Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mhhossein (talk | contribs) at 07:12, 17 September 2017 (→1RR violation: yes). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives (Index)

1 s/ 1 2 3 4 5 6

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Thanks

Thanks MHH, for just undone on deletion of historic photo of Zulfiqar.--Md iet (talk) 03:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Seyyed Abdollah Behbahani

On 17 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Seyyed Abdollah Behbahani, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Seyyed Abdollah Behbahani, a Shia theologian and leader of the constitutional movement, was assassinated in Iran and buried in Iraq? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Seyyed Abdollah Behbahani. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih 01:04, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 September newsletter

Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Misplaced Pages. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Refresh Bolivia

While the work of Refresh Bolivia looks worthy, I wanted to warn you that the current version of the article seems to lack any Misplaced Pages:Credible claim of significance of its notability and also lacks sources independent of the organization. You may want to review the General Notability Guideline to understand how to demonstrate notability of the organization. Without such a statement, ideally a cited one, the page could be deleted under the criteria for speedy deletion. I'm not currently proposing it for deletion, but just wanted to let you know to improve the article (if Refresh Bolivia is in fact notable) as soon as possible.--Carwil (talk) 02:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Carwil: So much thanks for the note. However, I'd like to draw your attention to my previous contributions and edit count (more than 13,000). There are of course independent sources. Do as you wish, if you think the subject does not pass our notability criteria. Regards. --Mhhossein 05:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Eid al-Ghadeer

In 2016, we had Eid al-Ghadeer listed September 20 for Iran/Iraq, and September 21 for Shia Islam in general. Is there a reason for the separate dates? There's nothing in the article that explains that. Should it just be on a single date this year? Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 22:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Howcheng: As far as I know, the main reason is the difference approach existing between Shia scholars for determining the first day of each month. This year, for example, each of Iraq and Iran held Eid al-Adha on different days. --Mhhossein 11:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

I just put it on a single day for this year, since that's what the article says. —howcheng {chat} 15:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

@Howcheng: Thanks, it seems nice and correct. But, in spite of what the article says, Eid al-Ghadeer will be held on different days this year. --Mhhossein 17:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Hassan Rouhani's plagiarism allegations

Hello! Your submission of Hassan Rouhani's plagiarism allegations at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

1RR violation

The following - ] is a violation of 1RR on a page with a clear ARBPIA notice on its talk page. I urge you to self revert.Icewhiz (talk) 06:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Icewhiz: Thanks for reminding. You had reverted my change, so did I. Both have done just one revert. I've opened a topic on the article talk page. --Mhhossein 07:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Your original edit was a revert. However, there is also the following stipulation on ARBPIA warnings - "If an edit is reverted by another editor, its original author may not restore it within 24 hours" (as you may see on the talk page). So even if your first edit was not a revert (which it was), you're still running foul of this stipulation. Again - I urge you to self-revert.Icewhiz (talk) 07:08, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Of course my edit was not a violation of 1RR, but per "If an edit is revert..." I'll do a self revert. Thank you again for reminding. However, I'll remove the synthesized parts. --Mhhossein 07:12, 17 September 2017 (UTC)