User talk:Pouya mh2

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ho3ein concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ho3ein, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ho3ein

Hello Pouya mh2. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Ho3ein".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ho3ein}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:49, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Hello, I'm حزل. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Hazel (talk) 01:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2016 AFC Champions League. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thanks. Hazel (talk) 22:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you have done at Iran national football team. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. MuyXmuy (talk) 23:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Italy, Germany and Brazil are big rivals when it comes to World Cup because they have close results. Italy and Germany each have won the cup 4 times and Brazil 5 times.

Brazil and Argentina have a huge rivalry; 102 games was played with Brazil winning 39 times and Argentina winning 37 times along with 26 draws.

Just like AFC, Iran and Saudis have had head to head games about 14 games with no friendlies, out of those games Iran has won 5 games, Saudis 4 and the rest were ties. Japan and Australia have played 23 games total, with Japan winning 8 times and the Aussies winning 7 times and the rest being ties.

These are great examples of rivalry. It doesn't matter how many times two teams have played against each other, it's how close the results are.

Now like I said before if you wanna add Iraq go right ahead but make sure you add these rivalries as listed below as well to be fair.

Iran vs. Kuwait ---> 28 games with Iran winning 12 times and Kuwait winning 7 times (Technically when it comes to numbers Kuwaitis are our biggest rivals)

Iran vs. Syria ---> 24 games with Iran winning 14 times and Syria winning only once

Iran vs. China ---> 20 games with Iran winning 11 times and China winning 4 times

Iran vs. Qatar ---> 20 games with Iran winning 12 times and Qatar winning 3 times

Iran vs. N.Korea ---> 17 games with Iran winning 13 times and N.Korea winning 0 times

Iran vs. Bahrain ---> 16 games with Iran winning 7 times and Bahrain winning 4 times

Iran vs. Pakistan ---> 14 games with Iran winning 12 times and Pakistan winning only once (This one made me laugh)

Iran vs. Oman ---> 11 games with Iran winning 5 times and Oman winning 2 times

and vs Iraq ---> 25 games with Iran winning 14 times and Iraq winning 4 times

Pouya_mh2 (talk) 18:18, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mohammad Ali Heydarpour

The article Mohammad Ali Heydarpour has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Mohammad Ali Heydarpour

For starters, please do not cite Transfermarkt in articles. Most of its content is user-generated, meaning it not considered a reliable source. Secondly, the fact that you are in touch with him as no bearing on the fact that he does not meet the relevant notability guidelines. Accordingly, I have nominated the article for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Ali Heydarpour. Happy editing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are two separate issues here. My concerns about the reliability of the sources you cited are unrelated to the notability issues. They just happened to come up in the same article at the same time. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. I also get the impression you don't actually know what I mean when I say "notability", so let me take a moment to explain. For a subject to have a stand-alone article on Wikipedia, it must meet considered notable. There a number of guidelines used to determine the notability of subjects. For soccer players, the relevant one is WP:NSOCCER. Broadly speaking, it says that a soccer player is notable enough if he has played in one of the fully-professional leagues listed at WP:FPL or for his country's national team. Since Canadian Soccer League is not listed at WP:FPL and Heydarpour has not played for Canada or Iran, he doesn't meet the guideline at present (though he may in future). I hope clears things up. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your question, there are two reasons for this. First, notability is not temporary. While the CSL may not be official today, it was in the 80's and 90's before Canadian clubs started playing in American soccer leagues. The other is that the notability guidelines for clubs and leagues are less stringent than for players. The guidelines soccer related subjects that are not people can be found at WP:FOOTYN. (Note: the page includes guidelines on players as well, but these are outdated and have been superseded by WP:NSOCCER.) Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:11, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm still learning about wikipedia. Sorry. ( Pouya mh2 (talk) 03:47, 17 March 2016 (UTC) )[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Pouya mh2. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Pouya mh2. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Pouya mh2. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ahmadreza Abedzade OC.jpeg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ahmadreza Abedzade OC.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Snowycats (talk) 00:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]