Kiumars

Messages: Please leave your general messages in this section

>>>Re: Ali Montazeri: Hi. I made some changes, including one regarding the "following" he has. Tell me what you think of them; I want to get the factual dispute tag off of the page soon. The Behnam 09:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

>>>Using stub templates: Hi - I think you need to read WP:STUB a bit more carefully! Please do not copy and paste the coding from thhe example stub template into articles - all you should do is add {{stub}} or one of the many subtypes of it (listed at WP:WSS/ST) to the article. Grutness...wha? 22:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, got it, thanks. Kiumars

Safavids article related

Dear Kiumars, right now, the entire Safavid article is a mess. Please stop editing the article for a while until the diputes are resovled. Thanks. Tājik 13:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tajik; how are the disputes going to be resolved if we do not talk to each other? I must say GM and Atabek have been very cooperative so far and have been open to all suggestions! I just made a few small changes to the article on the basis we agreed on so far to show how easy it is to resolve the dispute! Kiumars

Azerbaijani People article related

>>>Re: Azarbaijani People: Kiumars, The article Azerbaijani People, have been subject to a lot of discussion entries and edit wars. Eventually Tombseye has steped in and has done a great job to bring the article to a Featured Article standard.[1]. The best way to bring a change to this article woud be to engage in these discussions. Relatively large section of this article explains the numbers, sources and difficulties of providing accurate numbers on the Azerbaijani population of Iran, however relaiable studies by academic and other sources provide some figures that are used within the article. If you have any other sources of information on the ethnic Azerbaijanies, please let users know and see how we can incorporate in the article. Mehrdad 15:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>>THAt is actually a good discussion. See my sources in the talk page. --Ali doostzadeh 22:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>>:I am glad to see you passionately involved with editing Wikipedia articles. In regards to the Azari article, just remember that we must all cooperate together and stay civil. Not that I am implying that you have been uncooperative or uncivil, but just that I want meaningful discussion and harmonious dialogue. I appreciate your legitimate concerns.

These are some editing project pages and categories you might be interested in looking at and joining which overlap with the current article you have raised editorial concerns in.

WikiProject Central Asia

WikiProject Azari

WikiProject Iran

This [2] might also be a page you would want to take a look at since it overlaps with your interests. It is in dire need of NPOV editing. Once again thank you for raising your concerns.69.196.164.190

>>> In response to your message: You must be patient on Wikipedia. Things tka longer than they should sometimes becuase as you rightly said, "there are editors with vested interests." I think you should llook at the article I sent to you and its disucssion page. Actually please do this; look at the discussion page. You will see the inaccuracies and inconsistancies that defame Iranians as a whole and try to subjegate Azaris as alien from the mainstream of Iranians. A user that can greatly help you is user:Zereshk. I strongly suggest you join the Wikiproject Iran and talk to fellow editors. They will fill you in on the theoritical and practical situation on Wikipedia. It can be uphill sometimes, but stand by your principles and civiliy engage others for establishing truithful facts. 69.196.164.190

>>> Regarding Talk: Azerbaijani People. I dont know what you define as "discussion" but what me and countdown are doing is talking about the situation and trying to come to a conclusion. im sorry if you dont like it, but this is how it works. look at other talk pages with intense discussions, they are all the same. there are no insults, we are just talking about, that is called "discussing". i would appreciate it if you would stop being so immature about the situation and stop interrupting us.Iranian Patriot 22:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but for someone who writes on the grounds of logical discussion your discussion on the Azari talk page was not logical. In fact it seemed to be screaming mockery of dialogue. If I am wrong, accept my apology, but if I am right; you should not mock the intelligence or mechanisms of discussion. I know the system can be gamed, but that does not mean one should lose hope. Take it from an anon user, someone who does not get much respect just simply from the fact the ave an IP address comprised of numerials as a title and is treated with suspicion due to this. Everything on WIkpedia stas and is filed, bad behaviour or what may seem like bad behaviour such as mockery, bad faith, and trolling will hunt you and even be used as against you in the future when you want to make descent and worthy edits. 69.196.164.190

