User talk:Khoikhoi

5573:

personal ideology of distorting the history of what transpired in 1953 in Iran and the events leading up to it. I have been editing this article for several years and am seriously tired of Boogalouie POV-pushing. Everyone except BoogaLouie has written that he does it, including Binkersternet who often agrees with him. In his most recent edit, and in his ever non-historical,non-factual attempts to push the POV that Mossadegh was dishonorable, he quoted a source, an obscure source at that who has not written extensively on topic, to say that the coup would have not transpired if Mossadegh had not lost certain segments of the population. This is true and it has been said with far more explanatory material by historians of the topic. What the obscure source did not say and what no one has said except Boogalouie is that Mossadegh was moving toward dictatorship. Now, this is pushing a viewpoint that no reliable sources have stated. It is Boogalouie's personal view, pure and simple. And for nearly two years, I have stood in opposition to these types of creeping personal opinion that are attempts to destroy what is established history. Boogalouie is driving reasonable editors away. He drove me away for months at a time in 2009. Then I returned to the article to find that nothing changes. His activities continue and the article did not improve. I have gone through a period of trying to be a friend to Boogalouie to find out where he is coming from and to smooth his feathers, to see if the editing relationship could be reset. He became more antagonistic. Eventually I gave up the effort to relate to him as though he were not personal POV-pushing. I gave it up because, factually, that is what he is doing and has a history of doing. His latest edit to the Iran 1953 coup page is further evidence. I don't know where he gets the time to write long pages of one-sided, non-neutral pages relating to the 1953 coup but he consistently pulls out pages that are non-neutral, ostensibly to prove a point, his personal viewpoint, that mainstream historians do not share.

674:سیفارسی . (ص نسبی ) منسوب به فارس که فارسیان و ممالک آنها باشد. (منتهی الارب ). معرب پارسی . || ایرانی . (حاشیه ٔ برهان چ معین : پارس ). فارسی . عجم . رجوع به عجم وفارس شود. || پارسی . زبان فارسی ، که شامل سه زبان است : پارسی باستان ، پارسی میانه (پهلوی و اشکانی )، و پارسی نو (فارسی بعد از اسلام )، و چون مطلقاً فارسی گویند مراد زبان اخیر است . (حاشیه ٔ برهان چ معین : پارس ). رجوع به فارسی باستان ، فارسی جدید و فارسی میانه و زبان فارسی شود. || ابن الندیم از عبداﷲبن مقفع حکایت کند که لغات فارسی شش است : فهلویه (پهلوی )، دریه (دری )، فارسیه (زبان مردم فارس )، خوزیه (زبان مردم خوزستان )، و سریانیه . فهلویه منسوب است به فهله (پهله ) نامی که بر مجموع شهرهای پنجگانه ٔ اصفهان و ری و همدان و ماه نهاوند و آذربایجان دهند ۞ . دریه لغت شهرهای مداین است و درباریان پادشاه بدان سخن کنند و غالب آن لغت مردم خراسان و مشرق ایران و اهل بلخ است . فارسیه لغت موبدان و علما و امثال آنان است و آن زبان اهل فارس باشد. خوزیه زبانی است که ملوک و اشراف در خلوت خانه ها و بازی جایها و عیش گاهها و با حواشی بدان تکلم کنند. سریانی زبان ویژه ٔ اهل دانش و نگارش است ۞ . (از الفهرست چ مصر ص 19). - تمر فارسی ؛ نوعی از خرمای خوب است . - خط فارسی ؛ خطی که امروز در نوشتن بوسیله ٔ ایرانیان بکار میرود و الفبای آن با الفبای بسیاری از کشورهای اسلامی و بخصوص ممالک عربی تقریباً یکی است . در تداول عام در برابر خط لاتین (اروپایی )، فارسی گفته میشود. || (اِخ ) یکی از مردم فارس ۞ . (حاشیه ٔ برهان ). مقابل ترک و عرب . || زردشتی ، مخصوصاً زردشتی مقیم هند. (حاشیه ٔ برهان ). به دین 3170:

My changes were reverted over and over again by User Tajik, this person over and over again accused my edit as POV and further accused me of trying to destroy integrity of the page. Further going on the discussion page on how "crappy" my version was, and Tajik claimed that s/he has been through all 10 genetic research papers I attached. Now this person has "no" knowledge in science in general, does not know a thing about what I was talking about. He/she then mentions that they have not even actually read the papers, not that it matters because they do not have "any" knowledge in the subject anyway. I did not get into edit war or try to enforce my ideas over other editors, however ignorant they are. But I spent so much time and effort on my edit, and I believe my edits should be varified by a person with even a little knowlege in the matter, not a total ignorant in the subject. what bothers me even more that this user actually doesn't know what I'm talking about, yet accused me over and over again of POV, crappying the page, etc. I stand by calling this user a complete ignorant, as s/he truly meet the definition. But none the less I see what you mean, and I personally did not pursue this argument. Please read the whole argument between me and user Tajik. --

