Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:39, 6 May 2006

Regarding your comment on Talk:Richard Nelson Frye, please don't make personal attacks. Debate the issues, not the personalities. Don't let your anger overwhelm you, read WP:NPA and WP:AGF. --ManiF 04:51, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Darkred, I saw your comment here, and I have to say that despite what your intentions were, it wasn't appropriate. Remember, comment on content, not on contributors. Thank you. —Khoikhoi 05:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

It does not help by insulting people, however. Please don't do it again. —Khoikhoi 22:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Iran-Iraq war

Hello Dark, I'm sorry but the source you added does not qualify as a reputable and reliable source, furthermore if you revert one more time you will have broken the 3RR and could be blocked.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

You are new, so make sure you read WP:3RR and learn about the 3RR rule. You may not revert an article more than three times within 24 hours, or you may receive a temporary block (24 hr). --ManiF 05:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I see, thank you for reminding me of that manif, well a 24 hr block doesn't hurt anyone, i will have to read rules more carefully :) Darkred 06:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your warning Voice of all, i am new to wikipedia editing and did not know about the 3RR. I have now read the rules, sorry for any violation of the rules from my part. --Darkred 07:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I missed the 4th rv, as I was looking at the wrong content change. I'll have to block.Voice-of-All 07:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

====Regarding reversions made on April 23 2006 (UTC) to Iran-Iraq War====

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block is 24 hours. Voice-of-All 07:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Well voice of all i sent you an email regarding moshe's repeating vandalism, and explained the reason of my reverts, especially not knowing about the rule. Nonetheless again i am sorry if i violated the WP Rules. --Darkred 11:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

First, please leave the Iran-Iraq talk off the Frye page; second, you can't honestly believe that as either a credible source or even a credible story? This is as likely as space aliens supplying the Iranians on behalf of George Bush - it does not make any sense.Bridesmill 22:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Bridesmill, it's a well known fact that israel shipped weapons to iran during the war. I just posted the first source i could find to keep him off vandilizing. However it seems that zereshk have provided you with reliable sources according to the WP rules regarding this matter. :) --Darkred 20:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Darkred,

All you have to do is type in "TOW Iran Israel" on google. Youll get numerous hits on Israeli arms sales to Iran. I posted the best ones I found.--Zereshk 22:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Spam

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. Pilot|guy 23:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I see, thanks --Darkred 00:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Be nice :-)

Hello,

It is considered rude to call edits by fellow editors "vandalism". The guidelines are clear what constitutes "vandalism". It is only a change to content made in a deliberate attempt to negatively impact the encyclopedia. Often edits you disagree with, and even those that are plain wrong, are made in good faith. In the future please take a moment to consider whether the editor was actually trying to harm the encyclopedia to before using such language, and I think you will find the others much more cooperative. Taw 00:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually I was referring to calling an edit by me "vandalism"  ;-).

I don't know anything about any arguments people have about the Halabja poison gas attack article, I was just trying to make the introduction separate the established facts (Halabja is there and there, that many people died in that year for such reasons) from interpretations (Iraq did it, Iran did it, it was deliberate, someone screwed up, and so on) and to briefly say who supports which version and why. The discussion about the culprit is included in the article, so making the introduction sound as if one of the interpretations (even if it's most popular) was accepted by everyone feels kinda weird. Taw 00:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Kindly refrain from removing warnings from your talk page. Regards, --Andy123(talk) 00:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

user taw Like i said in my rv, there are several sources in this matter, and it is well proven that it was iraq that bobmbed the kurds, iran didnt even have any chemical weapons. Again like i said in the when i reverted, please refrain from deleting parts of an article without a good reason or any source that counteracts the other source. --Darkred 01:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

If someone troubles you, it can be referred to the administrators of Wikipeda. If someone makes any kind of personal attacks on you you can report them. Misplaced Pages has a strict policy against personal attacks. It is much easier for administrators to handle tasks if the discussion page is not blanked. Kindly assume good faith. I invite you to make constructive edits on Misplaced Pages. Regards, --Andy123(talk) 01:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

And i also invite you to do the same. Misplaced Pages does not belong to any user, neither to any administrator, there are rules and regulations for them aswell. They can too be reported for abusing their powers and accusing with no reason. From being accused of being rude to being accused for deleting that accusation from my page, because it's considered a warning message, that's alot of accusation don't you think. :). Oh well no harm no fowl. Please do carry on. --Darkred 02:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure that Iran didn't have any chemical weapons ? Quoting (which is linked from the article) which quotes the DIA study:

The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent — that is, a cyanide-based gas — which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.