69.196 [Re: your discussion on the Azari talk page was not logical. In fact it seemed to be screaming mockery of dialogue.]. Can you please point out which part seemed to be a screaming mockery of dialogue to you? Kiumars

dont leave wikipedia. the more the merrier, i value your opinion, and the great thing is that we can and should talk about these things, and im glad you pointed out to me that i come out as a bit harsh in these discussions. thank you, and please stick around.Iranian Patriot 04:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian Patriot, I am not a young man and I don’t have the energy to get involved in cat fights (see my user page!). As I said before there is no hard feeling, I understand that one can get angry or too excited when confronted with what one may consider untrue or illogical but fighting fire with fire is only suitable for certain types of fire, most fires are put off with a bucket of cold water (in this case reasoning and logic). I will stay around, don’t worry. Keep up the good work but with more finesse. Cheers, Kiumars 13:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks.Iranian Patriot 15:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also you might want to see this:[3] and read the first few articles. It agrees with your statistics. --Ali doostzadeh 07:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tombseye

Kiumars jaan, dar rabateh baa sohbatat dar moredeh Tombseye mikhastam behet begam ke dorosteh ke Tombseye Amerciaei hast ama man baa oon 1 saal hast ke kaar kardam, vaa behet etminan midam ke oon sad dar sad bitaraf hast o be hich onvaan zed-Irani nist, vaa baraks on chizi ke fekr mikoni naa Azeri hast naa tarafdareh Azerbaijan, bitaraf bitaraf hast, vaa rou maghalaat besiaari kaard kardeh ke aslan rabti be Azerbaijan nadareh mesl Iranian peoples, pas lotfan "assume good faith" bekon vaa behesh ejazeh bedeh ke dispute rou mianjigari koneh, motmaan bash ke pashimon namishi. Ageh bazham fekr mikoni ke biataraf nist, maa mitonim yek nafar digeh rou peyda konim bara miaanjigari. Khoi khoi 19:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khoikhoi 19:21, 25 January 2007, let’s put it on hold at the moment and see how it goes. If we do not manage to agree by reasoning then we take the next step. Meanwhile if you read the talk page you will see that a hot debate is going on which is a good sign! Cheers.Kiumars

Ok, good idea. :-) Cheers, Khoi khoi 02:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know much about these people. Try asking other users as well. Khoi khoi 06:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, please be aware that you can't just copy content direclty from another website. You have to put it in your own words. What is the latest version of the article? Khoi khoi 06:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was talking about Brenda Shaffer. Khoi khoi 22:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shaffer

I made some comments on Shaffer.. I don't care about statistics, but she did some serious forgery as I pointed out in two referenced articles by two full Professors. --alidoostzadeh 02:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iran related articles noticeboard/Incidents

Please watch this page and post your public messages on this page so that everybody may have access to it. Thanks --Aminz 05:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>> Salam; There are a lot of pages they have deleted. I don't really know many but you can ask someone like Zereshk, he would probably know. They tried to delete The English name of the Persian Language but since that did not work, they are now trying to merge it with Persian language even though there is no agreement to do that. This is the way it is here unfortunately. There is no problem for you to copy articles for your website since wikipedia is "open content" since no one "owns" anything. Khorshid 00:35, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>> Misconceptions about Iran: Hi! If you want to save this article, you should improved it. It's clear that it's not a good article and if I had enough time I whould do it myself.But as I told Zereshk before it should improved. This is my opinion:[4] and [5] Good buy. --Sa.vakilian 11:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>> Has Wiki become a platform for anti-Iranian propagandas? Have your say on the following page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Iran%2C_Shi%27a%2C_and_Middle_East_related_articles_noticeboard/Incidents Kiumars 15:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This one was deleted by an Administrator! I wonder why! see the history page and you will find out! Kiumars 21:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts / disputes (Keeping for records!)

Admin posts: Spam

Firstly, talk pages are as public as anything else on wikipedia. If you haven't noticed, anyone can edit them too. Secondly, removing spam not only is policy, but has been as long as you remember. If you don't like it, complain to someone else. --InShaneee 16:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: talk pages are as public as anything else on wikipedia. If you haven't noticed, anyone can edit them too.

