Nomination of Sepideh Gholian for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sepideh Gholian 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/Sepideh Gholian until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Saff V. ( talk) 07:35, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Please don't invite users from only one point of view to comment on Wikipedia discussions. Just make your own comment, list the discussion in the appropriate venues, and try to prevail by force of reason. In the recent AfD, experienced users agreed with your point of view. Do we have an understanding that you will not canvas in the future? I do not care whether or not you did in the past, as long as you confirm that you will not do so in the future. My purpose in asking you for this commitment is to defuse concerns of other editors who favor a sanction. Thank you. Jehochman Talk 15:48, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, Roger to no canvassing. I will not canvas in the future. Although in this case I would like to comment that I honestly did not see it as a matter of different points of view and I think the fact that at the end everybody without a single exception affirmed my judgement was significant. Also, my regards to the editors because I believe in the process. Fredrick eagles ( talk) 19:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- @
Jehochman: I think
you were OUTing a user by asking him not to invite others, sincehe hadn't mentioned any off-wiki link and you could not have ask him to prohibit canvassing (right?). @ Oshwah and Fish and karate: Thanks for being precise and accurate, but...OUTing? Just see he promised not to invite others in the future! -- Mhhossein talk 06:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- You are wrong. Please strike out the serious accusation you have made against me without any evidence. What are you doing here? Let this user speak for themself. They don’t need you acting as their lawyer, because you are
casting aspersions and
misusing Wikipedia as a battleground.
Jehochman
Talk 09:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ Jehochman: Yeah I may be wrong but every thing is clear here! I'm finished with that but your comments seemed contradictory to me. Once you say there's no clue and then you come here and make comments on inviting! Is asking some one not to invite others, while we're not sure if he/she really has done that before, accepted? Moreover, you ask me to strike "the serious accusation" and you make serious accusations of " casting aspersions and misusing Wikipedia as a battleground". Not a good reaction! I'm just Finished with that. -- Mhhossein talk 05:03, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- I showed my good faith against you and would expect you do the same. -- Mhhossein talk 05:05, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- You are wrong. Please strike out the serious accusation you have made against me without any evidence. What are you doing here? Let this user speak for themself. They don’t need you acting as their lawyer, because you are
casting aspersions and
misusing Wikipedia as a battleground.
Jehochman
Talk 09:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Fredrick eagles, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Flapjacktastic ( talk) 16:11, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give
Haft Tappeh Sugar Cane Mill Labor Syndicate a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is
legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Flapjacktastic ( talk) 16:13, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions to curtail disruption in articles related to post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. Before continuing to make edits that involve this topic, please read the full description of these sanctions here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Nomination of Sepideh Gholian for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sepideh Gholian 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/Sepideh Gholian until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Saff V. ( talk) 07:35, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Please don't invite users from only one point of view to comment on Wikipedia discussions. Just make your own comment, list the discussion in the appropriate venues, and try to prevail by force of reason. In the recent AfD, experienced users agreed with your point of view. Do we have an understanding that you will not canvas in the future? I do not care whether or not you did in the past, as long as you confirm that you will not do so in the future. My purpose in asking you for this commitment is to defuse concerns of other editors who favor a sanction. Thank you. Jehochman Talk 15:48, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, Roger to no canvassing. I will not canvas in the future. Although in this case I would like to comment that I honestly did not see it as a matter of different points of view and I think the fact that at the end everybody without a single exception affirmed my judgement was significant. Also, my regards to the editors because I believe in the process. Fredrick eagles ( talk) 19:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- @
Jehochman: I think
you were OUTing a user by asking him not to invite others, sincehe hadn't mentioned any off-wiki link and you could not have ask him to prohibit canvassing (right?). @ Oshwah and Fish and karate: Thanks for being precise and accurate, but...OUTing? Just see he promised not to invite others in the future! -- Mhhossein talk 06:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- You are wrong. Please strike out the serious accusation you have made against me without any evidence. What are you doing here? Let this user speak for themself. They don’t need you acting as their lawyer, because you are
casting aspersions and
misusing Wikipedia as a battleground.
Jehochman
Talk 09:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ Jehochman: Yeah I may be wrong but every thing is clear here! I'm finished with that but your comments seemed contradictory to me. Once you say there's no clue and then you come here and make comments on inviting! Is asking some one not to invite others, while we're not sure if he/she really has done that before, accepted? Moreover, you ask me to strike "the serious accusation" and you make serious accusations of " casting aspersions and misusing Wikipedia as a battleground". Not a good reaction! I'm just Finished with that. -- Mhhossein talk 05:03, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- I showed my good faith against you and would expect you do the same. -- Mhhossein talk 05:05, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- You are wrong. Please strike out the serious accusation you have made against me without any evidence. What are you doing here? Let this user speak for themself. They don’t need you acting as their lawyer, because you are
casting aspersions and
misusing Wikipedia as a battleground.
Jehochman
Talk 09:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Fredrick eagles, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Flapjacktastic ( talk) 16:11, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give
Haft Tappeh Sugar Cane Mill Labor Syndicate a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is
legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Flapjacktastic ( talk) 16:13, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions to curtail disruption in articles related to post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. Before continuing to make edits that involve this topic, please read the full description of these sanctions here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.