DIA seems to be claiming that Iran had and used chemical weapons during the war. Do you know of any reports supporting or opposing this claim ? Taw 16:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

User:taw, it is a well known fact that it was iraq which killed the kurds in halabja, alongside with the iranians that were in that town, there is no argument here. But if you really feel like keeping the article according to your POV i or other users will have to provide more sources regarding this matter, if there are none provided in the article(have not looked yet).

The claim that it was iran which bombed the kurds is regarded by many to be just like the claim that nazis did not kill 6 million jews. --Darkred 00:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Doroud

Welcome to Misplaced Pages, I just wanted to say comments like is not appropriate, and will definately not help to give a better image of Iranian wikipedians here. Ba sepaas, -- - K a s h 23:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Iran

Hi there, I noticed you have now twice reverted my edits to Iran. I moved the images up to reduce the amount of whitespace. Please explain why you have reverted my edits? Green Giant 23:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response. First of all an apology, as you didn't revert blindly. You moved each image separately and left my grammar corrections. I can understand wanting the top of the image and the first line aligned but there is no hard-and-fast rule for this. Comparing the two versions by me and by you, you'll notice there is a reduction in whitespace between the last paragraph of Economy and the title of Demographics. However this is a minor quibble and instead I am relieved to find that your reasoning actually has some logic involved. Five days ago, I posted suggestions for improving Iran because eight months since FACfailed is too long to have not renominated Iran. As one voter on the FAC said, "when was the last time anything about Iran got to featured status?". However, only Jeff responded to the suggestions, but since then almost every positive change I have made to Iran has been reverted by several editors with edit summaries requesting I should post on the talkpage any changes I want to make, despite themselves not having responded to my original post. Thank you for not blindly reverting my edits though. I don't engage in edit wars, so I will try to find some extra material to add to the Economy section and reduce the need for the whitespace. Green Giant 00:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Seems you are a history of revert editing...

Please do not revert edit without specifying reasons. You just did it in Iranian Turks again. What do you like to achieve with it? unsigned comment was added by 203.48.45.194

You stated that they spoke turkic in the army and persian in court. And had deleted the previous material without any source. --Darkred 01:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Well if the kings were Turkic speaking, then they would speak Turkic in their palaces, would they not? Armies also the same. Do you think Shahsavans of Shah Abbas era would speak Persian? Or Qezelbash army for that matter.

By the way, you were the first to revert drastically. All I did was to put things back where it was before your drastic reverting. It is not just the right way. This is collaborative environment. You seem to have a lot of passion for your believes. That is fine. But do not take them here. 59.167.0.169 14:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Norouz

Indeed, however looking at that article, what do you think about the Kurdish section? I think there should be a mention of it but currently it's almost like a full acount of that article - which I think is mostly made up anyway -- - K a s h 10:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but don't you think the section is rather large? -- - K a s h 10:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah although there seems to be a user who is posting in a very similar manner to the Kurdish user Xebat who was banned, I think he is being checked for being a WP:Sockpuppet -- - K a s h 10:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Geber

Keep an eye on this page, this user is disrupting consensus by saying he was Arab. Thanks. —Khoikhoi 03:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

And now check out the Persian Jews page - big controversy going on over there. —Khoikhoi 09:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I have, nice job! :) Keep up the good work, —Khoikhoi 09:12, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Bahá’í Faith

While it is true that Misplaced Pages is not a forum, I thought I could at the least address you on your personal talk page. Your question on the Bahá’í page is a very important, completely valid, and decidedly necessary question. You inquired about the nobility of Bahá’í character and principles and yet also questioned the construction of multi-million dollar shrines and buildings. Therefore, I am moved with a sincere desire to answer your question to the best of my limited ability.

The Bahá’í Faith is a young religion, and while it is spread to over 236 nations and has several million followers, its resources are quite limited. Before I address its limits, I must clarify that the Bahá’ís have not spent "billions" on its buildings, shrines and gardens. The total cost of the recent terraces and buildings came to a total of 250 million and the total cost of all other shrines, restorations, buildings and houses of worship do not exceed more than that amount, in fact it may be even half the amount. Therefore, the Bahá’í community has spent between 300 to 500 million dollars over the past 100 years. This is no where near the "billions" that one may think, certainly not even close to more than half a billion itself.