People reading Wiki I am sure are intelligent enough to realize that User Talk pages are not Wiki articles and these are only a means of communication between the members. Civilized users edit the page to add their comments to the page not deleting other people’s posts!

Re: If you don't like it, complain to someone else.

Who should I complain to? Give me a name please. Who is in charge in Wiki? Kiumars 11:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts: Recreation of The English name of the Persian Language

Dear Kiumars: You have recently created the article The English name of the Persian Language. This was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. Please do not recreate the article: if you disagree with the article's deletion, you may ask for a review at Wikipedia:Deletion review. . Thank you, and best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 20:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts: Iranian Notice-board.

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia by creating the article Iranian Notice-board.. Your test worked, and has been or will soon be removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Sbluen 02:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not nominate your Iranian Notice-board article because it contained the word "Zionist." I nominated it because it was a political rant, and didn't need to be an article. I'm not sure what this "Iranian Notice-board" thing has to do with your position on anti-Iranian propaganda. Were you trying to create such a notice board as a WP article? This looks like something more suitable to a Talk page or to your own user page. eaolson 02:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, no personal attacks. The question isn't whether anti-Iranian propaganda exists, it's whether or not the article you created was a valid article. You made an article that consisted of only an attack against WP for being anti-Iranian. It wasn't even a description of anything. It's since been deleted so it's a moot point. eaolson 02:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You made a new what? I'm not sure what you mean by "Zionist site". WP isn't a discussion forum (except in Talk pages, like this). If you wish to make an article on some aspect of Iran or whatever, just make sure it is verifiable and backed up by reliable sources. WP is not a forum for you to express your own personal opinion. eaolson 02:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be looking for [[Wikipedia:Iran, Shi'a, and Middle East related articles noticeboard/Inc

idents]]. Zetawoof^(ζ) 02:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what the Persian Gulf naming dispute has to do with the article you created. Zetawoof suggests you were attempting to report some sort of incident to Wikipedia:Iran, Shi'a, and Middle East related articles noticeboard/Incidents, if so that's the best place for it, I guess. I've never been to Zion, nor do I know where it is. Please remember that Wikipedia has an official policy about making personal attacks. eaolson 03:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, we all know what this is all about and who is running it and I am going to do my best to expose it from now on, good luck to you all but you need more than luck, you need a bunch of stupid people to buy that!Kiumars 03:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually, we don't. Zetawoof^(ζ) 03:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you would like to consider editing over at conspiracy theory. eaolson 03:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You will soon! When people find out who is running this sham. And I think I have enough proofs! Look at all Iran related articles and you will find out yourself too! It does not need a rocket scientist brain! Kiumars 03:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! On the eve of Israel defeat in Lebanon I have two Wiki Administrators chasing me! Does that mean something? They went quiet! Kiumars 03:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to me, I'm not an admin, just a volunteer editor. eaolson 03:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Same here - I'm just an editor, like you, Kiumars. Zetawoof^(ζ) 03:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

eaolson, Aha! A volunteer editor that deletes other people’s posts? How many of them do we have here? You think people are stupid? Have I ever deleted other people’s posts? ? Can I? Isn’t it interesting that two people turn up as soon as I post something about the Zionists? Kiumars 03:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not delete your article. I was looking at the newpages page, and saw your noticeboard article. I flagged your article with the {{db-attack}} speedy deletion template, as your article was basically an attack against Wikipedia. An administrator reviewed that the template was applicable and then was the one that actually deleted the article. You can do the same, so long as the article meets the appropriate criteria for speedy deletion. I believe only admins can actually delete articles. eaolson 03:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let’s see if my “Israel v Iran” is deleted too, that would be a good indication as how Zionist is this Wiki because we all know that there is an international issue currently called “Israel v Iran”.

