- ( talk) 06:04, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
افراطگرایان شیعه؟ شما مردمی را که برای عزاداری آمدهاند افراطی مینامید؟ یا شما مردم اردبیل را افراطی مینامید؟ واقعا از دید اهل تسنن و شما که جزوی از آن هستین این عکس نشانه افراط هست. فقط تاسف میخورم. Samək Talk 12:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Sadaqah at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HaEr48 ( talk) 04:32, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Mhhossein. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
Its for you. m,sharaf ( talk) 16:10, 20 December 2016 (UTC) |
WP has to rely on quality sources that have been published by recognized, peer-reviewed presses and journals. These presses and journals select experts in their field and check their work. It is reasonable to assume that they are more likely to be accurate than the editors at WP, whose expertise is generally less and whose work is not peer-reviewed by experts. You or I may know a lot about certain subject, but would anyone really recognize us as more expert in a field than the authors whose work we might contest? We may be very certain of what we say, but why should other editors believe us over recognized experts in the field.
In any case, this is established policy. If an editor wants to work on articles here, he or she must adhere to it.
The good news is that generally, I have found, valid points can be supported by responsible sources. Sometimes it takes a bit of hunting.
Good luck! Clean Copy talk 00:34, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
From [[WP:TRUTH}}:
Wikipedia's core sourcing policy, Wikipedia:Verifiability, previously defined the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia as "verifiability, not truth". "Verifiability" was used in this context to mean that material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply because they disagree with them. Clean Copy talk 03:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello:
The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article November 2016 Hillah suicide truck bombing has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist ( talk) 22:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The article 1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chris troutman -- Chris troutman ( talk) 03:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
The article Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 ( talk) 14:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chris troutman -- Chris troutman ( talk) 18:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 ( talk) 17:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Hey there! It is not required, but I always prefer articles to be up to last least B-class if there are active WikiProjects that can review them. MiHist has a very active assessment department and would be able to work with you to get it to a solid B-class article in no time (if it isn't already). Let me know if you decide to go that route, and I will get the review for GA started right after! Kees08 ( talk) 07:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Did you get an email? -- MehrdadFR ( talk) 13:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
This is about the dispute that was taken to the dispute resolution noticeboard over the article on Ali Khamenei. The filing party had removed a section from the article because he found it incomprehensible. I also thought that it was incomprehensible. You had said that an entire section should not be removed from an article because of a simple resolvable issue. An issue is not simple and resolvable if you do not discuss it collaboratively. I assumed that there was a language problem, that your command of English was not sufficient to permit detailed discussion of what you had written. Since you say that there is no language problem and that you can contribute to the English Wikipedia well, you should have been willing to discuss your edits, at least if your objective is to improve the encyclopedia. I had to close the request for dispute resolution because you did not appear to be willing to discuss. I see that the section has been removed. Please do not add sections to articles unless you are willing to discuss them in good faith. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
so called "Robert", and you insist on your unfair criticism of him, instead of respecting his considered opinion. How can I be positive in the face of such bungling? If you want respect you have to behave in a respectable manner. Dr. K. 05:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you very much
Icewhiz for your scholarly, and much-needed, reality-check against these baseless accusations. @Mhhossein: If you want to be respected and be taken seriously, please demonstrate that you understand your errors and false accusations. Please retract your allegations that I called your account "shared". Also please retract your unfair PA against veteran and respected editor
Robert McClenon for calling him quote: so called "Robert"
. That's simply not the way to gain respect in this collaborative project. In the process, can you also please apologise to Icewhiz, and myself, for insinuating that we are sockpuppets? Thank you.
Dr.
K. 11:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
"scholarly, and much-needed, reality-check"was an attempt to merely support you, like before. It's very very interesting that he ignored your referring to shared accounts. Did not you accuse me of possibly having a shared account? I don't want respect from you who don't know how to treat others on TP pages.
"much-needed, reality-check"against the misquoting. "Stop your usual nonsense," he told me in his edit summary when he made another ad hominen comment and made a false conclusion. You can add
"I know you have limited understanding of English"and
"[it] is beyond your current level of English (or honesty) to understand"to the list, let alone other pages. The reality is clarified now, thanks to your comment. -- Mhhossein talk 16:09, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
(Redacted)
An editor (not me) has started a discussion on AN/I that concerns you. You'll find it here. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 08:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for joining the Portals WikiProject.
Here's our first project-wide update. I hope you enjoy it...
The WikiProject reboot has been a success: the new re-envisioned project is up and running, with new members, ongoing discussions about automation, design, and upkeep; maintained task queques; and updates to members, like this, the very first one!
As you know, there's a proposal to delete all portals. It started out looking pretty dismal for portals, with primarily posts supporting their demise. It turned out that the proposer didn't post a deletion notice on the very pages being nominated for deletion (a requirement for all deletion discussions). Once that was done, a flood of opposition came in and has apparently turned the tide.
RfCs generally run for 30 days. It started April 8th, and so it has about 14 more days to run its course.
The more work we can do during that time on the portals, the stronger the reasons for keeping them will be. And the more prepared we will be for any MfDs that follow the closing of the RfC.
You may be wondering why we asked for AWB experience in the member-sign-up list.
We are gearing up to do maintenance runs on the entire set of portals, and the more people we have who can use AWB, the better.
But we're not quite ready to start this yet.
To be able to use AWB on the portals, we first need to know what the end result needs to be. Like on the news sections, do we comment out the out-of-date ones, or do we place the code to activate the newsbot on those pages? That would require an assessment of WikiNews and its news generating performance (areas covered, volume in each area), etc.
You can help us figure this out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Discussions about news sections.
Another area we're gearing up for, to do passes with AWB, are upgrades to the intro sections of portals. Many of these have static (copied/pasted) excerpts that go stale over time.
We're trying to figure out how to make self-updating excerpts to replace the existing static excerpts that are on many portals, and once this is done, AWB will be used to place the new code. See the discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Discussions about selective transclusion in intros.
There are 3 major areas of activity right now:
There are a few hundred existing portals that are missing from this list.
The list of missing entries, and instructions on what to do, can be found at Portal talk:Contents/Portals#These are not listed yet.
We need everybody's help on this. It's a big chore for one persons. But, many hands make light work. Please help chip away at this chore as much as you can. A little each day, form all of us, will get this done pretty quick.
In addition to browsing the portals in the 2 lists mentioned in the section above, you should take a look at the portal name space itself and what is in it.
That can be done at Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Watchlist.
There are discussions on many aspects of the WikiProject's operations, with more to come.
Such as about the purposes and functions of portals, design discussions, and so on.
There's even a automated design discussion over at Village Pump Technical, on selective transclusion.
I hope to see you on the talk page.
