Talk:Kuh-e Hajji Koshteh

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Iran Low‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Etymology of Hajji

Please see discussion at Talk:Koh e Haj e Kushtah which has had the same material added to it. If this has also been added to other articles, the same issues apply. Thank you, SchreiberBike talk 19:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@SchreiberBike:. I know your comment here is quite old already, but I will reply nevertheless, mainly for the record.

I decided to dig out the editorial pattern of the user who created this page ("Tabnak"), which has been rampant since day one. Perhaps some of his edits were in WP:GF, but it seems that about every single one of his edits has resulted in pure disruption. Relatively well-covered disruption, I will admit. Off-topic fairy tales, off-topic links, oudated (17/18th century) sources, and material directly copy-pasted from Google Translate. Just to name a few. And to make things worse, most of his edits have been on extremely low-profile articles, so yeah, the chances of someone actually bothering to check it out were be close to zero. The fact that you actually found out about it all the way back in 2014, is pretty impressive.

Anyway, I just decided to clean up most of the articles he touched and removed many of the disruptive material he added. Next time, admin action has to be taken in order to prevent further damage. Regards and all the best, - LouisAragon (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LouisAragon: I remember that issue. I did some cleanup after that editor and probably should have done more. Thank you for doing the right thing. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:03, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SchreiberBike:, thanks alot, you too! Take care, - LouisAragon (talk) 22:12, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kuh-e Hajji Koshteh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203092925/http://www.loghatnaameh.org/dehkhodaworddetail-0867995634a443f995b5f04d810e8287-fa.html to http://www.loghatnaameh.org/dehkhodaworddetail-0867995634a443f995b5f04d810e8287-fa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:03, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]