It's already got a speedy deletion tag on it (not by me). First of all, you probably wanted "Israel vs. Iran" not "Israel v Iran". You also created an article that had no real content in it, just your claim that Israel has been an enemy of Iran since the Islamic revolution. You provided no citations, no sources. It's not the sort of thing I'd expect to pick up and read in the Encylopedia Brittanica. There's already an article at Iran-Israel relations that probably covers the topic you were interested in. You seem to be trying to use WP as a discussion forum, which it's not. I would gently suggest you review Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and What Wikipedia is not and Neutral point of view before continuing. Your articles are being deleted because they are not good articles, not because of some Zionist conspiracy bent on world domination. eaolson 04:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist world domination? They would not live a day if America did not support them! Did you hear about UK objecting to American planes carrying bunker-buster bombs to Israel? And did you know that America pays for Israel to exist? What would you call an state like that? A parasite? Kiumars 04:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not claiming to know anything about the politics of the Middle East, nor do I wish to get into a discussion on the matter. I was trying to explain to you why your articles were being deleted. eaolson 04:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: I was trying to explain to you why your articles were being deleted. I know why they are being deleted! And I am counting on them being deleted! I am recording it! How else could I prove to my people that Wiki is a Zionist anti-Muslim site? Kiumars 04:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, your articles are being deleted because you seem to think that WP is a discussion forum. It's an encyclopedia. Create a good, well-written, well-sourced article, and it will stay up. You just seem to want to rant about how much Zionists are opressing you. For crying out loud, there's an entire portal on Islam. It sounds like you are taking a deliberatly belligerent attitude and writing your articles so that they will be deleted, then taking offense that they are deleted. eaolson 04:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia may have many zionist users, but creating an article about your opinions in not the right way to tell us that. Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia articles should not be propaganda or advocacy of any kind. I was just about to propose your article for deletion when eaolson tagged it for speedy deletion. --Sbluen 06:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sbluen, fighting fire with fire is only way of fighting certain types of fire. If it was not for the “an eye for an eye” principle, most people would be blind now. Kiumars 14:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts: Iran related articles noticeboard/Incidents

Putting this here because the talk page is tagged for speedy deletion.

Kiumars wrote: Eaolson, Didn't you tell me last night "Zetawoof suggests you were attempting to report some sort of incident to Wikipedia:Iran, Shi'a, and Middle East related articles noticeboard/Incidents, if so that's the best place for it, I guess.". Now you are telling me that this is not a good place to discuss my view about Wiki with other posters? Can you make your mind? Where can I post this then?

You did not make your comment at the page Zetawoof suggested, you put it in a discussion forum for an encyclopedia entry called "Iran related articles noticeboard/Incidents." Actually Zetawoof suggested you report it at Wikipedia:Iran, Shi'a, and Middle East related articles noticeboard/Incidents. Note the "Wikipedia" at the beginning. That means it's a meta page about Wikipedia itself, and not an actual encyclopedia entry. The leftmost tab says "project page" rather than "article".

Kiumars wrote: Can you do that and ask an administrator create a page where people can talk openly about Wiki? I think a page like that will be very useful for everybody. Kiumars 15:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, if you wish to discuss some Zionist bias on the part of Wikipedia as a whole, perhaps the Wikipedia:Village pump or one of it's sub-sections might be the best place to bring it up. That's a dedicated place for people to gather to discuss WP. eaolson 15:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. And Kiumars, I wasn't trying to fight you, I was only responding to the question that you asked on my talk page and explaining more of the policies. --Sbluen 22:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts: Disruptive editing: final warning

Dear Kiumars: Hello there. Despite a number of warnings and explanations from other Wikipedians about the matter, you have persisted in posting pro-Iranian diatribes which are not relevant to the encyclopaedia project we are intending to create. As per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia is not a soapbox for propaganda or advocacy of any kind, and your actions are somewhat disruptive. Whilst Wikipedia welcomes editors who wish to contribute to improve articles following the neutral point of view editorial policy, editors who merely wish to use Wikipedia to espouse a particular point of view or advocate one side in a factual controversy do not assist us in creating an encyclopaedia. As a consequence, I regret that should you continue this type of editing on Wikipedia, you will be blocked indefinitely; this is because it is not a valuable use of administrators' time having to go through the contributions and delete the material that you keep posting, and also because as you probably well know the subject area is contentious on Wikipedia. Thus, I most sincerely hope that you will be able to become a productive encyclopaedia editor and cease this pattern of editing from now on. Should you have any further questions or concerns about editing Wikipedia, please do let me know. Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 01:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Kiumars: Hi Nicholas,

Re: Despite a number of warnings and explanations from other Wikipedians about the matter, you have persisted in posting pro-Iranian diatribes which are not relevant to the encyclopaedia project we are intending to create.

