User talk:Khodabandeh14

Numbered list item

On Nezami Ganjavi Article [[1]]

/On Nezami Ganjavi article part II - Soviet/Turkish Nationalist distortions

Advice: Some articles unfortunately get hit a lot due to nationalistic behaviours. These articles try to introduce anachronistic terms, identities and groups. The best way to deal with this issue is to look at the majority of sources in www.books.google.com and www.scholar.google.com Or for example look at expert books. Sometimes a volume is even written by current living experts: [2]. There is no reason in attempting to reason with hard-headed folks from certain areas/countries. Rather mediation process should be started immediately and the mediators should be asked to write e-mails to current world-recognize experts on these issues. That is the best way of solving problems. Usually the side that has the minority viewpoint will try to emphasize the links they find in www.books.google.com and www.scholar.google.com However, not all books and articles from these sources are good. In actuality, if an article or book is not specific and specialized on the subject, it should not be used. Wikipedia:Verifiability:"The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. In general, the best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments; as a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source." (So article or book on the subject matter itself takes precedence over materials that mention the topic in a pagraph or two..or are not about the subject).

Note also if something is disputed, then if the scholar is dead, it should be asked from Modern scholars whose emails are vailable and a mediator should email that scholar on behalf of users based on a message agreed on both sides..(e.g..[3][4]

Epic poetry articles to work on

Faramarz Nama

Bijan Nama

Bahman Nama

Banu Goshasp Nama

Kush Nama

Saam Nama

Garshaspnama

Khaqani

Hafez

Sa'adi

Ferdowsi

Mir Fendereski

Borzu Nama

Bijan Nama

Darab Nama

Dorood/Greetings

Dear Khodabandeh, thank you very much for your greetings and kind sentiments. I hereby reciprocate your greetings and hope that you are also healthy and well. With kinds regards, --BF 02:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

ps. Just discovered that you are the very good old friend Nepaheshgar. More greetings! Incidentally, have you seen my latest comment on the talk page of Nowruz, here? At the time, as Pahlavannariman, you very wisely invited all to be calm in our heated discussions. I did not effect any change into the main text of Nowruz, following my vindication and writing the above-mentioned comment (before this, some people conspired against me and blocked my account first for two days and then for two or three weeks, which resulted in my writing of a very extensive letter to Jimbo Wales, which he kindly responded to), however not long after I wrote this comment, by chance I encountered one of the Wikipedians and asked him to kindly adjust the main text accordingly. It is remarkable how some people peddle a false idea and are also able to provide "references" in support of it, notably by attributing falsehoods to an article in Iranica (this is over and above the fact that the Iranica article at issue is one of the worst articles in that encyclopaedia known to me, in terms of being (1) ambiguous in a number of crucial places, (2) very incomplete, and (3) very badly researched --- it is incomprehensible, but also unforgivable, that A. Shahbazi has not taken the trouble to talk with some prominent members of the Zoroastrian community! Please pay attention to the caption of the image on this page, Ferdowsi's couplet, which is one of the finest lines in the world literature: it contains the essence of what in the recent history of humanity has come to be known as animal rights; one realises the profundity of Ferdowsi's words when considering that Charles Darwin published his On the Origin of Species in 1859, almost 900 years after Ferdowsi wrote those remarkable words). --BF 03:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Khodabandeh, thank you for the video link. I just watched the very interesting video and found it a pity that Ms Pezshki has not taken advise from so many good calligraphers that we have (for orientation, please just have a look here). Incidentally, the calligraphic themes designed by Ms Pezeshki are not new; I certainly am aware of very similar, if not identical, themes by Mirza Hossein Moshkin Ghalam, aka the second Mir Emad, as one of the earliest calligraphers known to me designing these and similar themes (my paternal grandmother had two originals of similar themes by Moshkin Ghalam in her possession, having inherited them from her father, so by now these two calligraphies would have been about 150 years old). Lastly, I am certain that you will be enjoying the audio slide-show here (in my opinion, however, the specialist speaking says some things that are pertinently incorrect; for instance, the reason why minarets in Iranian mosques occur in pairs is largely for creating counter weights for supporting the huge domes (domes are not rigid in the strict sense of the word, so that without countering the side-way forces, they will collapse; the situation would be different, if domes were strictly rigid, whereby the gravitational force exerted by them would be vertical, rendering counterweights unnecessary), thereby avoiding to build ugly buttresses in the front yards of mosques that would spoil the space; what he also says about pools in the main yards of Iranian mosques is equally incorrect, both historically and technically). With kind regards, --BF 12:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Dear Khodabandeh, thank you for your messages. Regarding the proposal to have articles on differences of architectures, that is a very good idea, however as far as my possible personal contributions to these articles are concerned, I am not qualified for the task; what I know on the subject matter is very rudimentary. You may have already done so, if not your proposal can be raised on the Wikipedia page where Iran-related topics are proposed. Regarding improving other articles that you suggest, turning them into featured articles, again a very good proposal. Unfortunately however, I am at this moment extremely busy with other things, whereby I am very rarely here. I believe that one should take personal initiative and invite one's personal friends and acquaintances in academia to come over and do some expert work on at least specific entries, such as those that you suggest. Incidentally, have you seen this? This is something for which the input of a real expert is vitally important. With kind regards, --BF 21:12, 17 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

