![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The administrator I was dealing with refuses to do anything about user:Diyakos actions. Read it and get back to me with a course of action. Manik666 05:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Don`t rely on individual admins who may not care to hear your side of the story, report your concerns here [1]. Zmmz 06:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Har Roozetan Norouz, Norouzetan Pirooz هر روزتا ن نوروز , نوروزتان پيروز . Amir85 13:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I included a diff [2] to your Rfc in an ongoing ArbCom case that we unfortunately had to file against Aucaman; so just be aware of that please. Zmmz 22:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
D iyako Talk + 10:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
You may want to comment on it. -- Cool Cat Talk| @ 13:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
با درود، به حرفهاش گوش نکن، بعضی ها میخوان از وضعیت سواستفاده بکنن، اگه درگذشته اختلافاتی در بین ما بوده دلیل نمیشه که ما باز هم وضعیت رو ادامه بدیم. D iyako Talk + 14:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
It's actually convention to bold-face alternate names for the subject of the article mentioned in the opening paragraph (the way "Ashkanian" is in bold-face on Parthia). Also, Octavian is just a redirect to Augustus, so it shouldn't be linked as it just brings you back to where you started. siafu 23:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
That is exactly why linked it, because a new reader might want to know the difference between the two names, hence, the link will show the names are interchangable; but, if you want to leave it bold faced, go ahead. Zmmz 23:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
By the way, Siafu did you get my email? Zmmz 00:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -- Tony Sidaway 19:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Now its your turn to check the talk page.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
You'll have to revert the edits to your original 'secularism'. Moshe's already gone and broken 3RR's, and I don't want to break it myself. black thorn of brethil 03:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
OK, this is the first time I am having a discussion with you both, but both of you need to give each other the benefit of the doubt and compromise with each other more. But, Black definitely don`t go over the 3RR, just let`s see what Moshe says, and we`ll revert it to a compromised version. Thanks Zmmz 03:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
You gave in way too easily. Your sentence ought still to contain a note on the secular bent of the Parthians, as that has immediate relevance to what comes after with the Sassanids - religious intolerance, suppression, bigotry and murder. black thorn of brethil 04:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I shouldnt of called you insane and I was kinda being a dick in general. Like I said earlier I wouldn't mind including a reference to their tendency towards secularism as long as it doesn't replace the hellenistic reference.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 08:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Moshe, no problem, all is good, and I think the proposals by Black are good as well, for now. Zmmz 22:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
For the most part I agree I just think we should take more of a neutral position, like not mention it being negative. Also I don't really think the Parthians' religious tolerance was Hellenistic influenced, since most Greeks weren't all that religiously tolerant, if anything the Parthians being religiously tolerant were influenced by the earlier Archemids.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 03:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
How are you guys getting along on the compromise--Moshe and Black? Zmmz 08:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I just read it, it looks good to me, what do you think Moshe? Zmmz 01:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks man, just let me know if you guys need me to mediate or if you need my opinion about possible compromises. Zmmz 22:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Making a red link is a suggestion that an article is needed. There's nothing wrong with making one. Actually, having articles on early cartographers is a good idea. Zora 00:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, stay calm please, as far as I recall, I asked people to make sure the links works first before submitting save please; I`m not sure if that is scolding. I thought red links are not encouraged in articles. Zmmz 00:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
They help to indicate which articles still have to written. Cheers, — Ruud 00:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I thought so, but when I was new here, someone said they are to be erased, hhmmm. Sure thing though, but listen that section about possible Turkish origin has to be taken out, because it is factually inaccurate; at the time of that particular scientist the Seljuk Turks had not invaded Persia, it is only after their invasion that Khwarizmians and Azeris became mixed, i.e. Iranian-Turks. Tell me what you think? Thanks Zmmz 00:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
What do you think of the actions of user ManiF on this article al-Karkhi ? Jidan 05:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Zmmz. I will not block them now as they haven't vandalised since the last warning - I will however do my best to keep an eye on them. Cheers TigerShark 00:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
You seem to have inserted an unneeded and misleading heading (the section is almost entirely non-biographical), reinstated duplicate wikilinks, removed facts, reinstated incorrected capitalisation, etc. Why? -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 10:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I`m sorry? Erased what facts? Are you sure it was me? I was the one who wrote the entire article, but some came in and erased a lot of stuff, so I don`t bother with it anymore. Also, I did erase some stuff, but they were rewritten, because they were originally copied and pasted from answers.com. You cannot do that in Wiki, if you want, I leave the Wiki manual link on your talk page---please review it. By the way, if as you acknowledge, a theory is now discarded, why do you still insert in in the article? Zmmz 21:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Dear Zmmz, I replaced the paragraph by the exact quotes of Ibn Khaldun about Persians, which all of them are full of praise for the Persian civilization. I have the book Muqaddimah and I have also submitted all of Ibn Khaldun's comments about Persians on the Talk page. You may add some of them to the article. There are many other quotes by him in praising Persians which can be included in that section. Here are some of his comments about Persians. If you like I can scan those pages and send it to you. All of the quotes are taken from Muqaddimah, Translated by Franz Rosenthal, Princeton University Press, 1981.