Aren’t talk/discussion pages the right place to discuss different points of views? Have I been wrong in thinking that way? Have I posted anything emotionally charged on any articles?

By the way, what pro-Iranian diatribes are you talking about? Show me one pro-Iranian diatribes posted by me and prove me wrong, but I think you really mean “objecting to anti-Iranian statements on the Wiki”, right?

Re: your actions are somewhat disruptive.

You find discussing a political / cultural / historical issue disruptive? Are you serious?

Re: editors who merely wish to use Wikipedia to espouse a particular point of view or advocate one side in a factual controversy do not assist us in creating an encyclopaedia.

Espousing a particular point of view is a bad thing? Are you telling me that scientists and politicians and researchers don’t have a particular point of view and do not follow those lines till they prove it to be right or proven to be wrong? You really think people jump from branch to branch all the time? I must admit I don’t understand what you are talking about and I don’t think you know what you are talking about either!

Again, Give me an example of when I have posted a pro-Iranian diatribes or have been one sided on any issues, On the other hand if you do not provide such proofs I will report you for abuse of the Admin position. Kiumars 11:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, What is your objection to my post and discussion with other users on the following page?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Iran%2C_Shi%27a%2C_and_Middle_East_related_articles_noticeboard/Incidents&action=history

Please do not delete, discuss first! Kiumars 12:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kiumars: Thank you very much for replying to me; I apologise for the length of time it has taken for me to respond. However, I regret that you have rather misunderstood what I intended to convey to you in my message - that may well be my fault, as I perhaps did not make myself clear enough, but I believe you also have failed to understand the issues relating to Wikipedia policy.

In reference to your post here, where you make a series of rhetorical statements that Wikipedia discriminates against Iranians:

"Guys, as you can see Wiki is a platform for anti-Iranian propagandas, Parisian Gulf is not Persian Gulf any more..."
"... Did you also notice how “Misconceptions about Iran” article was conveniently deleted in the middle of America’s propaganda against Iran ..."

You ask what my objection is to your post there - the answer to that should be fairly obvious; it is patently false conspiracy theorism to presume that Wikipedia is "a platform for anti-Iranian propaganda", which is an adversarial tone to take in discussion calculated to cause nothing but controversy. That is not, I feel, a post that could be made in the spirit of reasonable comment; although you may not wish to class such diatribe as being pro-Iranian, and would rather prefer to describe it as "objecting to anti-Iranian statements on the wiki", there is a difference between the latter (a justifiable grievance) and the former (mere hostile comment). If you feel that anti-Iranian sentiments are being made on Wikipedia, please raise it amicably and in a rational manner, and I can assure you the matter will be addressed.

I am also talking about other articles that you (re)created and were subsequently deleted, such as The English name of the Persian Language et al, which really were nothing but pro-Iranian POV pushing, and I cannot possibly see how you could reasonably consider them not to be so.

As regards to disruption, discussing such issues is not disruptive provided they are discussed amicably, but stating them in an adversarial and combative way is disruptive; it is also likewise disruptive to post talk page messages solely due to a desire to promote or defend one's own point of view. Looking at your contributions, it appears that you tend to follow the adversarial approach (which is disruptive) rather than just presenting your issues in an amicable way.

With relation to point of view, I regret you misunderstand the nature of the issue completely. I am not saying it is bad to hold a point of view; if I was to say that, it would be a clearly ridiculous statement to make. What I am saying is that Wikipedia is not interested in your point of view, and Wikipedia is not the place to try and publish your point of view. The Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy is non-negotiable; it is the way our project operates, and talk page discussion is only for the purposes of collaborating towards such an effort, not promotion of your own personal tenets and opinions, as per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not.

By the way, should you feel my actions as an administrator have been incorrect, I invite you to request that another administrator reviews my actions relating to you; please do so at your own convenience, as I have no objection at all to review by one of my colleagues. You can, of course, post on WP:AN/I for an administrator to review this case - just to make it perfectly clear, I have no interest in being abusive, and do not consider that I have been so.