RE: Pashto Literature temple

Hi, I totally forgot about that template. I don't have enough time nowadays to finish those templates. If there is anything you want to add, you are welcome to do so. (Ketabtoon (talk) 04:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)) I made some changes..--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 09:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi friend, have a look here.--Aliwiki (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apologizes for the false accusation. I explained the reasons why I believed it was a sockpuppetry case. I have been editing for a long time in wikipedia, and there were several accounts in which two or more accounts assisted in the discussion, all being sockpuppets. I have lost so much time for such discussions, and at the end sockpuppets confirmed. I thought it was also such a case. As for the email contents, I would have never disclosed neither your name, nor the contents of the email, unless the administrators would have asked for an off-wiki communication. Again, please accept my sincere apologizes for making a false accusation and creating a disturbance for you. Cabolitæ (talk) 07:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dorood

Dorood bar shoma va thank you for your message. --Anoushirvan (talk) 15:59, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 22:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afshin

I left a note at NPOV noticeboard to review the neutrality in the dispute and seek further assistance with the article. I would recommend against removing dispute tags and references from the article until the issues are settled. Thanks. Atabəy (talk) 16:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Khodabandeh14. I tried to improve the article Afshin a little bit. Please note that this is not the main article about Khaydar bin Kawus. As for the other article: I think al-Afshin's Iranian origin is undisputed in academic scholarship. See Iranica. I have left a short note at at NPOV noticeboard, but I do not want to get involved, because I am really busy right now. Regards. Tajik (talk) 10:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree with you..I did mention the two classical sources that mention "Turk" but as shown, the term "Turk" did not mean "Altaic speakers" in such sources. If one reads the historical documents, it is clear Afshin who was accused of being an anti-Arab Iranian was not a Turk. But some later Arab historians who did not have knowledge of the geography used the term for anyone from the far regions of Central Asia. What is important from wikipedia point of view is to use relavent scholars of the field, and also specialized studies on the subject matter. In this case, Golden(2004), and Bosworth(2005) have specialized works and the work of Lewis (1991) is fairly new. These reflect academic mainstream today as there is no specialized sources from the last 20 years that challenges it. I did an extensive googles book search and found more non-specialized sources for Persian/Sogdian, but when it came to distinguished scholars and specialized sources, there was no doubt on the issue from the last 20-30 years. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 18:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This has much to do with the confusion regarding the word "Turk". Apparently (according to various scholars such as Golden, Scharlip, Sinor, Findley, Róna-Tas, etc.) it is derived from a family-name or title of Khotan-Saka origin. That means that the very first "Turks" were not "Turks" as we understand it today, but belonged to the Indo-European substratum in Central Asia. It is merely thename of a single ruling dynasty, not of an ethnic group. Over the time, they became assimilated by their Turkic nomads, very similar to the way later (actual) Turkic rulers were assimilated by Iranians, Indians, etc. That also explains why these early "Turks" are described in Chinese sources as settled blacksmiths which is very "un-Turkish". That's also where the confusion in very early Arab-Islamic sources comes from. The term "Turk" back then mostly designated the subjects of the "Turk" dynasty, and their land became known as "Bilad al-Turk", which was rather a reference to the ruling dynasty. Hence, a whole bunch of people were refered to as "Turks", the same way in later times all subjects and vassals of the Mongols became known as "Mongols" although many were either Turkic, Slav or from some other group. BTW: I see you have finally found my article Hodud al-'alam. I hope you like it. ;-) However, I do not like the new title you have chosen, because Encyclopaedia of Islam uses "ḤUDŪD AL-ʿĀLAM". Tajik (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article back to Hudud al-'alam. I know that Iranica uses ḤODUD AL-ʿĀLAM, but in this case, I feel more comfortable with the version of the EI which seems to be more common in English. Tajik (talk) 23:26, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks on the other points. I totally agree with you. In the older Persian literature like Shahnameh for example, Turk was also used as a geographical term, where all the names of the Turks are etymologically Iranian. Hudud would be a somewhat incorrect spelling in the sense that it is حدود العالم and to type both "o" and "u" as و seems awkward. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On Kelileh va Demneh

