User talk:MagusMoon
Welcome!
[edit]Hi MagusMoon! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! RFD (talk) 21:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Kaveh Farrokh
[edit]Sorry, I didn't get around to replacing the Persian translation - he's ok with it. I needed to make sure as we need to be careful no one calls him Persian. Doug Weller talk 10:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. MagusMoon (talk) 18:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Requesting help
[edit]Hi greetings,
I have been looking for update and expansion support for 2 following articles in draft namespace
- Draft:Aurat (word) (article to cover grammar and linguistic part)
and
- Draft:Aurat (article to cover cultural women)
Please do have a look at the article, do update, expand, correct inaccuracies, suggest and discuss better article titles
Looking forward to your kind support.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku (talk) 06:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 1
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Prods Oktor Skjaervo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Persian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:47, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Vandalism of my userbox page
[edit]Never do that again to anyone. I had tenure at the University of Birmingham - I don't need to prove it to you. It was noticed by two editors, one an Administrator, and reverted. Doug Weller talk 04:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Doug, the deletion of your academic tag was not vandalism in the least, you have not provided any evidence for your claim. This was noted in the justification for deletion. Whoever has reverted the change has done so without substantiation.
- Your tone is indeed unacceptable and your behavior is a clear indicator of the longstanding quality control issues present within the Wikimedia Foundation. Should you continue behaving in such a manner, you will absolutely be reported for abuse. Let it be clear that your credentials are not to prove something to one person alone. Should you make claims, particularly with respect to academia and on a large scale platform like Wikipedia, then you must provide evidence as in accordance with the guidelines and practices of the Wikimedia Foundation. Your claim of a tenure has not been substantiated thus far and your past behavior is certainly not exhibiting of academic character. If you are indeed an academic or have been in the past, then provide evidence to substantiate it, such as a track record of publications or any positions held at higher learning institutions, such as the University of Birmingham. In this manner, how long was your tenure? In what department were you based? You may very well regard yourself as an academic, but there must also be evidence provided to support it. You are not exempt from adhering to the guidelines.
- Might it be reiterated that your tone is highly aggressive and it is advised against taking such a stance with anyone ever again. This can very easily and justifiably be construed as abuse.
- Conduct yourself with professionalism. MagusMoon (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- Amazing. This is something to do with my friend Kaveh's article, some type of retribution. It's a form of WP:Hounding. I hadn't noticed it until User:IamNotU posted to my talk page and User:Floquenbeam. I don't need to prove my credentials or the number of years I held a tenured position. My userpages are not articles and those guidelines don't apply. Doug Weller talk 18:00, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Do not lodge accusations. Your current and past behavior can certainly be attributed to WP:Hounding. Previous edits done on all pages were correcting your lack of attention to detail(s) and what can be understood as a haphazard approach to editorial duties. Everything done was to support accuracy. After all, even subsequent edits that you made to other pages were left intact as it was for the betterment of the entry and encyclopedia. However, any lack of evidence for academic positions and an absence of substantiated past track record ultimately creates reservation for dismissal, even if it is not a part of the encyclopedia WP:NOTPART. An example would be if others claimed to hold academic roles at Harvard University. What is concerning in this regard is misrepresentation and potential usage of nonexistent credentials and experience in an effort to exert and enforce edits. This is not exclusively directed towards you. In previous exchanges you have erroneously attributed and consequently incorrectly cited Wikipedia guidelines, so it is appreciated if you refrain from doing so and moreover portraying yourself in a manner that is perceived as threatening as it is not conducive to a productive editing environment. You are indeed perceived as harassing in your demeanor and it is not appreciated. Again, conduct yourself with professionalism as there has always been a balanced commonground of respect. If any of the edits on your userpage have caught you by surprise, there was a clear record of such edits being done coupled with reasoning in the edit summary. Note that reversions have not again been edited and your misunderstanding of WP:Hounding is dismissed. What is important is to keep a balanced setting in which calm professionalism prevails. Note that this is not an invitation for reply or aggressive engagement, but rather an explanation. Of course, anyone would agree that should credentials be provided then that would provide legitimacy to an authority. Needless to mention that some of your past endeavors on Wikipedia, such as with other history-oriented articles appearing on the platform in its earlier days, have been very much appreciated. Best regards, MagusMoon (talk) 19:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, MagusMoon. You have a certain leeway for poor behavior on your own user talkpage, but not this much. Personal questions ("how long was your tenure?") are highly inappropriate; personal attacks ("portraying yourself in a manner that is perceived as threatening", "You are indeed perceived as harassing in your demeanor") are worse. You are mistakenf if you think using tortured bureaucratic passive-voice language and avoiding the word "I" ("it is advised against taking such a stance") helps in some way. The next time you attack somebody without rhyme or reason, you are likely to be sanctioned. Bishonen | tålk 14:58, 14 July 2020 (UTC).
- @Doug Weller: Do not lodge accusations. Your current and past behavior can certainly be attributed to WP:Hounding. Previous edits done on all pages were correcting your lack of attention to detail(s) and what can be understood as a haphazard approach to editorial duties. Everything done was to support accuracy. After all, even subsequent edits that you made to other pages were left intact as it was for the betterment of the entry and encyclopedia. However, any lack of evidence for academic positions and an absence of substantiated past track record ultimately creates reservation for dismissal, even if it is not a part of the encyclopedia WP:NOTPART. An example would be if others claimed to hold academic roles at Harvard University. What is concerning in this regard is misrepresentation and potential usage of nonexistent credentials and experience in an effort to exert and enforce edits. This is not exclusively directed towards you. In previous exchanges you have erroneously attributed and consequently incorrectly cited Wikipedia guidelines, so it is appreciated if you refrain from doing so and moreover portraying yourself in a manner that is perceived as threatening as it is not conducive to a productive editing environment. You are indeed perceived as harassing in your demeanor and it is not appreciated. Again, conduct yourself with professionalism as there has always been a balanced commonground of respect. If any of the edits on your userpage have caught you by surprise, there was a clear record of such edits being done coupled with reasoning in the edit summary. Note that reversions have not again been edited and your misunderstanding of WP:Hounding is dismissed. What is important is to keep a balanced setting in which calm professionalism prevails. Note that this is not an invitation for reply or aggressive engagement, but rather an explanation. Of course, anyone would agree that should credentials be provided then that would provide legitimacy to an authority. Needless to mention that some of your past endeavors on Wikipedia, such as with other history-oriented articles appearing on the platform in its earlier days, have been very much appreciated. Best regards, MagusMoon (talk) 19:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- Amazing. This is something to do with my friend Kaveh's article, some type of retribution. It's a form of WP:Hounding. I hadn't noticed it until User:IamNotU posted to my talk page and User:Floquenbeam. I don't need to prove my credentials or the number of years I held a tenured position. My userpages are not articles and those guidelines don't apply. Doug Weller talk 18:00, 13 July 2020 (UTC)