In addition to the automation efforts mentioned above, we will be looking into how to automate the selection and display of alternating excerpts, and alternating pictures, for the various portal sections.
Watch for these discussions on the Wikiproject's talk page.
Get ready, get set, go! — The Transhumanist 14:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
We now have 52 members, and more are joining daily.
Attention portal maintainers!
There's a new template to improve existing and new portals, called {{ Transclude lead excerpt}}.
It is a lot easier to use than copying and pasting text from articles, as it displays the paragraphs you specify automatically for you.
It makes excerpts so that they are always current and never go stale or fork.
It is more powerful than it looks, because it has the Lua Module:Excerpt supporting it.
Be careful, as it is alpha software. Please notify the WikiProject talkpage of any problems you come across.
To give you a sense of the reaction this template is generating, here is an excerpt of a discussion thread from the WikiProject's talk page:
I wrote a comment in the the April 26 section of the RfC explaining what we are up to. I liked the excerpt above so much, that I went back to my RfC posting, and inserted it.
What's this? An old oil lamp. It's so dirty, I think I'll polish it...
*poof*
Whoa! Are you a WikiGenie? In that case, I get 3 wishes!
I wish...
Please make my wishes come true. See you around the portals! — The Transhumanist 08:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
We've grown to 73 members, and morale is high. Thank you for joining. Here is some news, and some tasks...
2018-05-11: preparations are being made to close the RfC. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/RfC: Ending the system of portals.
When there, be sure to notice the consultation link.
We're trying to get a prototypical single-page portal developed in time to show the RfC closers before they make their final decision. You can help. It's Portal:Humanism. So far, we've applied selective transclusion (automation) to excerpts, and have made the following sections without subpages: intro, selected article, selected biography, categories, related portals, wikiprojects, things to do, and wikimedia. Eight down, 4 to go, plus 2 formatting subpages (not sure we can migrate those). Automating every section, would also be nice.
Our main objectives currently, are:
The intro section of many portals transcludes an "Intro" subpage that has an excerpt in it.
We're replacing that with a selective transclusion directly in the intro section, bypassing the subpage. Though, there's a little more to it...
For instructions, see: Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Transclude intro excerpt directly on the portal base page.
Please skip Portal:American Civil War, as that is specifically being maintained by hand.
One of the sections on many portals links to sister projects on the subject. This needlessly takes a subpage. The subpage can be made obsolete by using the template {{ Wikimedia for portals}} directly on the portal base page.
This has been done for several hundred portals so far.
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Obsolete a Wikimedia subpage for instructions.
Certes figured out how...
{{subst:Text|<category|tree>}}{{subst:PAGENAME}}{{subst:Text|</categorytree>}}
For more information, see the thread Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Rendering PAGENAME inside categorytree tag doesn't work (it does now).
In the meantime, see ya around the portals! — The Transhumanist 15:50, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Please note you violated ARBPIA 1RR, and particularly the "original author clause" with [17] and [18]. Kindly self revert. Icewhiz ( talk) 17:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
We have grown to 89 members.
This is the seventh issue of this newsletter. For previous issues, see our newsletter archive.
A warm welcome to our nearly one dozen new members...
Our new members include:
Be sure to say "hi" and welcome them to the team.
There were 1515 portals, but now we have 1475, because we speedy deleted a bunch of incompleted portals that had been sitting around for ages, that were empty shells or had very little content. Because they were speedied, they can be rebuilt from scratch without acquiring approval from WP:DRV.
This is what we have been gearing up for: upgrading the portals en masse, using AWB.
More than half of the Associated Wikimedia sections have been converted to no longer use a subpage. This chore will probably be completed over the next week or two. Many thanks to the WikiGnome Squad, who have added an Associated Wikimedia section to the many geography-related portals that lacked one. The rest of the subjects await. :)
The next maintenance drive will be on the intro sections. Notices have gone out to the WikiProjects for which one or more portals fall within their subject scope. Once enough time has elapsed for them to respond (1 week), AWB processing of intro sections will begin.
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your part in the RfC. I went back and reread much of it. I believe your enthusiasm played a major part in turning the tide on there. I'm proud of all of you.
Why reread that mess, you ask?
To harvest ideas, and to keep the problems that need to be fixed firmly in mind. But, also to keep in touch. See below...
I've contacted all of the other opposers of the RfC proposal to delete portals, to thank them for their support, and to assure them that their decision was not made in vain. I updated them on our activities, provided the link to the interviews about this project in the Signpost, pointed out our newsletter archive so they can keep up-to-date with what we are doing, and I invited them all to come and have a look-see at our operations (on our talk page).
It so happened that one of our members was a sockpuppet: JLJ001. According to the admin who blocked him, he was a particularly tricky long term abuser. This is a weird situation, since the user was quite helpful. He will be missed.
This has been somewhat disruptive, because admins are doing routine deletions of the pages (portals, templates, etc.) he created, and reversion of his edits (I don't know if they will be reverting all of them). Please bear with them, as they are only doing what is best in the long run.
The following pages have been deleted by the admins so far, that I know of:
{{Wikimedia for portals|species=no|voy=no}}
{{#tag:categorytree|{{PAGENAME}}}}
Automatic article alerts are now featured on the project page.
Some super out-of-date entries kept showing up on there, so posting it on the Project page was delayed. Thanks to Evad37 and AfroThundr for providing solutions on this one. Evad37 adjusted the workflow settings per Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscribing#Choosing workflows, to make sure only the appropriate page types show up. AfroThundr removed the tags from the old entries that caused them to keep showing up in the article alerts.
Noyster pointed out that it would be nice to automate the updating of the portals section at the Community bulletin board.
Another major component of the portal system is the main list of portals, at Portal:Contents/Portals. How would we go about automating the updating of that?
Please post your ideas on the WikiProject's talk page. Thank you.
Keep in mind that we have already speedy deleted almost all of the nearly empty portals, which can be rebuilt without approval whenever it is convenient to do so. Other portals should be completed if at all possible rather than delete them through MfD (which requires approval from Deletion review to rebuild).
(Current deletion discussions are posted on our WikiProject page).
There's still more, but it will have to wait until next issue.
Until then, see ya around the project. — The Transhumanist 12:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man ( submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:
All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks for uploading File:Noureddin Afi.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 08:41, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
This deletion certainly occurred ages ago, so I admire you for even finding it! The article was deleted according to an AfD, the chief complaint against it being that it constituted " original research." I will restore the article and place it in your userspace at User:Mhhossein/Hadith of Persians and belief. This will allow you to salvage whatever content you think is useful. According to the content that is present in the article, this Hadith has no formal name. I would humbly suggest that you choose a name that sounds more natural in English, such as "Hadith regarding the Faith of the Persians." I have no idea whether such a name is supported in sources; I only know that the current title of the article sounds awkward in English, and that this poor title was cited in the AfD as among the reasons for deletion. Best wishes, Xoloz ( talk) 20:34, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.