Dear Khodabandeh, I have noticed that Kelileh va Demneh has been re-directed to Panchatantra. This is unacceptable to my best opinion. Irrespective of the origin of Kelileh va Demneh, the latter is on its own a canonical literary work in the Persian Literature. If you consider Dehkhod's Loghatnameh, then you will notice that a major body of the non-trivial examples (and by all accounts, some of the most beautiful and most sweet examples of all) that Dehkhoda quotes in support of a given meaning for a given Persian word, is drawn from Kelileh va Demneh. It follows that Kelileh va Demneh has had a development of its own, independent of and parallel to that of Panchatantra, within the framework of the Persian culture and literature. I believe therefore that English Wikipedia must have a separate entry on Kelileh va Demneh, with of course due reference to Panchatantra. It should be clear to all that the aim is not to appropriate Panchatantra in favour of Kelileh va Demneh, but to signify that the two are two unmistakably separate literary components in the larger body of World Literature. With kind regards, --BF 13:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I totally agree with you . Besides part of the Kalila o Demna was written by Barzuya the Pezeshk. I'll see on what I can do..--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 10:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind response. It follows that the issue must be raised, for instance amongst those Wikipedians who work on Iran-related subjects (I am personally part of no specific Wikipedia group, but perhaps you are), without delay. I believe that it is an absolute disgrace that no trace can be found of Kelileh va Demneh in English Wikipedia; even in the entry of Borzūya (who in older days was referred to as Borzuyeh Hakim, but now Hakim has been Persianized and made into Pezeshk) the link to Kelileh va Demneh ends up in Panchatantra! An absolutely disgraceful and sad affair! With kind regards, --BF 19:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Dorood I separated the article and linked it to Iranica.. Hopefully we can expand it.--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 18:27, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dorood bar shoma doust-e aziz! One aspect, at least according to the Introduction by Abdolhamid Monshi to Kelileh va Demneh (i.e. the Bahram Shahi version), Borzuya and Buzarjomehr were two separate persons. I am aware of the fact that the two are sometimes identified as being the same person, but this is certainly not the case in the context of Kelileh va Demneh. In the Introduction we read that Khosrow I, Shah-e Kasra, asked from Borzuyeh the Physician for a favour after his great service of bringing Kelileh va Demneh to Iran and translating it to Pahlavi (this after Borzuyeh the Physician had declined to accept any worldly thing from Khosrow I as reward), and Borzuyeh suggested that a chapter be added to Kelileh va Demneh in which he be named and his efforts be recorded. And this suggestion was accepted by Khosrow I who subsequently tasked Buzarjomehr the Vazir with the writing of this particular chapter. Incidentally, Abdolhamid Monshi in his Introduction refers to the Arabic text by Ibn Moqaffa as being translated from the Pahlavi text. In contrast, according to a chart presented in the Wikipedia entry of Panchatantra, Ibn Moqaffa's text is based on a Syriac text, in turn translated from Pahlavi. The route to the present Kelileh va Demneh, that is the Bahram Shahi Kelileh va Demneh, seems therefore to be Sanskrit -> Middle Persian -> Syriac -> Arabic -> Modern Persian. With kind regards, --BF 23:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Dear Khodabandeh: Please keep an eye on Khuzestan. It appears that the Arabic Wikipedia has turned Khuzestan into Arabistan. This is the same old sick story that recurs seemingly indefinitely. I am now going to confront the people on the Arabic Wikipedia with your old relevant text here. Kind regards, --BF 23:47, 4 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Just to let you know that User:Xqt has kindly corrected the falsification on the Arabic Wikipedia with regard to Khuzestan (I wrote to him about the issue around the time I wrote the above message). Kind regards, --BF 02:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Dear Khodabandeh, you are welcome. Incidentally, the issue of identifying Borzuya with Buzarjomehr (in the present text of Kelileh va Demneh) remains. As I have mentioned above, Abdolhamid Monshi considers the two as different individuals. With kind regards, -BF 19:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I know that you are passionate and knowlegble about Iranian history. Wanna try your hand at addressing Folantin's suggestion at bottom of section here? Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Cyrus_Cylinder_and_human_rights I'll be around the next few days trying to work on determining the prevalence of scholars supporting/not-supporting the notion that the Cylinder is "Charter of Human Rights." Perhaps you might want to address his in the same manner that he addresses it? GoetheFromm (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A reply

No hard feelings at all. And thanks for your message. We have our disagreements but I certainly hope that you and I can continue to engage in constructive conversations. On a related note, the "Iranic" term was recently changed by another user, but I have reverted that line back to your version. --Sharisna (talk) 11 February 2011 (UTC)

There has been another dispute that has arisen over the use of "Iranic" for the Kurdish people article. Since you were a part of the compromise to use this term, it would be helpful if you could join. Thanks. --Sharisna (talk) 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. I have been away for a while. Newroz piroz be! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharisna (talk • contribs) 00:02, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

language templates

Dear Khodabandeh. I am very concerned about the use of irrelevant language templates in wikipedia articles. Since I am interested in articles on Iran, I want to ask you if you know how we should solve this problem once and for all. Can we (at wp:IRAN) consider a discussion on this. The use of several language templates like what we had in Safavid dynasty makes the article look ugly, and very unattractive and we are in en.wikipedia. I propose something like what I did with safavid page). What do you think? Xashaiar (talk) 18:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nowruz

با درود و جهان سپاس از مِهر، بزرگواری و پیام نیک و زیبای شما دوست فرهیخته و دانشور و همزبانم، جناب خدابندۀ گرامی. من نیز از صمیم قلب، فرا رسیدن نوروز باستانی و زنده شدن بهار زیبای طبیعت را به شما بزرگوار، و خانوادۀ گرامیتان شادباش می گویم. امیدوارم که این سال نو، شکفتن بهار آرزوهای نیک و زیبای شما را به ارمغان آورد و نویدبخش صلح، آزادی، رفاه، آرامش، دادگستری و شادمانی برای تمامی مردم جهان و بویژه مردم مهرپرور و آزاده ایرانزمین کهن و باستانی (باشندگان سرزمینهای ایران، افغانستان و تاجیکستان امروزی) باشد. نیکی، مهر و آرامش پناهتان و روز و روزگار به کامتان باد. --Artacoana (talk) 05:03, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nowruz

دوست گرامی نوروز باستانی و سال نو را به شما و خانواده گرامیتان شادباش میگویم و از خداوند بزرگ خواستارم که شما و خانواده عزیزتان را در سایه عنایت خود همواره قرار دهد. پیروز باشید و نوروزتان پیروز.--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 14:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

دوست گرانقدر، نوروز شما و خانواده ارجمندتان نیز پیروز باد! با بزرگداری، -BF 18:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nowruz

Happy Nowruz! May you and your family have a wonderful Nowruz and may this Persian year, be a year of prosperity, and happiness for you and the ones you love! Dr. Persi (talk) 20:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Your page is now Template:Iranian Festivals. In future please make a template on a Template:.. page. Wilbysuffolk talk 02:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To create a page I type the name of the page or template etc. in the search box then search it and if there is not a page with that name it should say at the top of the search you may create this page. Click the dead link to the new page and then edit it. I don't know why the V and D buttons don't work but I will have a look. Wilbysuffolk talk 03:02, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked on your first one and it had the same problem so if you have a look at other templates you might find out what the problem is and what code is needed. I am new to templates of that kind so I regret to say there is not much help I can offer. Sorry. Wilbysuffolk talk 03:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help.

April 2011

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Azerbaijani people: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius (drop me a line) 16:18, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for policing this article, by the way! Also I just saw that you have another account too - have you considered asking for WP:Reviewer rights for both of them? That way you could get your edits auto-accepted without having to wait for other editors. All the best. — Mr. Stradivarius (drop me a line) 16:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I meant to add that the uw-unsourced templates would be appropriate in this case. These templates can help warn other editors and admins about what users have already done. — Mr. Stradivarius (drop me a line) 16:37, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing - you might want to take a look at WP:Twinkle, which you can set in your preferences. It gives you quick access to all the warning templates so you don't have to remember all the names. — Mr. Stradivarius (drop me a line) 16:53, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

a new portal about iran

Assalamo Aleykom.its [5] a new portal about iran.Jamal Nazareth (talk) 04:23, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Safavids (reply)