Bahá’ís recognize that there are hundreds of aid and humanitarian agencies that have built the framework and are already beginning to try to serve many of the concerns you so eloquently addressed. These organizations, in conjunction with nations, already pump several billion dollars into the aid and relief work, and while it may still not be enough, the amount that the Bahá’ís could contribute in a given year would not even make a dent. But this is not the point. Bahá’ís are free to give to these organizations, and certain statistics from studies done by an independent research firm show that Bahá’ís give at least twice the amount of money to these activities than they do to Bahá’í funds. Whether this is good or not remains to be seen. However, Bahá’ís are in fact slowly building the capacity and framework to serve these needs as well, and there are already over a thousand different social and economic development projects developed and run by the Bahá’ís around the world—especially in areas of great need. As you may know, there is also the Huqúqu'lláh, in which Bahá’ís give 19% of their earnings after payment of all life necessities. This special "Right of God" will one day evolve into the very channel that you so desire to see in the Bahá’í Faith.

Nevertheless, the Bahá’í Faith maintains that the single most powerful civilizer and healer of the ills of this planet—and its peoples—is the vast body of Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings. They believe that their religion and the message which operates as its animating purpose is the means toward the transformation of society and the unification of all humanity. These teachings and their promulgation, their acceptance and enactment are far more powerful, impact prone, and important to the future of mankind than any money contribution. That is not to say that we should forget or invalidate any of the references I gave above. Clearly, Bahá’ís see it in their heart and capacity to do all they can, but it is significant to understand the root sentiments behind their actions. Most importantly, those buildings and gardens are silent teachers of the message of Bahá’u’lláh and they stand out as beacons and signs to the world, as evidence of what the world will look like, beauty and perfection, when the world embraces Bahá’u’lláh and His edifying solutions. Nmentha 11:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I see, thanks for the information, and i wish you good luck with your quest. --Darkred 22:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

A point of information, Darkred. The projects on Mt. Carmel did cost about $250M US — not billions. By way of comparision, the Euclid Corridor Project in Cleveland, Ohio, for which I am the design structural engineer, is projected to cost $80M US for roadway, utilities, and streetscape work alone. Overall, the cost is expected to be $120M US including custom buses, maintenance facility upgrades, and off-system roadway improvements to mitigate the traffic effects of the new line. All of this to install a single bus rapid transit line only ten miles long, with seven miles of roadway and streetscape improvements. To spend billions of dollars one needs to move a lot of dirt around. Look at the Big Dig, or the Chunnel. Nmentha's obervations are also on-point. MARussellPESE 13:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I see, to be honest i was merely speaking metaphorically. However 250M US dollars is not far from 1 billion. --Darkred 14:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand. But I was trying to put it into some perspective with respect to the size of this religious community and the magnitude of the issues. The American Red Cross has $2B US in expected commitments for Hurrican Katrina relief alone, and were spending $35M US per day. Reconstruction is another matter entirely.

The UNHCR's budget for 2006 exceeds $1.1B US. The $250M US the Baha'is spent, which took five years to raise, would be a bit more than half of Africa's needs for a single year.

Baha'is do not neglect these issues; in fact, I doubt you'd find a Baha'i who'd object to doubling or tripling humanitarian relief. We do what we can do, and one of the most direct things we can is to live and teach others that we are our brothers' keepers, that trustworthiness and justice are the foundations of civil society, and that genuine love for all of humanity is the key principle to the advancement of the human race. Even Jesus acknowledged the limits of the Disciples' material contributions to society, and advised them to focus on their spiritual ones. (John 12:3-8, Mark 14:3-7, Matthew 26:6-11) Ciao, MARussellPESE 21:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I see, well it's good to hear that you are doing so much humanitarian work, i wish you good luck. --Darkred 01:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Mohammed Mossadegh

I saw that you reverted the IP's work but it seems like those contributions added some names and more info to the article, do you think they were incorrect? because its best to put why you are reverting in the edit summary - IPs have rights to edit Misplaced Pages too.