I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:
This applies to infoboxes, too.
Thanks, and my best wishes.
Tony (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Noureddin, Son of Iran is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noureddin, Son of Iran until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Super Mario Man ( talk ) 20:38, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:One woman's war.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi.. it is ok to use sources in Persian/Farsi. If you can find any Persian/Farsi sources with Google. The more sources the better chance it will Keep. We can read it with Google Translate. Thank you. -- Green C 14:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Musnad and Quraysh ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Risalah al-Huquq, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Director ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 12:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I think you deserve this barnstar for adding much needed information to the ISIS article, particularly the section on ideology and beliefs. Well done! P123ct1 ( talk) 09:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC) |
I certainly agree that the new section should have greater prominence, but it could only be moved to a main heading near the beginning if it applied to all of ISIS's predecessor organisations (as listed in "Names & name changes"), because although the article calls itself "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant", it is just as much about those organisations as it is about ISIS itself. If you feel confident that the "Ideology and beliefs" applies to all of them, I would go ahead and put it right near the beginning as a main section (although I guess some of the wording would have to be altered slightly). I am absolutely no expert on Middle East matters, so that would be for you to judge, but if you feel confident, why not do it and see? (I have chopped up and swapped around bits in this article and the al-Bagdhadi one mercilessly, and never had any complaints! Mind you I only did it when I felt on safe ground.) Even if people do object, at least it would get them thinking and realise how important the question of ideology and beliefs is in this case. To me the ideology is ultimately more important than the historical aspect, for it is that which drives events in all religious wars at all times in history. Personally I think this article is too history-biased as it stands now. If people object and say ideology and belief is for another article, I will support you; there should be at least some mention of it in an article like this. And, of course, now the caliphate has been established, this question of ideology becomes pre-eminently important. Be bold! -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
You mentioned me in your post on the Talk page as having reverted you. Please can you tell me what that was? I am not conscious of reverting anything. Was it the removal of "even"? The last thing I want to do is edit-war. I have restored your "even" to be on the safe side. I have not touched your new section on women. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 08:23, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
On 10 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the c. 8th-century medical text Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah, attributed to Ali al-Ridha, is also known as the "Golden Treatise"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 21:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
this is for good help and editing pages on Islam. well done. Mehdi ghaed ( talk) 21:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC) |
I appreciate your attempt but the entire background section is still in violation. I've done it myself while adding info so I completely understand how hard it is. Fixing some of the wording is not sufficient. You plagiarized the structure as well. It needs to be removed and completely restructured or else you put Wikipedia in an inappropriate position. Furthermore, the piece used says a lot that could be disputed.Please remove/heavily edit it.
"Facts cannot be copyrighted. It is legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate the concepts in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia. But be careful not to closely paraphrase; the structure, presentation, and phrasing of the information should be your own original creation. The United States court of appeals noted in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service that factual compilations of information may be protected with respect to "selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a minimal degree of creativity," as "[t]he compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers."[1] You can use the facts, but unless they are presented without creativity (such as an alphabetical phone directory), you may need to reorganize as well as restate them to avoid substantial similarity infringement. It can be helpful in this respect to utilize multiple sources, which can provide a greater selection of facts from which to draw." -
WP:COMPLIC (emphasis added)
I refer you to this exchange I had with Technophant.about adding wikilinks to "BBC News". The wikilinks were deliberate.
You have undone some carefully thought out changes. I have not reverted you, but perhaps you might like to reconsider your reverts. You will notice, if you look, that many references in the footnotes have been highlighted (by others, who put in the footnotes), for exactly the same reason: to help readers unfamiliar with the sites they are looking at. Wikipedia is about helping readers to learn what they are reading about.
You say you used Reflinks to make the changes. Reflinks is a tool that was withdrawn from use on 1st July this year (see Village Pump archived discussion), so I cannot understand how you managed this. Perhaps it has been reinstalled after all the fuss about removing it. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 10:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
سلام به شما. من در
Reactions to the 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict#Demonstrations and protests#2014 Quds Day
با تحقیقات زیادم توانستم آمار خوبی از راهپیماییهای روز قدس در سال 2014 را جمعآوری کنم. چون دیدم شما در مقاله روز قدس در ویکی انگلیسی، زحمت ایجاد این بخش را کشیدید، پیشنهاد میکنم از اطلاعاتی که من جمعآوری کردم، برای تکمیل بخش مربوط به سال 2014 استفاده کنید. موفق باشید. Gire 3pich2005 ( talk) 14:43, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
خیلی عالی است. بنده به دلیل اینکه سواد انگلیسی قابل توجهی ندارم، هیچگاه نتوانستم در اینجا در نوشتن متن مؤثر باشم ولی هزاران ویرایش در خصوص تصاویر و رده و ویرایشات جزئی دارم. البته اسم من در ویکی فارسی، لرزه بر اندامها میاندازد. :) امیدوارم در کارتان موفق باشید و اگر کمکی از من بر میآمد، مطرح کنید. انشالله شرمنده نشوم. Gire 3pich2005 ( talk) 15:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
سلام مجدد دوست من. بنده دیشب مقاله
2014 Israel raids on UNRWA schools
را شروع کردم ولی به دلیل ضعف در جملهسازی در زبان انگلیسی، قادر نیستم آن را گسترش دهم. از اینرو میخواستم به شما زحمت دهم دانشنامه را در گسترش این مقاله مفید یاری دهید. پیشاپیش ممنون. Gire 3pich2005 ( talk) 08:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.-- Shrike ( talk)/ WP:RX 09:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I have attempted to clarify your addition about Salafists and Hamas to this section. It was not very clear how the second sentence related to the first, so I looked at the article and have added some words for clarification. Could you check that this what you meant, please? I would not like to put words in your mouth. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 12:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I noticed you did not mention Wahhabism in your section on "Ideology and Beliefs" and I wondered if you could briefly describe in this section the relationship between ISIS and this brand of Islamic belief. Gazkthul says in #13, "Wahhabi movement", in Archive 2 of the ISIS Talk page, that ISIS are not Wahhabists, while confusingly, the Wiki article on the Wahhabi movement categorically states that ISIS does subscribe to Wahhabism . The "Wahhabist" reference goes in and out of this article like a yo-yo, i.e. it is the subject of many reverts, some people believing ISIS are Wahhabist and some not. Maybe there is genuine controversy over this, so a few words on the subject in this section for this reason alone I think would be a good idea. Could you contribute a paragraph here, or should I ask Gazkthul to do it? I suppose I could give a resume of what Gazkthul says on this, but I would not be very confident doing so, especially as the Wiki article on the subject contradicts what he says. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 13:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind my lightly copy-editing your new edits sometimes. I only do it so that the sentences run smoothly and blend in with those before and after. In fact, when I first started copy-editing this article, I went through the whole lot making small changes here and there to make it read more smoothly. The article is very long, so it was a mammoth task! -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I have replied here. Kingsindian ( talk) 11:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Salam Alaykom, As you do your best to improve the articles, this Baklava will help you. God bless you. Seyyed( t- c) 08:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you for your considerate review of Islamic calligraphy,
the most troubling part I think is indeed finding reliable references. If you would address which references is unsuitable, I'll try to find it in other references. But my sources are pretty limited. Regarding the lead section, I think I could come up with something.
again, thx. Sorry if it took a long time to fix this Alteaven ( talk) 02:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I've found this website later in my edit. It's quite broad and includes credit, would it serve as suitable replacement for above websites? Alteaven ( talk) 10:47, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications.