Dorood. Any time. As an observer with no connection to any registered user, my impression is that you seem to be a reasonable and neutral person and I find your discussions interesting. I haven't been involved in any major projects or discussions here, as my main focus so far has been to fix errors in addition to reading through policies and guidelines to try to learn how to work my way around. But, thanks for the offer. I have actually been thinking of creating an account because that way it's easier to cooperate. All the best. Cheers.84.23.140.55 (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 14:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank youDear Khodabandeh, thank you for your remarks on my talk page. As a matter of fact and despite some time ago, I hadn't been very active regarding Wiki (English) in the last months. But I consider the possibility to join Project Iran (as a "formal" step in addition to my activity). If I officially join, I should be able to offer more time. I reciprocate your greetings. Kind regards, --Anoushirvan (talk) 10:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]Thank you, kind greetings to you also. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]I don't know exactly how to replyI would love to! But I do not really have the nerve (a'saab) to deal with the discussions that usually ensue. And I am a rookie in writing stuff in Wikipedia (I mean with the syntax and everything). How do you suggest I can contribute? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazratemahmood (talk • contribs) 08:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Very large posts in the RfC at Talk:Safavid dynastyHello Khodabandeh. I just noticed you added 19.5 K of material to the RfC. I'm afraid this will make the whole RfC WP:TL;DR and may realistically prevent other editors from joining in. Can I suggest that you shorten your RfC material to a summary, and create links to supporting material that you create in your own user space? In Arbcom cases, length limits are placed on the postings, and this situation has some similarities. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Ateshgah of BakuDear Khodabandeh, I want to ask your attention to Ateshgah of Baku article. There is some POV pushing by Xashaiar, as you can see here and here. As you know removing sources like this is not allowed in Wikipedia. I think you very well know the history and influence of Zoroastrianism in Azerbaijan. And I know you're a reasonable and fair person, from our discussion in Iranian Azerbaijanis page. Thats why I ask you to take a look at the article. Neftchi (talk) 17:28, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Safavid dynasty opening paragraphHello Khodabandeh. Are you satisfied with the current opening paragraph of Safavid dynasty? Also, are the names given in enough languages? We now have the name of the dynasty in Persian script and in Azeri script, but not romanized. Is this sufficient, from your point of view? Also we are calling it 'Safavid dynasty' and not 'Safavid dynasty of Iran.' Is that OK? I'm trying to see where the continuing disagreements are, if any. Do you oppose Atabəy's idea of giving the name of the dynasty also in Azeri in Latin script? I see from Talk:Safavid dynasty#On the introduction of the article and also the identity of Safavid dynasty that Atabəy may want to change the name of the article to 'Safavid State' or 'Safavid Empire.' I have not yet done all the reading necessary to understand that, and I am concerned that it might be hard to reach agreement on that. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 23:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Your suggestionsHello Khodabandeh. You proposed by email some ideas for how enforcement could be improved in the future. Having a group of admins to pay attention to the area would help, but I don't know where you would find such people. Also, any willingness of the editors in the area to participate calmly in discussions would help. I know that the ARBPIA editors have a collaboration project called WP:IPCOLL. Maybe something like that could be created for AA. There are also some ideas listed at the bottom of WP:WGR. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]Merhaba/SelamHi, I don't speak Turkish but you seem like an ubiased person. Can you take a look at the articles Medes in the Turkish Wikipedia? See here: [6]? I think accuracy should be a concern and some of the same users tried to insert these unreliable sources in Persian wikipedia but they failed. Now Turkish Wikipedia is an easier target since no one knows as much about the Medes and also the people that tried to manipulate Persian Wikipedia speadk the language well. Thank you--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 17:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]Hi. Haha :)) I look at this edit. Version of Melikov is better. But Version of Erdarion is Azeri POV pushing edit. Maybe they confused Old Azari language with Azeris. I reccomend you to consult with User:InfoCan and/or User:Noumenon. Takabeg (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]Merhaba again. I do not know Turkish, but the guys you mentioned did not seem to edit the article Medler article again, and the admins there (who might not be knowledge) are supporting their psuedo-science. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 21:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] Unfortunately some users (including some admins) in Turkish Wikipedia confuse neutral point of view with accepting pseudohistory. But most users know these problems. About discussion page of Medler, Melikov think his edits abnormal. Melikov wrote that there is no scholar who claims such theory in Azerbaijan (Baku). There are many articles like this in Turkish Wikipedia. For example tr:İskitler :)) Takabeg (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]Saljuq namaThank you for the Persian/Farsi equivalent for Saljuq nama! --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] Could you do the same for Rahat al-sudur? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] Excellent! Thanks! --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:34, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]re RFAThanks for the heads up. --Golbez (talk) 13:45, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussionHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 21:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 00:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]If you want to appeal your block, you may e-mail me (or another admin if I don't respond promptly), and I will unprotect your page.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]Your talk pageThis page was fully protected indefinitely on July 11, 2011, by User:Alex Bakharev. Alex hasn't edited Wikipedia since July of this year so I can't consult with him easily. Was there some reason why you needed full protection? Do you still need it? If so, why? It's unusual for a user's talk page to be fully protected as it prevents other editors from communicating with you. Please answer on my talk page as you can't do so here.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]Nart sagaHi. Please check and verify this article and also article's talk page. Thanks. Zheek (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:06, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]TarHi. Please watch the article Tar (lute). Recent vandalism, pov-pushing, and disruptive edits. Thanks. Zheek (talk) 06:53, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]A cup of tea for you!‫خسته نباشید به خاطر هدفی که دارید و تلاشی که می‌کنید. حضرت محمود (talk) 09:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]TabatabaeiSalam. Can you help find the source, which indicates that the Ayatollah Muhammad Husayn Tabatabaei ethnic Azeri? Did he know Azeri language? (Bazargan, for example, do not know Azeri language, but he is an ethnic Azeri). Tabatabaei is a very remarkable man. In English about this biography a little information. I know that in Iran, all Muslim nations considered a single Muslim nation. Maybe there are Persian sources, which says that Tabatabai is a ethnic Azerbaijani/Azeri. Талех (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]