I hope the above may clarify the issue somewhat, and I hope that you shall be able to be a more productive editor in the future. Should you have any questions or concerns relating to Wikipedia editing, please do let me know. Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 02:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts: Brenda Shaffer

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Brenda Shaffer, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.mfa.gov.az/eng/training/2004/brenda.shtml, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Brenda Shaffer and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Brenda Shaffer with a link to where we can find that note;
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Brenda Shaffer. Alternatively, you may create a note on your web page releasing the work under the GFDL and then leave a note at Talk:Brenda Shaffer with a link to the details.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Brenda Shaffer/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Brenda Shaffer saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Francis Tyers · 18:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Tyers 18:35, 31 January 2007; I can rephrase the sentences but my understanding is that what was quoted from those websites fall under fair use, am I wrong?

No you can't because you didn't quote them. You just copied it. You can use quotes, but they must be in quote marks. You cannot just copy the first paragraph from a website. This is a copyright violation. - Francis Tyers · 08:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Francis_Tyers"

Ok, open the article and let me put them as quote marks! Kiumars

Francis_Tyers has put a copyright tag on Brenda Shaffer article and does not reply to my posts and questions! How can we solve this problem?

Sorry no one's available to help right now. You may want to try WP:RFC. Good luck. Xiner (talk, email) 02:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin posts: Evan Siegel

No, I added the tag because the bulk of his books are on Azerbaijan. Chris 22:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

enable your e-mail

dude can you enable your e-mail. --alidoostzadeh 19:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Help is needed on NOR issue

I need your opinion urgently about NOR on Languages of Iran; as you will see from the history of the article and its talk page I have been told that we cannot take a calculator and add up the figures on this article and demonstrate the discrepancies because that is counted as Original research! Is this true? Is adding up the figures on a list and showing their discrepancies counted as original Research? Kiumars

Dear Kiumars: I know it's a strange problem, and one I've come across before. Unfortunately you can't just add up the figures given in demographic data to give an overall total; although I wouldn't have personally called it "original research" in the strictest sense of the term, it is not necessarily factually correct, and so would not be acceptable on Wikipedia. The reason for this is that demographic figures are estimates (usually gathered from statistical sampling across particular groups in a population, and then scaled according to overall size) meaning that totalling up of the figures wouldn't yield an accurate result. You will need to find an external source that quotes a specific total, rather than trying to calculate one yourself, which would technically speaking fall under the WP:NOR policy. I shouldn't have thought that would be too difficult. Ideally, the best way of solving this would be to find a single source (some kind of "gazetteer" that shows population breakdown per language, with estimated totals), which is what I'd advise. I hope this might help a bit. All the best, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 00:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Brenda Shaffer

Hi Kiumars - I did add a US-writer-stub to that article... but it was based on the fact that her academic work seems to have been in the United States. I don't have any information about her - sorry! Grutness...wha? 04:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helllppppppppppppp

Help with Brenda Shaffer article pleaseeeeeeeeeeeees! Ok, guys, I have rewritten it, it should be ok now please check the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brenda_Shaffer/Temp Kiumars

Looks fine to me, however, there are empty sections and a lot of question marks that could be fixed. - Icez 20:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Icez 20:00, 5 February 2007; Yes I know but they are not copyright issues and other people may be able to fill in the missing information, isn’t that what we are here for? So, what is the next step? Can the article survive? Who is going to remove the copyright tag?

Sorry, looks like no one's here. You may want to try WP:RFF. Good luck. Xiner (talk, email) 20:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xiner 20:14, 5 February 2007; you have been giving me that shit for the last 72 hours and stopped the dispute to be resolved! Do you have a vested interest in this topic? Icez 20:00, 5 February 2007 already said that he/she does not see any problem with the article! So what is your problem?

Er, first, please do not make personal attacks on someone who just happened by and bothered to answer your helpme tag. Second, why are you signing your messages as "Icez", [6]? Xiner (talk, email) 20:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xiner, he didn't sign it, he addressed the message to me. Kiumar, may I know which copyright tag? Icez 20:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank god!

Oh thank god! I was trying to prove my innocents for not being a cheat! I may be lots of things but I am not a cheat. Icez see Brenda Shaffer please.

by the way, it is Kiumars not kiumar!