Oh! I've checked that but I thought that counts as self-published. Right, since she provides definitions of kufic and other styles, It can replace many things cited from the defunct websites. Thanks a lot! I'll edit it ASAP Alteaven ( talk) 13:23, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Someone today has made an edit to your "Ideology and beliefs", first para. You may want to check they have understood what you meant to say. I think it's all right. (I watch all new edits!) -- P123ct1 ( talk) 22:17, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello & thanks I have problem in referencing & I didn't get the difference between reference list & footnotes.ofcourse I know I must study wiki rules more. Being bold is very difficult. How can I improve that this definition for this word is better? Salman mahdi ( talk) 17:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Salaam! Great job brother! Strivingsoul ( talk) 15:36, 11 August 2014 (UTC) |
Salam, please pay attention to her article as it is on the main page now. -- Seyyed( t- c) 05:51, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't know whether you are still watching your contributions to this page, but I see someone has altered your "Ideology and beliefs" section, adding "violent" to the first line, tipping the balance away from what I think you intended. It is in line with other recent changes in the Lead, where even more intemperate language is being used now, clearly flouting NPOV. The two history search tools are not working at the moment, so I don't know who edited this. I would take out "violent" myself, but am up against a 1RR and have other important changes to make after that expires! Perhaps you think how it stands now is okay, but thought I had better notify you in case not. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 17:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
salam You've sentme a message, but I can't see it on my talk page; what's the problem? Salman mahdi ( talk) 09:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Salam, how can we have an easy access to our friends in our user page? thanks for ur help and just u should be patient and kind until we be professional.( where is its guidance in Wiki?) Salman mahdi ( talk) 06:33, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
A disagreement has arisen over whether ISIS should be called Sunnis or Kharijites. Yesterday I put "Sunni Islamism" into the second infobox and it was changed to this [4], which at least attempts to indicate there is controversy over this. I have read your interesting essay about Sunnis and Shias on your userpage but am not clear if ISIS call themselves Sunnis. There is no mention of "Sunni" in the "Ideology and belief" section though it does say that whether they are Kharijite is a matter of opinion. I think you wrote most of this section, didn't you? I know very little about this subject, so I wonder if you could add a few words about "Sunni" on the ISIS Talk page [5] and in that section as well, please. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:04, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 13:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
The article Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 18:42, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of The Fifteen Whispered Prayers (Munajat) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 23:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
You may not have seen Jason from nyc's comment, which appears before yours today. I was trying to move the whole section "Ideology and beliefs (3)" to the end of the Talk page and forgot to delete it when I had done the move, and Jason added his comment to the old section. I have now moved his comment to the section at the end before yours, as he hadn't seen our comments. Sorry about this. -- P123ct1 ( talk) 14:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I can't figure out what this means:"The members of the Muhammad family who were expected to participate is no modified in some of the sunni sources while some others mention Fatima, Hasan and Hossein as the participants. Meanwhile, some of the sunni sources are in agreement with shia believe and saying that Ahl al-Kisa, including Ali, participated the occasion." Dougweller ( talk) 14:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
On 6 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Fifteen Whispered Prayers, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that The Fifteen Whispered Prayers by Imam Zayn al-Abidin contains different prayers to be recited in accordance with one's present mood? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hadith of Mubahala, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hasan and Fatima. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Using this tool, we see that on the edit before Hadi.anani started, the character count was 6,457 (not including subheads, charts, captions or lists). After the most recent edit, the character count is 10,880. Hadi.anani did a great job improving the sources and the presentation, but it's not a 5x expansion. Yoninah ( talk) 12:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2014 Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's speech at UN is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's speech at UN until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Serten ( talk) 03:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kirchner un speech. Since you had some involvement with the Kirchner un speech redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Serten ( talk) 05:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Chris Troutman ( talk) 19:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
There is currently an requested move underway here and I am trying to get as many users to provide input as possible. I appreciate your contributions! - SantiLak ( talk) 23:58, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
In regards to your revert of my edit. I would advise you to look more carefully and see that I actually updated the OCHA figure with a more recent/newer one (you reverted to an outdated/older one); added a newer source for the 70% civilians Ministry figure (which you removed); moved about a few sources (from places that one source instead of three was enough) but did not remove the said sources from the article altogether. The only thing that comes to my mind when you said sourced material is the OCHA women/children breakdown that I removed from the infobox. I removed it because it has no place in the infobox. The infobox is there only for the number of civilian and combatant dead. The breakdown among children and women is already talked about (with the said source) in the main body of the article and in multiple paragraphs, not just one. Hope this clears it up. Cheers! :) EkoGraf ( talk) 09:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@ EkoGraf: It's clear. Using the same motivation, there's no need to have "including 1 native of Thailand" in the infobox. Mhhossein ( talk) 10:20, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! You said you sometimes did not get pinged when your name is mentioned in the Talk page. I looked into this as I was puzzled, and the WP Help Desk said users must be careful to sign any comment which includes the pinged name, otherwise the pinging doesn't work. They spotted that I had not signed my message where I had pinged you in the Talk page, which is why you never had notification that time! They also said that getting notifications/being pinged depends on how "Preferences" are set up. If you go to "Preferences" and click on "Notifications", there is a section headed "Notify me about these events". There is a column for "Web" and one for "Email". If you want to get notifications on screen for the various events, just tick in the "Web" column all the ones you want to get notifications of. I have ticked all mine so I can't go wrong! Hope this helps. (You may know it already!) ~ P-123 ( talk) 15:06, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I only meant where are you based. I knew you were Iranian! If you don't reply, I will know you prefer not to disclose. :) ~ P-123 ( talk) 18:37, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
@ P-123: That's kind of you. I contributed in some articles and created some other. Thanks God, I made a GA. I'm going to ask you help me with The Fourteen Infallibles. We tried to promote it to the Featured List level but the language is not fascinating as the reviewers say. Fortunately as a native speaker of English, your role is very beneficial. Is it OK with you? Mhhossein ( talk) 19:26, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Reading the article as it is now, I understand less about the Fourteen Infallibles and the concepts of Ismah and Imamah than I did when I read it the first time! I think it may have been condensed too much, but I am no judge of that. I only speak as an uninformed reader. I am not sure a prohibition can be incumbent upon someone. I have never heard that before. It is quoted in Google, but only twice and from a very strange-sounding translation. ~ P-123 ( talk) 21:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Three things:.
I haven't looked at the Family Tree yet, but I will. When you answer my queries I can do something with those three parts I didn't understand. This is more fun than ISIS! There is too much stress involved in editing ISIS now. The editors are so quarrelsome! I was very surprised to read your comment to Greg that you like editing the ISIS page now! ~ P-123 ( talk) 16:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The same editor is back and I am not happy with the way he is changing the wording. He seems the sort of editor (from his edit summaries - and from the Talk page!) who will revert any changes made to his wording, and as I don't want to edit-war over grammar (!), I think I had better not do any more. For example, he has: "Shias also believe that the Fourteen Infallibles are superior to the rest of creation, even the major prophets other than Muhammad." It is already clear that Muhammad is one of the Infallibles, so why add "other than Muhammad"? I also do not agree with his reason for including semi-colons in the list. Commas are fine, here; readers can count up to 14! (I cannot understand why "include" at the beginning was there (which he has correctly changed to "are") as I am sure I altered this to "are" much earlier on.) The editor has only started recopy-editing, so I expect there will be other changes. He is clearly not a collaborative editor, going by his comments in the Talk page. ~
P-123 (
talk) 20:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
@ P-123: OK Thanks for your valuable efforts in this article. Is your physical (or emotional?) problem to the involvement in ISIS Talk page? You're pushing yourself too hard! Mhhossein ( talk) 16:09, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you put an AfD template on the Wilayat al-Sina (ISIL) and the Wilayat Barqah (ISIL) articles. However, the AfD link on the Wilayat al-Sina (ISIL) article article goes to the wrong page [6]. Just thought I'd let you know. David O. Johnson ( talk) 22:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate it if you would be able to take time to either assess or review this article:
Hello Mhhossein, I have just posted this tag on the above mentioned article. The tag advises I also contact the author, so I am. I put the reason on the tag as:
There are hundreds, if not thousands of different topics in Hadith. This article is pushing a POV. Please consider for deletion.
Thanks Mbcap ( talk) 19:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
The history of the critical content was that, some months ago I was breaking consensus on a particular issue, another editor was edit warring so as to reduce the critical content of both the lead and the rest of the article. P-123 was the editor with the smarts to notice a couple of the significant departures of content. I was presented by the same editor [the edit warring one] as being the only one that that wanted critical content to remain in the lead. Discussion on the inclusion of critical content was then conducted from a position within which there was significantly reduced content. It took me a while to get my head together in the situation but, in the context of some welcome support, I produced and presented a record of the edit warring. There was a resulting conflict in the threads concerned but, despite efforts, the article has not been the same since. GregKaye ✍♪ 16:50, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for adding your voice to the discussion on the new ordering for the article. There are only three editors who think the characteristics section should go before the criticisms for clearly logical reasons as befits an encyclopaedia, or any account of the subject for that matter, but I fear the prominent editors on the page are no longer trying to write an encyclopaedia at all. As you will have read I have been outspoken about this, but the opposition has discounted everything I have said and I don't think anything can be done to stop the way the article is going. It is acquiring the stamp of two editors and the old editors have dropped away one by one. I am grateful for your support although I don't think our views will carry any weight. ~ P123ct1 ( talk) 10:06, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
You will be interested in this AfD /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wilayat_Kirkuk_(ISIL) Legacypac ( talk) 19:58, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi and happy holidays for whenever you have them in Iran.
Enjoy
I was curious about the Hadith of Virtures of Persian People article but could not find it. Is there a link? GregKaye ✍♪ 14:44, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
I took an interest in the title of the Hadith when I saw it as I have strong opinions on the benefits of Patriotism as more important than Nationalism. Perhaps, last time I spoke too much about my views on religion but I can still recognise a beautiful text .
I would also be interested in knowing how people in Iran view the Iraqi conflict. I started a thread for the sake of clarification at Talk:Iraqi insurgency (2011–present)#Insurgency or civil war? (RfC).
Thanks GregKaye ✍♪ 13:41, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
You asked about this, thanks. Basically I disagree too much with the way the article has been going recently. I don't think it has good encylopaedic content now, or rather the content is fine but the presentation of it is not neutral. It is showing what I see as ant-ISIL bias in the Lead and I do not agree with not stating facts as facts, as I have often said on the Talk page. There seems to be a reluctance to be straightforward; there are too many qualifiers throughout the article like "self-declared" and "caliphate"s and "Islamic State"s in inverted commas, which again to me shows anti-ISIL bias. However, Gregkaye and Legacypac strongly disagree with my views and I have no support from other editors. There is a clear difference of view on how WP:NPOV should be interpreted and I am losing the battle. There are at least two discussions on the Talk page about this. I am not happy about text not being properly backed up by citations either; you will have seen some of my misgivings on that on the Talk page as well. I am regarded as too pedantic, but I think accurate citations are important. This has no connection with my being taken to AN/I by Gregkaye, by the way, which happened after I put up that notice about copy-editing. I don't know if you have looked at the AN/I. There is a link to it on the Talk page. As you probably know, Gregkaye and I have gone from being very good colleagues to very bad ones. I cannot say much about it as it would be unfair on Gregkaye. But you would probably find the AN/I content enlightening. Again, I cannot comment on the AN/I for the same reason. I am not used to belligerence and aggression and so am finding the going pretty hard in the AN/I. I have no problem defending myself but it is currently a war of attrition between us. I really cannot say any more, for fear of Gregkaye saying I am canvassing your support, and that might be added to the AN/I as a charge against me. . P-123 ( talk) 19:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mhhossein,
Knowing that you are a Muslim from Shia background I thought I would mention that I had found category templates appropriate to be placed at the bottom of articles. They are found at Category:Anti-Shi'ism which contains Category:Violence against Shia Muslims. I have added the first of the templates to the 'SIL article. This is just in case categorisations are in your interests.
Happy new year
Greg Kaye 15:39, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Of possible interest to you. [7] Legacypac ( talk) 01:38, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
P-123 is topic banned from ISIL and interaction banned from Gregkeye. Therefore they can't talk about either so your question is problematic as they can't respond. Legacypac ( talk) 17:15, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I have started copy-editing the article again, and as I did before, I have asked some questions about passages that did not make sense so I could then copy-edit them. An IP has just left a message on the Talk page where I did this to say that I should not copy-edit the article, although I have explained the background. All my WP activities are being watched very closely now! ~ P-123 ( talk) 17:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Mhhossein. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Dating Arba'een. Thank you.
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Awarded for your efforts to keep Wikipedia free of non-notable articles that promoted the claims of a terrorist organization. Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 04:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hi Mhhossein, I am currently working on Draft:List of states by official designation given to Daesh, ISIL, ISIS and wondered if you could find any relevant government reference to the use of Daesh / daash or any other relevant reverence. Reference can be in Persian or whatever but a relevant English reference would be preferred. I think that this type of article should have been produced some time ago but I guess I got to thinking about it in conjunction with the recent request move at talk:ISIL. Cheers Greg Kaye 17:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
@ Legacypac:Which region do you mean? The so called middle east? Mhhossein ( talk) 04:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I have just started editing Wikipedia and I noticed some of the articles like ISIL have explicitly cited the Koran and taken verses out of context and being anti-islamic and justifying rape .In accordance with wikipedias neutral policy, can you please remove those verses? Muhammad atta al-salam ( talk) 14:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello Mhhossein, seen as you have made a sizable contribution to Shia related topics, I thought you may be able to lend me some assistance. Do you know of any reliable non-partisan sources on Al-Hilli. So far I can only find Shia sources which are full of praise and Sunni sources which completely discount him and his contribution, so it is slightly difficult to get a neutral account of him. There is the brill sources but there must be other accounts as he made a big contribution to his field in his time. If you can let me know of any other good reliable source, I would be grateful. Regards Mbcap ( talk) 15:42, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I am working on al-Sahifa al-Sajjadiyya in my sandbox, and it seems you are experienced user about Islamic topic. would you help me for copy-edit of this article? M.Sakhaie 10:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
You accused me of posting copyright material which is false .The content is taken from this this website is not copyright protected.All the other sources are specified to support the claim, the content is not derived from any of the other sources other than the provided.If you wanna still argue the claims are repeated and echoed in all the sources many of them aren't even copyrght protected.Might wanna check all sources before reverting Hand snoojy ( talk) 14:30, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Just pinging you about this. Sorry about the Russian doll syndrome! ~ P-123 ( talk) 14:51, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
On 15 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article To the Youth in Europe and North America, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Iran's Supreme Leader, Khamenei, is alleged to be the first senior Islamic cleric directly addressing western youth about his religion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/To the Youth in Europe and North America. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:51, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Talk:To the_Youth_in_Europe_and_North_America#Paul_Craig_Roberts". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Anders Feder ( talk) 18:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Mhhossein::salam alaykom! I decided to delete Fadak (TV channel) because of following reason:
More content of the article don't have any sources. A few of them have, but their accuracy is controversial. Because of that the notability of the article is imprecise. According to Wikipedia:Notability, Only being one of the TV channels (or being famous) does not mean that is notable. So it should be deleted.
I do process, according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, but it seems that there is some problem. Can you help me? Thanks! Samaneh-davoudi ( talk) 08:49, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
Thanks for your contribution in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmad Keshvari. AliAkar ( talk) 14:45, 14 February 2015 (UTC) |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article One Woman's War: Da (Mother) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Woman's War: Da (Mother) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 08:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A City Under Siege: Tales of the Iran-Iraq War is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A City Under Siege: Tales of the Iran-Iraq War until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 07:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article That Which That Orphan Saw is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/That Which That Orphan Saw until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 07:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ● Mehran Debate● 07:33, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hadith of Virtues of Persia People is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of Virtues of Persia People until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mbcap ( talk) 01:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
A Barnstar! | Please participate
There's a voting going on here. It needs to close, but consensus is not certain. We need more participation. The issues can't remain without a resolution. Please, check it out. Closure of the discussion has started. ( refresh) Please, hurry. 78.149.193.255 ( talk) 16:24, 10 April 2015 (UTC) |
There is consensus to move, but supporters are divided on including or omitting years (a time period) in the title. -- George Ho ( talk) 06:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Why did you close it? WP:RMCI didn't encourage nominator to close it as if the request is supported. -- George Ho away from home ( talk) 23:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Many discussions result in a reasonably clear consensus, so if the consensus is clear, any editor—even one involved in the discussion—may close the discussion." That's why, I did the job!. By the way, which part of WP:RMCI does not encourage me to close the proposal? Mhhossein ( talk) 12:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I worked on Borunsi, this is a book related to the Iran-Iraq war. As you created Noureddin, Son of Iran and One Woman's War: Da (Mother), could you help me to improve it? Munifi3nt ( talk) 04:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hadith of Golden Chain you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Royroydeb -- Royroydeb ( talk) 18:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journey to Heading 270 Degrees is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journey to Heading 270 Degrees until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ism schism ( talk) 20:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
You requested dispute resolution about the deletion of a subpage that appears to be a polemic. That request has been declined as premature. Also, DRN is for discussing improvements to articles, not for discussing deletion of things. You can, if you wish, nominate the subpage for deletion via miscellany for deletion. Robert McClenon ( talk) 15:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Assalamualaikum. Thanks for your note. I've responded on my talk page. - User:bakura82
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article One Woman's War: Da (Mother) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Poltair -- Poltair ( talk) 08:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
The article One Woman's War: Da (Mother) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:One Woman's War: Da (Mother) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Poltair -- Poltair ( talk) 09:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
The article Hadith of Golden Chain you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Hadith of Golden Chain for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Royroydeb -- Royroydeb ( talk) 09:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
You were mentioned at WP:ANI in this discussion. Just FYI. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 01:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Javad Ramezani (جواد رمضانی) is a prolific sockpuppetteer trying to get his name into Wikipedia (see SPI). He started by pretending to be a great singer, but has moved on to pretending to be an ethologist, and inserting his name alongside that of Konrad Lorenz with edits like [15]] in articles about geese and animal behavior. He uses too many IP addresses for a range-block to be possible, and if his target is semi-protected he moves on to another.
I notice that he is doing the same on fa-wiki at fa:رفتارشناسی جانوران, and I am letting you know so that fa-wiki admins can be alerted. A search for his name may find other instances, and would be worth repeating from time to time, because he is very persistent.
The master account User:جواد رمضانی شوراب is blocked on fa-wiki with reason "حساب ایجادشده برای خرابکاری: فرد آمده است که اسم خود را در مقالههای ویکیپدیا وارد کند", and globally locked, and some of his other accounts like User:Javadramezanishorab are blocked on fa-wiki, so they know something about him already.