"Peoples and states deploying cataphracts at some time in their history included (in this order) tribal groups, the Parthian dynasty, Iranian Sarmatians, Seleucids, Sassanid Persia, Armenians and the Byzantine Empire, Pergamenes, the Roman Empire, "
Sorry, what I meant was that it wasn't necessarily completely sequential chronologically, since many of these deployers overlapped historically. I'm also certain that, contrary to the latest edit, Pergamon and the pre-Theodosian Roman Empire came before and not after the Byzantine Empire. Indeed the Pergamene state was formed shortly after the Seleucid Empire was forged and was roughly contemporaneous with it. It might also be of benefit to explicitly state that the Parthians and the Iranian Sarmatians were the first ones to include cataphracts in their armies. Khepidjemwa'atnefru 23:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I think, then, stating the following may be more appropriate....“more or less in order of use”. Also, feel free to move them around, and provide one source for your usage. Thanks Zmmz 00:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Check out what they did to the Pashtuns page - they removed every reference to the word "Iranian" that they could find! [3] -- Khoikhoi 05:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Every reference was not removed, just derogatory remarks such "Iranian stock". Khoikhoi agreed with me about one month ago that it was derogatory and should be changed to Pashtuns are descendants of eastern Iranians, but he now has changed his mind! It is good to mention the eastern Iranian roots, but do not make the article about how everything is from "Iranian" this and "Iranian" that!! That is all I am saying. Thank you.
How is being of "Iranian stock", which is a factual statement, derogatory? I looked at the article; you actually erased every single word that was Iran or Iranian. Zmmz 06:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Please see discussion between Khoikhoi and Souther Comfort on April 1st They may edit it now but take a look at Khoikhoi's discussion page, they discuss the "Iranian Stock" derogatory comment. Very interesting and works toward my point that there is an agenda on Wikipedia that is not healthy. They knew that that using the word "stock" couldn't be backed up at that time, but did not change it. Furthermore, when someone went on to take it off, they were the first to issue "warnings" and put the "Iranian Stock" comment back on. Real sneaky if you ask many of us such Haider, Zak etc.. Is this the way Wikipedia works? I hope not.
Also, not all the references to Iran were removed, I checked myself, and I was not the one who removed all the Iranian references either. I share a computer with some colleagues sometimes, and a couple of them removed the term as they stated it was a complete joke that a couple of people were running rampantly through all sorts of ethnic articles and placing "Iranian" this and "Iranian" that wherever they could with very minimal evidence in most cases. That is a joke if you ask me!
Like I said before, it is one thing to reference the partial descendatns to eastern Iranian / Persian peoples, but another to call a whole group "stock". That is completely inappropriate and should not be tolerated. I will address the barrage of inappropriately placed Iranian comments throughout Wikipedia pages with the Wikipedia org later.
Is that message intended to constitute "evidence of trying to resolve the problem" before you launch another Arbcom case?
I don't think that it was particularily helpful. There's nothing wrong with having a POV on WP. It is considered wrong to try to enshrine it at the expense of all other POVs.
Nor am I doing "original research". None of the positions of which you accuse me are all that off-beat. Standard conference fare [4].
It might help if we both read the Garthwaite book I mentioned and then argued about the book. If you're at U of C (you mentioned talking to Donner) Regenstein will probably have it. I'll have to save up for it. Zora 22:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Well I'm the guy who inserted the Eastern Iranian phrase in the first place when I started adding and drastically changing the article and I have left that for the info. box which explains related people and the rest of the article delves into the Iranian peoples links regarding the Pashtuns. Yes, I've been reading some books and articles and the Pashtuns, first and foremost share ties with their immediate neighbors, whom I've also listed in addition to the Iranian peoples. Their lineage (whether entire or partial) from an Iranic people is not in question, but not necessary for the opening as many ethnic groups are not given this rendition (see English people etc.). See discussion page on Pashtuns as well for my rationale. Tombseye 20:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I`m sorry, how is it not necessary to state in the intro of an article the lineage of the certain ethnic group that the article is about, in an encylopedia of all places? The infobox mention is rather irrelevant, and not a good excuse to erase this fact from the intro. Zmmz 21:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
No, it has to be emphasized in the intro. The origin of the ethnicity needs to be stated in the intro in the article about that ethnicity. Zmmz 21:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Khoikhoi, I`m sorry, it is not about being famous, it is about the factual origin of an entire ethnicity; the origin, not the current status. Zmmz 22:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks Khoikhoi; I know you are tired. Zmmz 22:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I hope after that, there be more constructive discussions, and the disruptiveness ceases for a while. Zmmz 22:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Um, it's grammar, not grammer. Zora 23:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me? Zmmz 00:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