Anyway nice shiro-khorshid flag! :) -- - K a s h 23:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Doroud

Doroud, I have a suggestion since you are interested deeply in Iranian history, Achaemenid dynasty article sucks right now and since its the first Persian empire it should be treated better for sure. So if you have time, do a collaboration team work on it and improve the article to a FA status like I did in Sassanid Empire, follow the same pattern. I'll help you guys in the proces. Best wishes. Amir85 06:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

To get the fastest and best result, do a team work. Khashayar, Kourosh Neshatian, Mani and .... will help you if you ask them. All the best. Amir85 07:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes

Hi. I guess you just add it to the correct page at Misplaced Pages:Userboxes#Existing_Userboxes. Regards, —Khoikhoi 07:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Reza Pahlavi II

Hey, I don't know if you know much about him, but that article could do with some improvement, I have added a few links and I will work on it more from next week or so -- - K a s h 22:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Aucaman

Don't worry you don't have to revert his actions for too long, he may be banned from editing Iran-related articles because of this arbitation case: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Aucaman =) -- - K a s h 08:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Template

Well from what I got in the message you left me, a given template can be deleted from a page when you for exapmle remove {{any template}} and vice versa. Amir85 16:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, first I created Sassanid template, I put the template:Iran in the footnote section and template:Sassanid in its stead. Amir85 09:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Civility

Acusing other users of racism and making hateful statements about another ethnic group as you did here are not acceptable as per wikipedia policy. Please try to be more respectful towords all other editors in the future. --InShaneee 17:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I am following the rules, hence why you should consider this not a suggestion, but a warning: comments such as this are not allowed. You must be civil towords all other editors here, regardless of your feelings towords them or their contributions. If you continue to be beligerent towords them, you will be temporarily blocked from editing. --InShaneee 16:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm warning you again, do not attack other users as you have here and do not continually revert the edits of other users, either. If there is a disagreement about content, talk to them in a civil manner. There is no excuse for this type of agressive behavior. If you continue to be unwilling to work with other editors in a respectful manner, you will be temporarily blocked from editing. --InShaneee 20:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I am not 'abusing' anything, and I will give you one last warning: accusing other users of being 'liars' and calling anything you don't agree with 'vandalism' is uncivil, and you will be blocked if you do anything of that sort again. Misplaced Pages policy strictly dictates that we discuss article content, and not the users making it. --InShaneee 20:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not taking sides. You can report me to whomever you like, but that still does not give you the right to call another user a liar. --InShaneee 20:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding this edit and others:

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Misplaced Pages by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. --InShaneee 21:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Vox Magna

Please check out the other pages he/she edited:

• Sipahi
• Ahmed Yesevi
• Hajji Bektash Wali
• Safi Al-Din

The person lives in Istanbul, by the way--based on their ip, 85.103.33.69 (talk · contribs). —Khoikhoi 06:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

And here's a 5th one: —Khoikhoi 07:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh. :p There is, on the other hand, a banned Armenian vandal. P.S. - check out the pages I showed you above. Cheers, —Khoikhoi 07:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

No, 3RR doesn't apply to obvious vandalism (i.e. adding "fuck you" into an article) but this isn't obvious, it's just simple POV. Don't break the 3RR, instead you can report him on Sipahi, as he clearly was warned. —Khoikhoi 07:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you know how do report someone (go to WP:AN/3RR) or would you like me to do it? —Khoikhoi 07:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

There may indeed be something suspicious about Vox Magna; at the same time, however, he/she seems to be onto something that's not entirely wrong. See the Sipahi talk page for what I researched on the matter. —Saposcat 07:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Turkish vandal

Huh? Can you be more specific, like some examples please? —Khoikhoi 07:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, are you talking about the racist troll Inanna? She came back yesterday, see the edit history page for Turkish people. —Khoikhoi 07:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Alright, try the Ahmed Yesevi for example. —Khoikhoi 07:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• Sigh* - I told him not to revert anymore on Safavid dynasty but he seemed to just completely ignore me. :( —Khoikhoi 08:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think things are resolved on the Sipahi page. Saposcat basically said that the paragraph before Vox changed it was wrong. The conflicts other pages that Vox edited have yet to be resolved. BTW, very clear 3RR violation on Safavids. —Khoikhoi 08:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't rv again on that page. —Khoikhoi 08:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Civility (again)

Regarding this edit: Please do not blindly remove comments from your talk page, and more importantly do NOT refer to other users as 'vandals' in such a casual fashion. The user you reverted was being very polite and attempting to open a diolouge with you, which is what you should be doing with other users rather than continuing to revert back to what you want on a page. Please try to work to gain consensus with other editors, and above all, be respectful and do NOT make any more personal attacks. --InShaneee 18:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

I've blocked you for 24 hours disruption and rudeness. This sort of thing is really uncalled-for. This appears to be a pattern of poor behavior you've been warned against multiple times. Friday (talk) 18:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC)