User talk:Qahramani44

Welcome!

Hello, Qahramani44, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! GermanJoe (talk) 02:43, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:AltaicLanguagesAccurate.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AltaicLanguagesAccurate.png, 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. Ymblanter (talk) 17:03, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

I see that you are edit-warring in Altaic Languages. Whereas the old map may have problems, the map which you try to insert there is of considerably poorer quality. I nominated the file for deletion.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

Dorud Qahramani, please behave more politely when you're here, there was really no need for that language/tone earlier, and it can get you easily blocked. --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORUM

Hi. Could you stop replying to those nationalistic rants by IPs and inactive users? Most of those stuff are WP:FORUM and necrobumping them is neither helpful nor useful for other editors. There's no point in replying to those rants. --Wario-Man (talk) 16:11, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Has nothing to do with modern islamic İran republic.It's geographical location. Sword313 (talk) 06:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It has to do with us (Persians), because the state and the people inhabiting that land at that time, were our ethnic kin. Same way Crimean Khanate has nothing to do with Russians, even if modern Crimea is Russian now, Atropatene has nothing to do with Turkics like you. Qahramani44 (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AA2 advisory

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date. [1]

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

- LouisAragon (talk) 11:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Your recent editing history at Agal (accessory) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Abecedare (talk) 06:08, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Turkmen Sahra

Have your read the infobox of that image?

Image page link

Plus it was uploaded by a problematic editor who's blocked on Commons.[2] Should I show his other problematic maps? Also Turkmen Sahra is a region. How an ethnic-based map has anything to do with the definition of a region? Upload your new file with verifiable sources. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:29, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite aware of Beshogur's ideology and the kinds of posts he made, that's precisely why I edited his map to be accurate, based on reliable sources. I don't care enough about that page to bother fighting over the map if you really want to remove it, but I don't see any sense in describing a region without showing its boundaries in some way, especially when said region is named after the ethnicity that lives there. That is, assuming this region of "Turkmen Sahra" even exists in any reliable source in the first place. --Qahramani44 (talk) 05:47, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Turkmen Sahra is a term just like Turkistan. If a region has Turkmen population, that does not make that region a part of Turkmen Sahra. That's my point. Again, if you have reliable sources and sourced maps of Turkmen Sahra, create your own images and upload them as new files. Forget that user and his works on Commons. You don't need to fix or edit his unused images. --Wario-Man (talk) 06:58, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPA policy

Hi, I'd just like to remind you of the policy of no personal attacks. You added one such to a (very) old discussion which was in any case long since closed and the article restructured and passed through the GA process, so I have removed it. Many thanks for your understanding, Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

about the Scythians Article

Hi dear friend according to your account name i guess your are Iranian . am i right ? can i leave messages here to Persian ? CenemaWithoutColor (talk) 22:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

سلام داداش، اره میتونی توی فارسی بگی. من خارجیم و واژگان فارسیم کامل نیست، ولی خطش را یه کمی میفهمم. -- Qahramani44 (talk) 02:20, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

درود دوباره برادر . خیلی خوشحال شدم از آشنایی . در مورد مقاله انگلیسی سکاها یک چیزی که خیلی مسخره هست بنابر همه منابع سکاها ایرانی بودند مثل اهل خوارزم یا اهل سغد و غیره . در مورد ایرانی بودن سکاها منبع زیاد هست . ولیکن در مقاله این بخش یک سری منابع پرت و پلا رو گذاشتند و اسکاتلندی ها و ایرلندی ها و ژرمن ها و هرکی دست شون رسیده رو به سکاها از لحاظ تباری ربط دادند . والا دیگه کم مونده بود که قبایل آفریقایی رو هم به سکاها ربط بدن . درحالیکه اگه همون صفحه بحث مقاله رو دیده باشی منابعی که من اونجا گذاشتم درباره دو تا قوم باستانی منطقه مازندران یعنی آمارد ها و تپور ها همه دال بر سکایی بودن شون داره . البته اسم این دو قوم در مقاله سکاهای انگلیسی بعنوان قبایل سکایی باستانی هست ولی وقتی ملل اروپایی میان سکاهای ایرانی رو میچسبونند به خودشون چرا ایرانی ها نباید با منبع ادعای نسب بکنند ؟ اصلا برام جالبه که چرا انقدر اینها به سکاها حساس هستند . اهل خوارزم و سغد و خیلی مناطق سکایی بودند . کجاشون مثل اروپایی ها بود ؟! کلا کار اینها هم سرقت ملل مرده هست . بنظر شما باید ویرایش های بیشتری داشته باشم تا بتونم در مقاله سکاها ویرایش کنم ؟

ممنون از لطفی که داشتی CenemaWithoutColor (talk) 10:41, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

راستی همین الان بعد از ویرایش در صفحه بحث شما ، دهمین ویرایشم در ویکی انگلسی انجام شد و مثل اینکه مشکل حل شد و میتونم در مقاله سکاها ویرایش داشته باشم . کلا دستت سبک بود برادر . زنده باشی CenemaWithoutColor (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Tractor S.C., you may be blocked from editing. I know you haven't restored the content in a while, but I am warning all editors involved in this in the same way. Fenix down (talk) 14:15, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijani People's Government - Book burning

Hi Qahramani44. Can you tell me who in their right minds would burn their native language books, without being coerced to do so? I checked Swietochowski's source and it lacks detail as to how events transpired in Tabriz. As for Asgharzadeh, true he is not a historian per say, he is a professor of sociology. His work, Iran and the Challenge of Diversity, is a multidisciplinary work on the analysis of racism in Iran.

>who in their right minds would burn their native language books, without being coerced to do so?

The same people who, according to Swietochowski were "greeting the returning Iranian troops" and "obviously not ready even for a regional self-government so long as it smacked of separatism", perhaps? If his narration lacks detail, that doesn't discount it, nor does it allow a non-historian like Asgharzadeh to add his own narrative/fill-in-the-blank "details" to it. Regardless of anyone's opinion, a sociologist has no more credibility when describing a historical event than a mathematician, plumber, or random Wikipedia editor.

And I'm quite familiar with his work, I've read his sorry excuse for a book. Asgharzadeh is quite possibly the least neutral source one could possibly choose about anything related to Iran, and his book is less an "analysis of racism" and more a blatant attempt at historical revisionism filled with his own source-less POV. There are more detailed refutations than this, though. --Qahramani44 (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

>Well I can't get a hold of a copy of reference number 15 to see where Swietochowski based his claim off of, so I'll let this go though I want to address the rest of your message.

According to Douglas (ref24), the Iranian army "behaved as an occupying force and brutalized the local inhabitants". Considering that, how might a book-burning happen willfully? The Iranian army also burned Kurdish books after retaking the puppet state Mahabad; it's not crazy to think that the same thing happened in Tabriz, unless you think Douglas is wrong about the Iranian army's brutality. Historians also make mistakes, a history professor of mine once told the class that Reza Shah became president in 1925, for which I had to correct her. What is important is the use of credible primary sources, not necessarily the degree itself. --C-Na6ZZ (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Nizami Ganjavi. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Peaceray (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting help

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) 06:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting small help

Hello many greetings,

Requesting your proactive contribution and support in updating Draft:Aurats (word) in relation to Azerbaijani languages, if you know well.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 02:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Xwedodah

Dear Qaharamani44, I thank you for your changes on the article. Would you be interesting in working together to clean up the Xwedodah article, which lacks any coverage from a Persian perceptive. Manzarene (talk) 21:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Manzarene: Sure, I appreciate your efforts as well, the other guy Lamazeva is pretty clearly trying to push the article into an exaggerated narrative. — Qahramani44 (talk) 23:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't revert back to prior versions of the page. Almost all of the old revisions contain material copied from https://iranicaonline.org/articles/marriage-next-of-kin in violation of our copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 11:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: I understand if copyright is an issue, but in this case the other guy is straight up trying to remove any reference from Iranica that's being added, he could have easily reworded the copied phrase instead of deleting it. I mean come on he even included a section trying to tie in Shi'a Mutah with Xwedodah [3] (which is also WP:OR considering its attached "source" mentions nothing about Zoroastrianism). I believe the current version of the page just edited by @Xhepablo [4] is better at this point, far more balanced and without any copyright issues either. — Qahramani44 (talk) 23:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bukhara Article

Hi there I edited the Bukhara article a couple of hours ago, just to find out that every single one of my additions and corrections were deleted by you. The reason you gave, was that the information about ethnic groups was accurate and not biased, if it was sourced from multiple credible sources. I assume you’re referring to the edit that tajiks are a “sizeable minority”. I sourced this information from a recent article about ethnographic make-up of Central Asia, so there was no personal bias involved. But this still doesn’t explain the fact that you plainly deleted all the information added about the naming origin, from different sources, including Encyclopedia Irænica, which i assume we agree isn’t biased. And the information added wasn’t even about the ethnic make up, but was just a way to make the article more informative. I went out of my way to do hours of research for this, and you just delete all this information, because of 1 line you didn’t like? As an editor, i expected you to be more fair and unbiased, and not use the excuse of “bias” to remove thousands of bytes of text, not in a single way related to the ethnic element. I hope you come about, and throw away your bias, because as a wikipedia editor, i expected better. Pigeon de Ville (talk) 22:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia / Azerbaijan sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Magog the Ogre (t • c) 22:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haque 1982

Assalam, I have seen a book reference on shykh ibn tayimmah page named Haque 1982. (Reference no. 36) Achronian (talk) 12:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where i can find that book? Can you help me? Achronian (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you review and verify this article?

Seems the sourced content does not match citations.[5] --Wario-Man (talk) 08:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For restoring WP:RS sourced content and combatting outright removals of RS sourced content without edit summary (i.e. WP:TENDENTIOUS). Keep up the good work! - LouisAragon (talk) 00:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You do need to be more cautious when writing edit summaries and talk page comments though, as some do violate WP:BATTLEGROUND. No matter how "right" and high-quality your sources are, civility is key while editing Wikipedia. Thanks, - LouisAragon (talk) 00:22, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. 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. Saucysalsa30 (talk) 22:38, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

M Zakiev Article

Hi there I edited the Mirfatih Zakiev article yesterday, just to find out that every single one of my additions and corrections were reverted by you.

In your motivation you stated that you based your revert solely on the disagreement about the category classification, which is, indeed, debatable. All the other credible and verifiable sources I provided you didn't pay attention to, I assume? I sourced this information from a series of academic articles accolading the subject, so there was no personal bias involved. But this still doesn’t explain the fact that you plainly deleted all the information added about the positive aspects of the subjects' work throughout his life. The sources added would allow to give the (living, mind you, so extra care should be taken!) subject a fair credit for his academic work.

I can translate the newly sourced articles for you so that you see for yourself that the subject is a reputable scholar, at least in Russia. The "controversialness" in the lead is too harsh of a characterization for a scholar with such a huge academic output. I agree with keeping the criticism in the Reception part of the article, but putting "controversialness" into the lead put too much (negative, mind you!) emphasis on the subjects' disputed hypotheses.

Anyhow, your striving towards highlighting only the contenstable sides of the subject's work (judging by your edit history of the article in question), and this particular case of undoing of my multiple edits citing verifiable sources just using the excuse of you not liking only one of them, can be considered as a disruptive editing.

Let's make a deal: from the current revision you get to keep the "pseudo-" categories that you seem to insist on ("Pseudohistorians", "Pseudolinguistics"), but you'll have to credit the subject for his other (undisputed) contributions, and put the non-"pseudo" (i.e. normal "linguistics", normal "historians") tags along with those.

Do you agree with such a proposition? Mchan12345 10:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mchan12345, the only "credible and verifiable" sources you provided there were three articles by three other turkologists praising him, as well as a page by the university he works at (Kazan University) detailing what he does. None of that erases the countless other sources in the article which show him as a pseudohistorian. There is no inherent merit to having a "large academic output", scholars are judged not based on how much work they do but by the quality of their work. The fact that his "hypotheses" are considered to be revisionist fringe by the vast majority of other historians and linguists makes the label "controversial scholar" perfectly reasonable. I have no issue with you including the part praising his work, but removing "controversial" from the lede and the "pseudohistorian" and "pseudolinguist" tags is simply whitewashing his misdeeds. The "both sides" argument doesn't work at all here. Also next time, put this discussion in the page itself, not on my talk page. --Qahramani44 (talk) 17:38, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tabarian culture

This is written in persian: سلام و درود بر شما. با توجه به نامتان حدس زدم فارسی‌زبان باشید لذا متن را به فارسی نوشتم. از جناب واریومن شنیدم شما در زمینه ایران فعال هستید لذا تقاضا دارم اگر می‌توانید مقاله‌ای با عنوان فرهنگ طبری (Tabarian culture) را در ویکی‌انگلیسی بسازید و از فارسی ترجمه کنید. این مقاله نسبتاً گسترده و هست و منابع فارسی نسبتاً زیادی دارد البته فکر نمی‌کنم منبع انگلیسی برایش پیدا شود. با احترام.Mehdi Parkuhi (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

سلام، من میتونم سعی کنم ولی فارسیم به حد روانی نیستش. میبینم چکار میتونم بکنم، ولی قطعا از نفرهای دیگه که میشناسی بپرس که بتونند کمک کنند. Qahramani44 (talk) 17:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

سلام مجدد. چشم سعی می‌کنم پیگیر باشم از افراد دیگری هم کمک بگیرم. البته خودم برای ترجمه مطالب از فارسی به انگلیسی مشکلی ندارم (میتونم برای ترجمه برخی اصطلاحات از گوگل‌ترنسلیت هم استفاده کنم) و فقط تنها مشکل این است که تقریباً تمام منابع مقاله کتاب‌ها و سایت‌های فارسی هستند که امیدوارم این مسئله مشکلی ایجاد نکند. Mehdi Parkuhi (talk) 10:17, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Your edit to Racism in the Arab world has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. That content is a copyright violation from a non-public domain source. Do not reinstate it. I understand it was already there, but adding it when a user removed is not what should be done. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Berrely In that case it should be okay to re-add the source but reword the paragraph so it's not a direct copyright. The user who removed this source failed to justify it on WP:RSN so he's simply removing credible sources on a basis of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. -- User:Qahramani44 17:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Saucysalsa30

I understand wanting to avoid Saucysalsa30's constant threats and personal attacks, but I would urge you not to back down and allow the bully to win; he will only get bolder. If he continues, I will report him, yet again, for edit warring, and he will surely be sanctioned, as happened previously. Just a bit of advice.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I see that you've beaten me to it...TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:05, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Funny timing eh? I was writing up the report as you were writing up your previous comment. I appreciate the support a lot, thank you very much. --Qahramani44 (talk) 00:07, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strange accusations considering Qahramani44 was the one who started and continued edit warring [6] [7], coupled with WP:NPA and WP:HOUNDING violations, and was warned by an admin for copyright violations as a result [8]. I didn't expect you would react so angrily just because no one on Wikipedia believes your unsubstantiated claim that a provable non-RS blog site like Iran Chamber Society is not RS. Saucysalsa30 (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

I've warned Saucysalsa30 and TheTimesAreAChanging already regarding recent behavior. I've not seen you engage in the personal attacks, but please do not continue slow-edit-warring. Though 10 days have passed, it is still "warring". EvergreenFir (talk) 05:55, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EvergreenFir: If that's your decision then sure I'll accept, but I would like to state that it's only him that's pushing that POV revision, against everyone else he is edit-warring with. I don't see how any consensus could possibly be made with him, he's completely unwilling to discuss anything and only throws polemics and personal attacks. --Qahramani44 (talk) 06:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, you may be blocked from editing. In your case you actually just removed another's comments entirely. You are free to disagree with them,but you should not be removing them. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bakhshayish carpet

You might be interested in this newly created article.[9] - LouisAragon (talk) 22:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another brand new article. Not sure where to start.[10] - LouisAragon (talk) 23:22, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Hey, how are you? I have recently discovered that the history of the Mughal dynasty and the polity they ruled was within the scope of your interests. I invite you to have your say on the Persian influence section at the talk page where you have lately discussed the Chagatai origin of Mughals. Thank you! Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 13:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]