I didn't actually revert anything. I just worked on syntax. As it happens those two sentences were added by me. It's been six months, and they have been altered, gutted, restored, tweaked, argued about, etc. But basically, those two sentences are recognizable as I added them and I continue to defend them when someone has a problem! Marskell 21:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:A Relief of a Persian King Battling a Demon.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Tomb of rumi at konya turkey.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Stamp three.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Persia-_Sassanian_Cavalry.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, what is wrong with the other images [Iranian farmers and women] please, and how can the possible problem be fixed? Thank you Zmmz 07:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Why do you keep removing this? It's a comment insulting Iranians. — Khoikhoi 01:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
I have not done so. Zmmz 01:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
You cannot edit my sections though. Zmmz 01:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Persepolis - The Sculptures 3.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc ( ?) 20:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, how can I add a source? Zmmz 20:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Tochal Mountain.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc ( ?) 21:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey Zmmz, I have resonded on that guys talk page as you have requested. I basically said you shouldn't be blocked and it was kinda strange that you were picked on since out of all the editors with a similar POV, youi are easily the most courteus and reasonable.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 11:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem man, I would hate to see you not be able to edit anymore, I like how even with your POV you still don't come across as dogmatic.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
You can if you wish (I'm sure this diffs on his talk page, as well as most of the rest of that page, should be a good starting point), but frankly, I don't think it's worth the time or effort. Xebat is a vandal, and he does very little to try to hide this point. Far apart from the complex edit wars of Aucaman, Xebat is pretty easy to deal with (as evidenced by his current block). In the event he shows up again, I imagine he'll simply throw around a few more curses until he gets blocked for even longer. -- InShaneee 00:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, but I just do not want to exclude anyone, even those whom I agreed with in POV. Nevertheless, my fear is User:Xebat will come back with another username, like he did before, but this time more cautious in disrupting articles; nevertheless, still tangent to edit-warring, and occasional incivilities. I won’t be around then, and [if] someone else decides to report him, it may take months, even so needlessly wasting the time of ArbCom members. If you feel appropriate, since, you blocked him, you provide the evidence. I don’t have too much time anymore. By the way, maybe--you were right--maybe it was worth it to stick around and see this thing to the end; even if, it came at the expense of myself being banned. Believe it or not, I care about Wiki; I have learned so much from browsing around here, that otherwise, would not have, since buying an encyclopedia is not really feasible for some people. Zmmz 01:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, if I am topically banned, then I don`t have much else to contribute, but I will of-course keep reading the articles. But, if I am partially banned, then most likely, I will stay for a few more month. You are doing a good job, by the way; these guys need at least one or two stern admins to keep them in place. Zmmz 05:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
The image.. I think selection can be much better. Also the name of it.."Uzbeks"? that should be fixed also. -- - K a s h Talk | email 16:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
The owner of the site admitted that he uses the picture for all Turkish or Turkic related people. The rights to that picture was given to me. Zmmz 23:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
First of all, please remain civil, and calm. Secondly, as I stated, the author indicated she can be used as an Iranian-Turk, since he himself uses her picture in a broadened sense. Thank you Zmmz 23:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
There is no issue. I don`t see anyone discussing the picture, and with all due respect, I just indicated to you, that the author indicated she can be used as an Iranian-Turk. I don`t see any problems here.
Zmmz
23:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
If I insert the picture back into the article, would you try to revert it again? Zmmz 00:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Iranianswithdifferentbackgrounds.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Also, you should consider archiving your talk page. Happy editing, Flying Canuck 03:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for advising me of the ongoing Arbitration concerning User:Zora; it's good to be informed. For the time being, I'll decline getting involved, as my interaction with her was brief and superficial — I'd have little to contribute. I hope that you're able to reach a resolution, and forgive any mistake on my part at WP:AN/I. Tijuana Brass 07:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian local woman.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aucaman Talk 02:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Do not leave; help reshape the system. If you study me carefully you will know who I am and what I am. 72.57.230.179 04:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Collage of azeris and others.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aucaman Talk 02:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Oldman again.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:06, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi there,
I just wanted to let you know that user, khoikhoi (MOD) keeps including the very offensive term, "south azerbaijan" on the Iranian Azerbaijan page. We should not let him post this propoganda and false information. That term has no place in an encycolpedia article. It is not relevent to the content. What a few seperatists call that region should not be shown here. If we dont stop this, people will start including the "a#abian gulf" as an alternate name on the Persian gulf page.
KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
I noticed your question while leaving him a note. I manage copyrights at work. The short answer is: he must have the permission of the image's creator. The only thing that changes this is if the creator attached a "free for non-comercial use" or some other such license to the image or to the page that serves the image -- CTSWyneken 21:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for finally clarifying this; so which tag should I use? The pics have been given to me by the creators of the pics, not third parties, but they are only to be used in Wikipedia. Zmmz 21:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, just to make sure; if I am given a picture free-of-charge, to be used in Wikipedia only see example here, and the original author has the copyright, yet, gives non-exclusive rights to, I--is this the correct tag for it?; is PermissionAndFairUse tag correct, or should I use another tag? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmmz ( talk • contribs)
So exactly, what do I kind of permission do I need to get from the creators? Zmmz 21:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I will just ask the creators of the pics to release all rights, does that work? Zmmz 22:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
sure no problem. The picture of the girl is good, but has nothing to do with the section where she was placed whereas the Bactriana Complex picture does. She is part of the cultural dimension and logically she seems suitable for the culture section. In the future I'll let you know. Also, the main picture needs more diversity that doesn't include people from Iran as I explained on the discussion page. Thanks and take care. Tombseye 22:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
The main picture already includes an Israeli, Afghan, a Canadian-Iranian, and a Persian. I don`t think it is prudent to get more people there, because it is only five pics; otherwise, the pic becomes too long/unusable. Zmmz 22:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but Israeli Iranians are a tiny group, whereas Kurds are the 3rd largest group and the Tajiks and Ossetians and Baluchis are major peoples. Putting up Iranian Jews is okay, but not really representative of the IRanian peoples since you have three Iranian Persians which is disproportionate. Also, in the diversity section, I would suggest no picture as that section is really about Turko-Iranians and other overlapping groups whereas Persian Jews are simply Persians of the Jewish faith. Tombseye 23:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Persian Jews are as Iranian as others, and like I said the pic has only room for 5 pics, and the two presidents are important. I just added a Tajik picture seperately, so feel free to find a pic of a Kurd and add it somewhere into the article. No one should object to that. Zmmz 23:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I asked you before, and in the discussion you said the pic is fine, submit it. It is extremely difficult to get copyright permissions from creators of the pics, and I have done so. I am not going to delete the pic. As a compromise we can replace the Gilaki woman with a Kurd, but in text only, such that the pic is only a model representing generically Iranian peoples. So, she could very well be Kurdish. In fact, the designer is inspired by Qajar era, and the Kurds. You can view his web site. Zmmz 00:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but can you please stop uploading images until you have a better understanding of our image copyright policies. Many of the images you are uploading are tagged incorrectly, Image:Wiped.jpg suggests copyright and permission yet you have tagged it as no rights reserved, likewise Image:Mrspresedident.jpg. You also seem to be uploading many copies of the same image. If you have any questions let me know, or ask on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions but until you have a good understanding please stop uploading as all of these things will have to be corrected by volunteers. Thanks - cohesion 22:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
One of the creators asked to use the creative commons tag himslef via email though. That should be good enough; no? Zmmz 02:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't know where you got the idea that I am in an edit war. I've never initiated nor participated in edit wars of any kind. The changes I and Jeff made last night were reverted by yourself and Zereshk. Look carefully through the history and you'll see I did not revert your reversions. The only reverts I ever make are against obvious vandalism. You repeatedly ask for me to discuss changes on the talkpage and yet you have not made even one comment on the suggested improvements. Perhaps you could take a look now? The reason for deleting the subheading is that the section is fragmented by so many subsections. It would be better to have a continuous prose instead. I will continue to make positive changes and if you disagree, you are welcome to propose alternatives. Please note that simply reverting to an older version is not going to improve the article. Green Giant 02:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
What you call revert, was a rvv., which put back pics you deleted. And, you insisted no poll is even neeed? You guys need to work with others, and do not erase sections/pics unless you ask others; even if, you don`t feel like talking to other people. Please don`t erase first, and wait till others voice their voices; ask first, delete later. Zmmz 02:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
It's a legal issue - the onus is on the editors to provide the permissions or rationales. The admins job in this respect is to make sure images are not being wrongly used. If they allow the images to be used without rationales, then Wikimedia becomes legally culpable and faces the possibility of legal action by the copyright holders. Green Giant 01:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I am aware of the rules, but I am not the one you need to inform though. Those are not my pictures, but I think it is appropriate that you copy and paste this on the talk pages of whom the pictures belong to, to show them courtesy, and inform them of the issues. Also, the procedure for 3RR warning is to leave it on user talk pages as well. Zmmz 01:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Again, I am not the one you need to inform of these info. Please review this page for warning other users, it will be helpful to you, [5]. And, about the pic, you dont have to let them know you erased them, but out of courtesy, it is a good thing if you do. Zmmz 01:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Iran- Dariush.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 16:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
To avoid filling your talk page with about 10+ more templates of images with no sources or copyright information, I'm going to just list them here. Please review the source data for the following images:
Please review the copyright status for each of the following:
Please note that these pictures will be deleted if they are not sufficently updated within 7 days. Pepsidrinka 16:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian model4.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 16:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have personally contacted the creators/owners of these images and obtained permission to use the creative commons tag on them. You can email me or the owner for proof; see the pic`s info for contact detail.