Regards, JohnCD ( talk) 13:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Birmingham Quran manuscript.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Armbrust
The Homunculus 14:36, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
|
I request you to arrange the page of I. K. A. Howard Ph.D. Lecturer in Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Edinburgh, died in March 2013. He deserves to be included in this encyclopedia. I could not find him at EN:WP. Thanks Nannadeem ( talk) 18:23, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Anders Feder ( talk) 07:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
For excellent work at Qods Day. LavaBaron ( talk) 22:51, 26 August 2015 (UTC) |
لطفا عکس منو بزار برای عزاداری محرم. -- ( talk) 06:04, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
افراطگرایان شیعه؟ شما مردمی را که برای عزاداری آمدهاند افراطی مینامید؟ یا شما مردم اردبیل را افراطی مینامید؟ واقعا از دید اهل تسنن و شما که جزوی از آن هستین این عکس نشانه افراط هست. فقط تاسف میخورم. Samək Talk 12:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Sadaqah at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HaEr48 ( talk) 04:32, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Mhhossein. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
Its for you. m,sharaf ( talk) 16:10, 20 December 2016 (UTC) |
WP has to rely on quality sources that have been published by recognized, peer-reviewed presses and journals. These presses and journals select experts in their field and check their work. It is reasonable to assume that they are more likely to be accurate than the editors at WP, whose expertise is generally less and whose work is not peer-reviewed by experts. You or I may know a lot about certain subject, but would anyone really recognize us as more expert in a field than the authors whose work we might contest? We may be very certain of what we say, but why should other editors believe us over recognized experts in the field.
In any case, this is established policy. If an editor wants to work on articles here, he or she must adhere to it.
The good news is that generally, I have found, valid points can be supported by responsible sources. Sometimes it takes a bit of hunting.
Good luck! Clean Copy talk 00:34, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
From [[WP:TRUTH}}:
Wikipedia's core sourcing policy, Wikipedia:Verifiability, previously defined the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia as "verifiability, not truth". "Verifiability" was used in this context to mean that material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply because they disagree with them. Clean Copy talk 03:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello:
The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article November 2016 Hillah suicide truck bombing has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist ( talk) 22:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The article 1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chris troutman -- Chris troutman ( talk) 03:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
The article Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 ( talk) 14:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chris troutman -- Chris troutman ( talk) 18:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 ( talk) 17:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Hey there! It is not required, but I always prefer articles to be up to last least B-class if there are active WikiProjects that can review them. MiHist has a very active assessment department and would be able to work with you to get it to a solid B-class article in no time (if it isn't already). Let me know if you decide to go that route, and I will get the review for GA started right after! Kees08 ( talk) 07:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Did you get an email? -- MehrdadFR ( talk) 13:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
This is about the dispute that was taken to the dispute resolution noticeboard over the article on Ali Khamenei. The filing party had removed a section from the article because he found it incomprehensible. I also thought that it was incomprehensible. You had said that an entire section should not be removed from an article because of a simple resolvable issue. An issue is not simple and resolvable if you do not discuss it collaboratively. I assumed that there was a language problem, that your command of English was not sufficient to permit detailed discussion of what you had written. Since you say that there is no language problem and that you can contribute to the English Wikipedia well, you should have been willing to discuss your edits, at least if your objective is to improve the encyclopedia. I had to close the request for dispute resolution because you did not appear to be willing to discuss. I see that the section has been removed. Please do not add sections to articles unless you are willing to discuss them in good faith. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
so called "Robert", and you insist on your unfair criticism of him, instead of respecting his considered opinion. How can I be positive in the face of such bungling? If you want respect you have to behave in a respectable manner. Dr. K. 05:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you very much
Icewhiz for your scholarly, and much-needed, reality-check against these baseless accusations. @Mhhossein: If you want to be respected and be taken seriously, please demonstrate that you understand your errors and false accusations. Please retract your allegations that I called your account "shared". Also please retract your unfair PA against veteran and respected editor
Robert McClenon for calling him quote: so called "Robert"
. That's simply not the way to gain respect in this collaborative project. In the process, can you also please apologise to Icewhiz, and myself, for insinuating that we are sockpuppets? Thank you.
Dr.
K. 11:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
"scholarly, and much-needed, reality-check"was an attempt to merely support you, like before. It's very very interesting that he ignored your referring to shared accounts. Did not you accuse me of possibly having a shared account? I don't want respect from you who don't know how to treat others on TP pages.
"much-needed, reality-check"against the misquoting. "Stop your usual nonsense," he told me in his edit summary when he made another ad hominen comment and made a false conclusion. You can add
"I know you have limited understanding of English"and
"[it] is beyond your current level of English (or honesty) to understand"to the list, let alone other pages. The reality is clarified now, thanks to your comment. -- Mhhossein talk 16:09, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
(Redacted)
An editor (not me) has started a discussion on AN/I that concerns you. You'll find it here. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 08:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for joining the Portals WikiProject.
Here's our first project-wide update. I hope you enjoy it...
The WikiProject reboot has been a success: the new re-envisioned project is up and running, with new members, ongoing discussions about automation, design, and upkeep; maintained task queques; and updates to members, like this, the very first one!
As you know, there's a proposal to delete all portals. It started out looking pretty dismal for portals, with primarily posts supporting their demise. It turned out that the proposer didn't post a deletion notice on the very pages being nominated for deletion (a requirement for all deletion discussions). Once that was done, a flood of opposition came in and has apparently turned the tide.
RfCs generally run for 30 days. It started April 8th, and so it has about 14 more days to run its course.
The more work we can do during that time on the portals, the stronger the reasons for keeping them will be. And the more prepared we will be for any MfDs that follow the closing of the RfC.
You may be wondering why we asked for AWB experience in the member-sign-up list.
We are gearing up to do maintenance runs on the entire set of portals, and the more people we have who can use AWB, the better.
But we're not quite ready to start this yet.
To be able to use AWB on the portals, we first need to know what the end result needs to be. Like on the news sections, do we comment out the out-of-date ones, or do we place the code to activate the newsbot on those pages? That would require an assessment of WikiNews and its news generating performance (areas covered, volume in each area), etc.
You can help us figure this out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Discussions about news sections.
Another area we're gearing up for, to do passes with AWB, are upgrades to the intro sections of portals. Many of these have static (copied/pasted) excerpts that go stale over time.
We're trying to figure out how to make self-updating excerpts to replace the existing static excerpts that are on many portals, and once this is done, AWB will be used to place the new code. See the discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Discussions about selective transclusion in intros.
There are 3 major areas of activity right now:
There are a few hundred existing portals that are missing from this list.
The list of missing entries, and instructions on what to do, can be found at Portal talk:Contents/Portals#These are not listed yet.