Brenda Shaffer is an empty page. The copyright "tag" is just a warning not to put anything that violates copyrights. If your page is under fair use (which it seems so) then I see no reason why it couldn't be published. Sorry for the typo :) -- Icez

21:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brenda_Shaffer/Temp please. can I republish it now? Is it ok? Kiumars

I fixed some little things on it. You should be good to publish it. Icez 21:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Icez I kiss you as a friend. That is all I can do and I hope it mans the same to you. Kiumars

The pleasure is mine. Write me if you ever need any help again. Icez 21:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Icez; No, the pleasure is all mine and thanks for your help, I have no doubts that I will be needing your help again soon. So, see you soon. Thanks again Kiumars

LANGUAGE&CULTURE

All human beings nearer to each other are genetically more related than people in distant places. I think, neighbours with different languages become genetically related after years due to marriages, but if they keep their languages we see genetically related people with different languages. So, language families does not necassarily follow the line of "genetics families".

Genetics science: As you know, human beings are related to monkeys with 99.5% and different human beings are related to each other by 99.8% according to that science. (Although evidence shows that 80% difference in 21th chromosome, see latest researches!). So, genetics science is not so credible(80% difference is not ignored by genetics scientists, so I'm always skeptical about that science.).

But, your theory is even worse than it. I think languages and culture is more important than race concept. Maybe, it is not scientific but there is 3 races concept: Yellow(Mongoloid), Black, White. Turkish belong to "White", but for example Kazaks belong to Yellow race, but they speak similar languages. [Chinese, Japanese belong to Yellow race.There is not RED race. It is also mongoloid race. And I think native Americans are Asians, but I also read that south native Americans are Polinesians. Africans belong to black race.] I don't think there are much differences genetically in Middle East people. Turkish people look like Middle Eastern and Mediterrean, so there are not much differences between Greeks and Turkish, for example.

For example Chinese is many different from "Japanese and Koreans" in language, although they look like the same. But Japanese and Korean is very similar in language.

The people in Ethiopia belong to Semitic languages, but they are black people and they look like Africans although Jewish in Europe and Arabs in Syria does not look like them. But, they speak similar languages.

One example is Madagaskar, they also look like Africans but they belong to Indonesian language family. What makes Turkish people is Turkish language not the genes, and Turkish people are genetically mixed with their neighbours. I don't think we cannot speak about a "genetical" Turkish nation. We do not need similar genes, color, etc. to be a nation, but we only need culture and language. ( I also think that most important reason of Kurdish question in Turkey is that existence of Kurdish language, but this is the subject of another message.)

Paparokan 00:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paparokan 00:28, 25 February 2007; I will go thru your message and answer them in the order you raised them.

1: Genetics is a very interesting and amazing field; I am so interested that I intend to take an Open University crush course in the subject. As for your comments and your figures; they are not accurate actually! Although a 98% genetic similarity statistic between humans and chimps has been established (assuming that the similarity demonstrates common ancestry), can common ancestry explain shared functional genetic similarities between humans and chimps? We also have over 95% in common with the worms! The fact is that the life building blocks are shared amongst all creatures, after all we are all made of flesh and bone! But these elements (the building blocks) act differently and have different functions in different species. The role of the cDNA is very important and interesting as these are the ones who tell the other genes what they are supposed to do! i.e. the same genes perform totally different functions in different species!

Each pair of homologous human chromosomes (whether from a single individual or from two individuals) are about 99.9% identical in sequence. This is why all humans from all parts of the planet are so much alike, and so different from all other animals including even our closest living relatives. Nevertheless, with 3 billion total nucleotides, 0.1% difference means about 3,000,000 nucleotide differences among homologous chromosomes. These DNA sequence differences are largely, but not entirely, responsible for the differences among people.

As we know the difference between male and females is only in a single chromosome (Males have one X and one Y chromosome, whereas females have two X and no Y chromosomes). So if one chromosome can have such a major impact and be the reason behind all the differences between male and female (and all the differences in body shape, body functions, emotional states, having different hormones, etc) then imagine what the other 3,000,000 nucleotide differences among people can do! Common people easily get fooled by percentages and do not see the real figures (i.e. 3,000,000 potential factors!).