Zmmz
20:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok. You seem to have uploaded some images that have non-commercial liscenses. According to the criteria for speedy deletion, they fulfil the criteria when there is no assertion of fair use. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Images, Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Image copyright tags, and become familar with the speedy deletion criteria for images. Pepsidrinka 15:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have personally contacted the creators/owners of these images and obtained permission to use the creative commons tag on them. You can email me or the owner for proof; see the pic`s info for contact detail. Zmmz 20:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have listed Image:02-01-13-x-0094-iran-tehran-tochal-ski-skiing-0640.jpg and Image:01-08-14-6581-iran-tehran-azadi-shahyad-0640.jpg as copyright problems, since you state they are from IranPIX, whose website states " Pictures on this site may not be copied for commercial use or distribution, nor may these objects be modified or reposted to other sites and media. All pictures by IranPIX. © IranPIX". Unless you can provide proof that these photos have also been licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License as you tagged them, they are likely to be deleted. └ UkPaolo/ talk┐ 16:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
The owner has given me permission to use them as creative common licensed. You can email me or him for proof. Zmmz 20:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The administrator I was dealing with refuses to do anything about user:Diyakos actions. Read it and get back to me with a course of action. Manik666 05:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Don`t rely on individual admins who may not care to hear your side of the story, report your concerns here [1]. Zmmz 06:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Har Roozetan Norouz, Norouzetan Pirooz هر روزتا ن نوروز , نوروزتان پيروز . Amir85 13:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I included a diff [2] to your Rfc in an ongoing ArbCom case that we unfortunately had to file against Aucaman; so just be aware of that please. Zmmz 22:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
D iyako Talk + 10:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
You may want to comment on it. -- Cool Cat Talk| @ 13:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
با درود، به حرفهاش گوش نکن، بعضی ها میخوان از وضعیت سواستفاده بکنن، اگه درگذشته اختلافاتی در بین ما بوده دلیل نمیشه که ما باز هم وضعیت رو ادامه بدیم. D iyako Talk + 14:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
It's actually convention to bold-face alternate names for the subject of the article mentioned in the opening paragraph (the way "Ashkanian" is in bold-face on Parthia). Also, Octavian is just a redirect to Augustus, so it shouldn't be linked as it just brings you back to where you started. siafu 23:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
That is exactly why linked it, because a new reader might want to know the difference between the two names, hence, the link will show the names are interchangable; but, if you want to leave it bold faced, go ahead. Zmmz 23:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
By the way, Siafu did you get my email? Zmmz 00:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -- Tony Sidaway 19:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Now its your turn to check the talk page.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
You'll have to revert the edits to your original 'secularism'. Moshe's already gone and broken 3RR's, and I don't want to break it myself. black thorn of brethil 03:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
OK, this is the first time I am having a discussion with you both, but both of you need to give each other the benefit of the doubt and compromise with each other more. But, Black definitely don`t go over the 3RR, just let`s see what Moshe says, and we`ll revert it to a compromised version. Thanks Zmmz 03:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
You gave in way too easily. Your sentence ought still to contain a note on the secular bent of the Parthians, as that has immediate relevance to what comes after with the Sassanids - religious intolerance, suppression, bigotry and murder. black thorn of brethil 04:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I shouldnt of called you insane and I was kinda being a dick in general. Like I said earlier I wouldn't mind including a reference to their tendency towards secularism as long as it doesn't replace the hellenistic reference.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 08:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Moshe, no problem, all is good, and I think the proposals by Black are good as well, for now. Zmmz 22:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
For the most part I agree I just think we should take more of a neutral position, like not mention it being negative. Also I don't really think the Parthians' religious tolerance was Hellenistic influenced, since most Greeks weren't all that religiously tolerant, if anything the Parthians being religiously tolerant were influenced by the earlier Archemids.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 03:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
How are you guys getting along on the compromise--Moshe and Black? Zmmz 08:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I just read it, it looks good to me, what do you think Moshe? Zmmz 01:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks man, just let me know if you guys need me to mediate or if you need my opinion about possible compromises. Zmmz 22:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Making a red link is a suggestion that an article is needed. There's nothing wrong with making one. Actually, having articles on early cartographers is a good idea. Zora 00:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, stay calm please, as far as I recall, I asked people to make sure the links works first before submitting save please; I`m not sure if that is scolding. I thought red links are not encouraged in articles. Zmmz 00:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
They help to indicate which articles still have to written. Cheers, — Ruud 00:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I thought so, but when I was new here, someone said they are to be erased, hhmmm. Sure thing though, but listen that section about possible Turkish origin has to be taken out, because it is factually inaccurate; at the time of that particular scientist the Seljuk Turks had not invaded Persia, it is only after their invasion that Khwarizmians and Azeris became mixed, i.e. Iranian-Turks. Tell me what you think? Thanks Zmmz 00:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
What do you think of the actions of user ManiF on this article al-Karkhi ? Jidan 05:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Zmmz. I will not block them now as they haven't vandalised since the last warning - I will however do my best to keep an eye on them. Cheers TigerShark 00:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
You seem to have inserted an unneeded and misleading heading (the section is almost entirely non-biographical), reinstated duplicate wikilinks, removed facts, reinstated incorrected capitalisation, etc. Why? -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 10:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I`m sorry? Erased what facts? Are you sure it was me? I was the one who wrote the entire article, but some came in and erased a lot of stuff, so I don`t bother with it anymore. Also, I did erase some stuff, but they were rewritten, because they were originally copied and pasted from answers.com. You cannot do that in Wiki, if you want, I leave the Wiki manual link on your talk page---please review it. By the way, if as you acknowledge, a theory is now discarded, why do you still insert in in the article? Zmmz 21:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Dear Zmmz, I replaced the paragraph by the exact quotes of Ibn Khaldun about Persians, which all of them are full of praise for the Persian civilization. I have the book Muqaddimah and I have also submitted all of Ibn Khaldun's comments about Persians on the Talk page. You may add some of them to the article. There are many other quotes by him in praising Persians which can be included in that section. Here are some of his comments about Persians. If you like I can scan those pages and send it to you. All of the quotes are taken from Muqaddimah, Translated by Franz Rosenthal, Princeton University Press, 1981.