We need everybody's help on this. It's a big chore for one persons. But, many hands make light work. Please help chip away at this chore as much as you can. A little each day, form all of us, will get this done pretty quick.
In addition to browsing the portals in the 2 lists mentioned in the section above, you should take a look at the portal name space itself and what is in it.
That can be done at Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Watchlist.
There are discussions on many aspects of the WikiProject's operations, with more to come.
Such as about the purposes and functions of portals, design discussions, and so on.
There's even a automated design discussion over at Village Pump Technical, on selective transclusion.
I hope to see you on the talk page.
In addition to the automation efforts mentioned above, we will be looking into how to automate the selection and display of alternating excerpts, and alternating pictures, for the various portal sections.
Watch for these discussions on the Wikiproject's talk page.
Get ready, get set, go! — The Transhumanist 14:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
We now have 52 members, and more are joining daily.
Attention portal maintainers!
There's a new template to improve existing and new portals, called {{ Transclude lead excerpt}}.
It is a lot easier to use than copying and pasting text from articles, as it displays the paragraphs you specify automatically for you.
It makes excerpts so that they are always current and never go stale or fork.
It is more powerful than it looks, because it has the Lua Module:Excerpt supporting it.
Be careful, as it is alpha software. Please notify the WikiProject talkpage of any problems you come across.
To give you a sense of the reaction this template is generating, here is an excerpt of a discussion thread from the WikiProject's talk page:
I wrote a comment in the the April 26 section of the RfC explaining what we are up to. I liked the excerpt above so much, that I went back to my RfC posting, and inserted it.
What's this? An old oil lamp. It's so dirty, I think I'll polish it...
*poof*
Whoa! Are you a WikiGenie? In that case, I get 3 wishes!
I wish...
Please make my wishes come true. See you around the portals! — The Transhumanist 08:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
We've grown to 73 members, and morale is high. Thank you for joining. Here is some news, and some tasks...
2018-05-11: preparations are being made to close the RfC. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/RfC: Ending the system of portals.
When there, be sure to notice the consultation link.
We're trying to get a prototypical single-page portal developed in time to show the RfC closers before they make their final decision. You can help. It's Portal:Humanism. So far, we've applied selective transclusion (automation) to excerpts, and have made the following sections without subpages: intro, selected article, selected biography, categories, related portals, wikiprojects, things to do, and wikimedia. Eight down, 4 to go, plus 2 formatting subpages (not sure we can migrate those). Automating every section, would also be nice.
Our main objectives currently, are:
The intro section of many portals transcludes an "Intro" subpage that has an excerpt in it.
We're replacing that with a selective transclusion directly in the intro section, bypassing the subpage. Though, there's a little more to it...
For instructions, see: Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Transclude intro excerpt directly on the portal base page.
Please skip Portal:American Civil War, as that is specifically being maintained by hand.
One of the sections on many portals links to sister projects on the subject. This needlessly takes a subpage. The subpage can be made obsolete by using the template {{ Wikimedia for portals}} directly on the portal base page.
This has been done for several hundred portals so far.
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Obsolete a Wikimedia subpage for instructions.
Certes figured out how...
{{subst:Text|<category|tree>}}{{subst:PAGENAME}}{{subst:Text|</categorytree>}}
For more information, see the thread Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Rendering PAGENAME inside categorytree tag doesn't work (it does now).
In the meantime, see ya around the portals! — The Transhumanist 15:50, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Please note you violated ARBPIA 1RR, and particularly the "original author clause" with [17] and [18]. Kindly self revert. Icewhiz ( talk) 17:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
We have grown to 89 members.
This is the seventh issue of this newsletter. For previous issues, see our newsletter archive.
A warm welcome to our nearly one dozen new members...
Our new members include:
Be sure to say "hi" and welcome them to the team.
There were 1515 portals, but now we have 1475, because we speedy deleted a bunch of incompleted portals that had been sitting around for ages, that were empty shells or had very little content. Because they were speedied, they can be rebuilt from scratch without acquiring approval from WP:DRV.
This is what we have been gearing up for: upgrading the portals en masse, using AWB.
More than half of the Associated Wikimedia sections have been converted to no longer use a subpage. This chore will probably be completed over the next week or two. Many thanks to the WikiGnome Squad, who have added an Associated Wikimedia section to the many geography-related portals that lacked one. The rest of the subjects await. :)
The next maintenance drive will be on the intro sections. Notices have gone out to the WikiProjects for which one or more portals fall within their subject scope. Once enough time has elapsed for them to respond (1 week), AWB processing of intro sections will begin.
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your part in the RfC. I went back and reread much of it. I believe your enthusiasm played a major part in turning the tide on there. I'm proud of all of you.
Why reread that mess, you ask?
To harvest ideas, and to keep the problems that need to be fixed firmly in mind. But, also to keep in touch. See below...
I've contacted all of the other opposers of the RfC proposal to delete portals, to thank them for their support, and to assure them that their decision was not made in vain. I updated them on our activities, provided the link to the interviews about this project in the Signpost, pointed out our newsletter archive so they can keep up-to-date with what we are doing, and I invited them all to come and have a look-see at our operations (on our talk page).
It so happened that one of our members was a sockpuppet: JLJ001. According to the admin who blocked him, he was a particularly tricky long term abuser. This is a weird situation, since the user was quite helpful. He will be missed.
This has been somewhat disruptive, because admins are doing routine deletions of the pages (portals, templates, etc.) he created, and reversion of his edits (I don't know if they will be reverting all of them). Please bear with them, as they are only doing what is best in the long run.
The following pages have been deleted by the admins so far, that I know of:
{{Wikimedia for portals|species=no|voy=no}}
{{#tag:categorytree|{{PAGENAME}}}}
Automatic article alerts are now featured on the project page.
Some super out-of-date entries kept showing up on there, so posting it on the Project page was delayed. Thanks to Evad37 and AfroThundr for providing solutions on this one. Evad37 adjusted the workflow settings per Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscribing#Choosing workflows, to make sure only the appropriate page types show up. AfroThundr removed the tags from the old entries that caused them to keep showing up in the article alerts.
Noyster pointed out that it would be nice to automate the updating of the portals section at the Community bulletin board.
Another major component of the portal system is the main list of portals, at Portal:Contents/Portals. How would we go about automating the updating of that?
Please post your ideas on the WikiProject's talk page. Thank you.
Keep in mind that we have already speedy deleted almost all of the nearly empty portals, which can be rebuilt without approval whenever it is convenient to do so. Other portals should be completed if at all possible rather than delete them through MfD (which requires approval from Deletion review to rebuild).
(Current deletion discussions are posted on our WikiProject page).
There's still more, but it will have to wait until next issue.
Until then, see ya around the project. — The Transhumanist 12:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man ( submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:
All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)