2: Your argument about inter-marriage and mixing with other groups has some merits in the modern days (although it is still a very small percentage of the population), but cannot be used to claim that in the old days people were all mixed genetically! There is no scientific data to back that argument and on the contrary there are lots of data to prove otherwise! Just look at the people who mixed with the Russians in the last 200 years in the Caspian region! Russians were seen as intruders, invaders, and were never trusted and never respected by the local people! Why do you think Russia at the end gave up and set them free?

3: There are 5 main races in the world not 3; and there are major differences between members of the same race too. Are all the whites the same? Are all the blacks the same? Are all the yellows the same? You mentioned Chinese and Japanese and Koreans, I know lots of them and worked with them and I can see the difference from miles! Japanese had no mercy on Koreans during the WWII because Japanese and Korean languages are close! Koreans hate the Japanese as much as the Chinese do! You better study a bit and get your facts right! Education is not that expensive these days!

4: As for the people of the ME you are wrong again, we can tell each other easily from miles. I understand that some Jews are now claiming that they are not semantic and they are Kurds! That will be an interesting subject to follow! But it may have something to do with the current Iraq issues and that they want to find a footprint in the country! We will see.

5: Appearances can be misleading; there was a program on BBC a few months ago interviewing some famous people and genetically testing their origins via two different institutes (totally unaware of the other party’s involvement and participation in the test). The daughter of Margaret Thatcher had over 50% Middle Eastern genes! And one of the leaders of the British National Party had over 80% Greek genes (he has sued BBC since!). Language on the other hand as I explained before can be replaced in a generation or two (and some times by force; like Turkification or Arabization of Iranians in the past), but genes remain in you for ever even when they are mixed!

6: I agree that culture is probably the most important factor that gels people together as a nation but culture itself is a combination of Religion; Language; and shared history, customs, literature, music, etc. sharing the same pride in defeating the enemies and suffering the same pain for short comings. Lots of nations speak English or French but they are not and cannot form a nation because the do not share the most important ingredients of a shared culture! Or even because they do not look alike! Let’s see how European treat Turkey in its quest in becoming a member of EU! So far the cultural differences have been the main obstacle raised by the open minded Western community!

7: I don’t blame you for trying but you are way out off the track! Try harder next time; and give us some credit, we are not as stupid as you think we are! Kiumars 20:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk page

[[7]]Paparokan You have a message on my talk page, and the message here is also moved to my talk page. Thank you!Paparokan 18:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your posts

Hi Kiumars, some of the comments you're leaving on talk pages are arguably inappropriate, and it might be a good idea to tone things down a little. In particular, comments such as asking other editors whether they're Jewish because only Jews do certain things [8] are likely to lead to complaints. It's best to concentrate on the content and not on the contributor. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew mentioning Netanyahu name and his involvement in Wiki would get some of you here quickly! How come you saw that post after 10 days but only 5 minutes after mentioning Netanyahu name? Kiumars 02:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have other examples, some more recent. What do you mean by "mentioning Netanyahu ... would get some of you here quickly"? Who is "you"? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 08:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SlimVirgin 08:07, 25 February 2007; Can you show me the more recent ones you are talking about please?

BTW should you have not notices there is a war going on between the Muslims and Jews and Christians! Bush called it a crusade! Didn’t you see it? Don’t you live in this world? Don’t you read papers or watch TV? What is this “Political Correctness” about? Why it is not applied to other issues? Go to any Turkish/Armenian, Japanese/Chinese, etc article and see what is going on! But mentioning a word about Israel gets everybody’s attention here! Why? Wiki is supposed to reflect the realities but it is wrapping anything that has anything to do with Israel in dark paper and treats as taboo! Kiumars 15:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kiumars, I see you didn't take my advice. You've been blocked for 24 hours for this post, and please note that the next time you reference an editor's race, ethnicity, or religion, or use the word "Zionist" as a disguise for "Jew," the block is likely to be indefinite. I'm assuming some good faith here for the time being in making this block a short one. Please concentrate only on content from now on, not on the contributors. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indefblocked because of what looks like a death threat by e-mail. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 17:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]