"Peoples and states deploying cataphracts at some time in their history included (in this order) tribal groups, the Parthian dynasty, Iranian Sarmatians, Seleucids, Sassanid Persia, Armenians and the Byzantine Empire, Pergamenes, the Roman Empire, "
Sorry, what I meant was that it wasn't necessarily completely sequential chronologically, since many of these deployers overlapped historically. I'm also certain that, contrary to the latest edit, Pergamon and the pre-Theodosian Roman Empire came before and not after the Byzantine Empire. Indeed the Pergamene state was formed shortly after the Seleucid Empire was forged and was roughly contemporaneous with it. It might also be of benefit to explicitly state that the Parthians and the Iranian Sarmatians were the first ones to include cataphracts in their armies. Khepidjemwa'atnefru 23:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I think, then, stating the following may be more appropriate....“more or less in order of use”. Also, feel free to move them around, and provide one source for your usage. Thanks Zmmz 00:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Check out what they did to the Pashtuns page - they removed every reference to the word "Iranian" that they could find! [3] -- Khoikhoi 05:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Every reference was not removed, just derogatory remarks such "Iranian stock". Khoikhoi agreed with me about one month ago that it was derogatory and should be changed to Pashtuns are descendants of eastern Iranians, but he now has changed his mind! It is good to mention the eastern Iranian roots, but do not make the article about how everything is from "Iranian" this and "Iranian" that!! That is all I am saying. Thank you.
How is being of "Iranian stock", which is a factual statement, derogatory? I looked at the article; you actually erased every single word that was Iran or Iranian. Zmmz 06:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Please see discussion between Khoikhoi and Souther Comfort on April 1st They may edit it now but take a look at Khoikhoi's discussion page, they discuss the "Iranian Stock" derogatory comment. Very interesting and works toward my point that there is an agenda on Wikipedia that is not healthy. They knew that that using the word "stock" couldn't be backed up at that time, but did not change it. Furthermore, when someone went on to take it off, they were the first to issue "warnings" and put the "Iranian Stock" comment back on. Real sneaky if you ask many of us such Haider, Zak etc.. Is this the way Wikipedia works? I hope not.
Also, not all the references to Iran were removed, I checked myself, and I was not the one who removed all the Iranian references either. I share a computer with some colleagues sometimes, and a couple of them removed the term as they stated it was a complete joke that a couple of people were running rampantly through all sorts of ethnic articles and placing "Iranian" this and "Iranian" that wherever they could with very minimal evidence in most cases. That is a joke if you ask me!
Like I said before, it is one thing to reference the partial descendatns to eastern Iranian / Persian peoples, but another to call a whole group "stock". That is completely inappropriate and should not be tolerated. I will address the barrage of inappropriately placed Iranian comments throughout Wikipedia pages with the Wikipedia org later.
Is that message intended to constitute "evidence of trying to resolve the problem" before you launch another Arbcom case?
I don't think that it was particularily helpful. There's nothing wrong with having a POV on WP. It is considered wrong to try to enshrine it at the expense of all other POVs.
Nor am I doing "original research". None of the positions of which you accuse me are all that off-beat. Standard conference fare [4].
It might help if we both read the Garthwaite book I mentioned and then argued about the book. If you're at U of C (you mentioned talking to Donner) Regenstein will probably have it. I'll have to save up for it. Zora 22:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Well I'm the guy who inserted the Eastern Iranian phrase in the first place when I started adding and drastically changing the article and I have left that for the info. box which explains related people and the rest of the article delves into the Iranian peoples links regarding the Pashtuns. Yes, I've been reading some books and articles and the Pashtuns, first and foremost share ties with their immediate neighbors, whom I've also listed in addition to the Iranian peoples. Their lineage (whether entire or partial) from an Iranic people is not in question, but not necessary for the opening as many ethnic groups are not given this rendition (see English people etc.). See discussion page on Pashtuns as well for my rationale. Tombseye 20:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I`m sorry, how is it not necessary to state in the intro of an article the lineage of the certain ethnic group that the article is about, in an encylopedia of all places? The infobox mention is rather irrelevant, and not a good excuse to erase this fact from the intro. Zmmz 21:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
No, it has to be emphasized in the intro. The origin of the ethnicity needs to be stated in the intro in the article about that ethnicity. Zmmz 21:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Khoikhoi, I`m sorry, it is not about being famous, it is about the factual origin of an entire ethnicity; the origin, not the current status. Zmmz 22:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks Khoikhoi; I know you are tired. Zmmz 22:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I hope after that, there be more constructive discussions, and the disruptiveness ceases for a while. Zmmz 22:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Um, it's grammar, not grammer. Zora 23:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me? Zmmz 00:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
I didn't actually revert anything. I just worked on syntax. As it happens those two sentences were added by me. It's been six months, and they have been altered, gutted, restored, tweaked, argued about, etc. But basically, those two sentences are recognizable as I added them and I continue to defend them when someone has a problem! Marskell 21:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:A Relief of a Persian King Battling a Demon.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Tomb of rumi at konya turkey.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Stamp three.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Persia-_Sassanian_Cavalry.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, what is wrong with the other images [Iranian farmers and women] please, and how can the possible problem be fixed? Thank you Zmmz 07:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Why do you keep removing this? It's a comment insulting Iranians. — Khoikhoi 01:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
I have not done so. Zmmz 01:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
You cannot edit my sections though. Zmmz 01:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Persepolis - The Sculptures 3.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc ( ?) 20:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, how can I add a source? Zmmz 20:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Tochal Mountain.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc ( ?) 21:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey Zmmz, I have resonded on that guys talk page as you have requested. I basically said you shouldn't be blocked and it was kinda strange that you were picked on since out of all the editors with a similar POV, youi are easily the most courteus and reasonable.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 11:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem man, I would hate to see you not be able to edit anymore, I like how even with your POV you still don't come across as dogmatic.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
You can if you wish (I'm sure this diffs on his talk page, as well as most of the rest of that page, should be a good starting point), but frankly, I don't think it's worth the time or effort. Xebat is a vandal, and he does very little to try to hide this point. Far apart from the complex edit wars of Aucaman, Xebat is pretty easy to deal with (as evidenced by his current block). In the event he shows up again, I imagine he'll simply throw around a few more curses until he gets blocked for even longer. -- InShaneee 00:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, but I just do not want to exclude anyone, even those whom I agreed with in POV. Nevertheless, my fear is User:Xebat will come back with another username, like he did before, but this time more cautious in disrupting articles; nevertheless, still tangent to edit-warring, and occasional incivilities. I won’t be around then, and [if] someone else decides to report him, it may take months, even so needlessly wasting the time of ArbCom members. If you feel appropriate, since, you blocked him, you provide the evidence. I don’t have too much time anymore. By the way, maybe--you were right--maybe it was worth it to stick around and see this thing to the end; even if, it came at the expense of myself being banned. Believe it or not, I care about Wiki; I have learned so much from browsing around here, that otherwise, would not have, since buying an encyclopedia is not really feasible for some people. Zmmz 01:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, if I am topically banned, then I don`t have much else to contribute, but I will of-course keep reading the articles. But, if I am partially banned, then most likely, I will stay for a few more month. You are doing a good job, by the way; these guys need at least one or two stern admins to keep them in place. Zmmz 05:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
The image.. I think selection can be much better. Also the name of it.."Uzbeks"? that should be fixed also. -- - K a s h Talk | email 16:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
The owner of the site admitted that he uses the picture for all Turkish or Turkic related people. The rights to that picture was given to me. Zmmz 23:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
First of all, please remain civil, and calm. Secondly, as I stated, the author indicated she can be used as an Iranian-Turk, since he himself uses her picture in a broadened sense. Thank you Zmmz 23:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
There is no issue. I don`t see anyone discussing the picture, and with all due respect, I just indicated to you, that the author indicated she can be used as an Iranian-Turk. I don`t see any problems here.
Zmmz
23:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
If I insert the picture back into the article, would you try to revert it again? Zmmz 00:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Iranianswithdifferentbackgrounds.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Also, you should consider archiving your talk page. Happy editing, Flying Canuck 03:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for advising me of the ongoing Arbitration concerning User:Zora; it's good to be informed. For the time being, I'll decline getting involved, as my interaction with her was brief and superficial — I'd have little to contribute. I hope that you're able to reach a resolution, and forgive any mistake on my part at WP:AN/I. Tijuana Brass 07:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian local woman.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aucaman Talk 02:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Do not leave; help reshape the system. If you study me carefully you will know who I am and what I am. 72.57.230.179 04:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Collage of azeris and others.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aucaman Talk 02:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Oldman again.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:06, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi there,
I just wanted to let you know that user, khoikhoi (MOD) keeps including the very offensive term, "south azerbaijan" on the Iranian Azerbaijan page. We should not let him post this propoganda and false information. That term has no place in an encycolpedia article. It is not relevent to the content. What a few seperatists call that region should not be shown here. If we dont stop this, people will start including the "a#abian gulf" as an alternate name on the Persian gulf page.
KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
I noticed your question while leaving him a note. I manage copyrights at work. The short answer is: he must have the permission of the image's creator. The only thing that changes this is if the creator attached a "free for non-comercial use" or some other such license to the image or to the page that serves the image -- CTSWyneken 21:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for finally clarifying this; so which tag should I use? The pics have been given to me by the creators of the pics, not third parties, but they are only to be used in Wikipedia. Zmmz 21:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, just to make sure; if I am given a picture free-of-charge, to be used in Wikipedia only see example here, and the original author has the copyright, yet, gives non-exclusive rights to, I--is this the correct tag for it?; is PermissionAndFairUse tag correct, or should I use another tag? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmmz ( talk • contribs)
So exactly, what do I kind of permission do I need to get from the creators? Zmmz 21:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I will just ask the creators of the pics to release all rights, does that work? Zmmz 22:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
sure no problem. The picture of the girl is good, but has nothing to do with the section where she was placed whereas the Bactriana Complex picture does. She is part of the cultural dimension and logically she seems suitable for the culture section. In the future I'll let you know. Also, the main picture needs more diversity that doesn't include people from Iran as I explained on the discussion page. Thanks and take care. Tombseye 22:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
The main picture already includes an Israeli, Afghan, a Canadian-Iranian, and a Persian. I don`t think it is prudent to get more people there, because it is only five pics; otherwise, the pic becomes too long/unusable. Zmmz 22:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but Israeli Iranians are a tiny group, whereas Kurds are the 3rd largest group and the Tajiks and Ossetians and Baluchis are major peoples. Putting up Iranian Jews is okay, but not really representative of the IRanian peoples since you have three Iranian Persians which is disproportionate. Also, in the diversity section, I would suggest no picture as that section is really about Turko-Iranians and other overlapping groups whereas Persian Jews are simply Persians of the Jewish faith. Tombseye 23:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Persian Jews are as Iranian as others, and like I said the pic has only room for 5 pics, and the two presidents are important. I just added a Tajik picture seperately, so feel free to find a pic of a Kurd and add it somewhere into the article. No one should object to that. Zmmz 23:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I asked you before, and in the discussion you said the pic is fine, submit it. It is extremely difficult to get copyright permissions from creators of the pics, and I have done so. I am not going to delete the pic. As a compromise we can replace the Gilaki woman with a Kurd, but in text only, such that the pic is only a model representing generically Iranian peoples. So, she could very well be Kurdish. In fact, the designer is inspired by Qajar era, and the Kurds. You can view his web site. Zmmz 00:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but can you please stop uploading images until you have a better understanding of our image copyright policies. Many of the images you are uploading are tagged incorrectly, Image:Wiped.jpg suggests copyright and permission yet you have tagged it as no rights reserved, likewise Image:Mrspresedident.jpg. You also seem to be uploading many copies of the same image. If you have any questions let me know, or ask on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions but until you have a good understanding please stop uploading as all of these things will have to be corrected by volunteers. Thanks - cohesion 22:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
One of the creators asked to use the creative commons tag himslef via email though. That should be good enough; no? Zmmz 02:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't know where you got the idea that I am in an edit war. I've never initiated nor participated in edit wars of any kind. The changes I and Jeff made last night were reverted by yourself and Zereshk. Look carefully through the history and you'll see I did not revert your reversions. The only reverts I ever make are against obvious vandalism. You repeatedly ask for me to discuss changes on the talkpage and yet you have not made even one comment on the suggested improvements. Perhaps you could take a look now? The reason for deleting the subheading is that the section is fragmented by so many subsections. It would be better to have a continuous prose instead. I will continue to make positive changes and if you disagree, you are welcome to propose alternatives. Please note that simply reverting to an older version is not going to improve the article. Green Giant 02:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
What you call revert, was a rvv., which put back pics you deleted. And, you insisted no poll is even neeed? You guys need to work with others, and do not erase sections/pics unless you ask others; even if, you don`t feel like talking to other people. Please don`t erase first, and wait till others voice their voices; ask first, delete later. Zmmz 02:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
It's a legal issue - the onus is on the editors to provide the permissions or rationales. The admins job in this respect is to make sure images are not being wrongly used. If they allow the images to be used without rationales, then Wikimedia becomes legally culpable and faces the possibility of legal action by the copyright holders. Green Giant 01:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I am aware of the rules, but I am not the one you need to inform though. Those are not my pictures, but I think it is appropriate that you copy and paste this on the talk pages of whom the pictures belong to, to show them courtesy, and inform them of the issues. Also, the procedure for 3RR warning is to leave it on user talk pages as well. Zmmz 01:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Again, I am not the one you need to inform of these info. Please review this page for warning other users, it will be helpful to you, [5]. And, about the pic, you dont have to let them know you erased them, but out of courtesy, it is a good thing if you do. Zmmz 01:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Iran- Dariush.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 16:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
To avoid filling your talk page with about 10+ more templates of images with no sources or copyright information, I'm going to just list them here. Please review the source data for the following images:
Please review the copyright status for each of the following:
Please note that these pictures will be deleted if they are not sufficently updated within 7 days. Pepsidrinka 16:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian model4.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 16:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have personally contacted the creators/owners of these images and obtained permission to use the creative commons tag on them. You can email me or the owner for proof; see the pic`s info for contact detail.
Zmmz
20:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok. You seem to have uploaded some images that have non-commercial liscenses. According to the criteria for speedy deletion, they fulfil the criteria when there is no assertion of fair use. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Images, Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Image copyright tags, and become familar with the speedy deletion criteria for images. Pepsidrinka 15:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have personally contacted the creators/owners of these images and obtained permission to use the creative commons tag on them. You can email me or the owner for proof; see the pic`s info for contact detail. Zmmz 20:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have listed Image:02-01-13-x-0094-iran-tehran-tochal-ski-skiing-0640.jpg and Image:01-08-14-6581-iran-tehran-azadi-shahyad-0640.jpg as copyright problems, since you state they are from IranPIX, whose website states " Pictures on this site may not be copied for commercial use or distribution, nor may these objects be modified or reposted to other sites and media. All pictures by IranPIX. © IranPIX". Unless you can provide proof that these photos have also been licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License as you tagged them, they are likely to be deleted. └ UkPaolo/ talk┐ 16:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
The owner has given me permission to use them as creative common licensed. You can email me or him for proof. Zmmz 20:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)