1915:

to wartn you about your behavior, I usually provide a link the the policy or guideline you are violating, or assume you know how to find something as simple as "personal attacks". You are supposed to address the edits, which you can do without attacking the editor, calling them a racist - which you have done in the past. My interpretation iof our policies is rock solid; if anything, I am more of a hard-liner than many of my contemporaries when it comes to citation, reliability, verifiability and neutrality. While I acknowledge that sometimes I am less willing to molly-coddle folk when it comes to enforcement (when being nicer would likely work better), I have often found that it wastes time when folk are only interested in their point of view or an agenda. Case in point: you were determined to add info about an attack on a hair salon based on anti-Muslim behavior, characterizing the attack as anti-Iranian. It took several editors over several weeks to point out that the sources didn't say that. I am still sure you do not feel you were wrong.

6645:"I am the only administrator who has closely followed the various disputes on 1953 Iranian coup d'état page. I have since semi-retired from Knowledge, but I may give in my two cents every now and again. There is an ongoing activist-type campaign by a couple of editors to downplay the US role in the coup, cast the elected primer Minster Mossadegh, who was ousted by the coup, in a bad light, and essentially legitimize the coup. This campaign sometimes goes beyond what is permissible in our polices, and there have been plenty of infringements by the involved parties in the past few months. This is one of the latest examples. Having studied this topic for many years, I would consider Darioush Bayandor to be a fringe source. Given the extreme nature of his views, he should not be cited in the main article about the 1953 coup. He could, however, be cited in an article about the historical viewpoint of the Pahlavi dynasty. Khoikhoi 00:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)" from 937:, her response was (and I am not exaggerating) that she (i.e. this "feminist") had a career to think about and that I could copy the requested photograph myself there and there! (If she had looked at my e-mail address, she would have realised that I had no access to "there and there".) This is the level of co-operation one receives, notably by a "feminist" for whom Bibi Khatoon Astarabadi must be as Jesus Christ is for a Christian. You seem not to have any idea of what you are talking about! You yourself have been instrumental in removing all traces of two main monuments in Tabriz, without ever thinking that as a person living in Tabriz you had the moral responsibility to find substitutes for those photographs. You have been instrumental in removing the dingy photograph of the graveside of 846:. As for the photograph of Iraj Pezeshkzad, if you had any dealing with the literature, you would have known that the photograph at issue was used on the back-cover of Pezeshkzad's book before Revolution (Pezeshkzad is now over 80). The Revolution being 30 years old, this photograph was published more than 30 years ago. As for Morteza Neydavoud, he was born in 1900, i.e. 109 year ago, and in this photograph he is at most 15 (looking at his face, one sees that he is just a teenage boy - no sign of hairs on his face). The photograph is therefore more than 90 years old. Aside from this, this photograph has been in the public domain (in various forms) so long as any living person can remember. With two exceptions, 666:

speak Indo Iranian languages , the correct translation for Persian in Farsi is Fars , also Persian people are not excluded to the Iranian borders as shown on the map .just as the Azerbaijanis are known as an ethnic group due to the fact that they speak Azerbaijani Turkic language and ,Kurds are regarded as ethnic Kurdish people because of their native Kurdish tongue ,Persians or Fars people an ethnic group that speak the Farsi language as their mother tongue . Whether this mistake was done deliberately,or simply by misinformation is irrelevant , in either way it should be changed immedeately cuz it can considered as distortion of facts by the Wkikipedia,

1892:

the subjects he editd or is doing it intentionally. Assuming gtood faith, the first possibility is more probable.. Then he goed to userpages and writes intimidating stuff. He tries to divert a discussion about the content to personal attacks and wars. Another bad habit of him is that he tends to interpret the sources. As he has said many times: he "does not belive", his "interpretation" is different. And having this authoritarian character he only accepts his own interpretations and in general things he belief. His behavior is totally disrespectful. He does this not only to Iranian editors but has also problems with many other non-Iranian editors.--

1987:

saloon source told that the victim was Iranian. Nothing that the motive was Muslim or so. And the Dutch university ban was against Iranians not all Muslims. Uou have this idea that there is an islamophobia and there is nothing called anti-Iranianism. Well two things can be connected, but still there are other motives for being anti-Iranist. Speaking about citations: I did see how compromising you were toward the Panarab POV pusher in the Persian Gulf naming dispute! So: next time there will be no warning for you to behave. We will go directly for your ban. Then there will be some peace in Knowledge's Iranian-related pages.--

2824:. Note that I have showed, by using other edits of others, that his source is not reliable. That is one sentence that he keeps adding is wrong (look at point 1 and 6 of my last link). So what is then an RS? A source that has wrong, contradicting most of the sources (including the Cambridge History of Iran) can not be RS. Moreover, the user bestofmed changes the sentences the way he-she likes. (look at point 6 of my last link above). This is against wikipedia rule to include something that the source does not claim it. I mentioned this in the talk page but the user has repeated the addition of the 1939:

honestly I think that would be useful. I myself hate all race-related discourse. Another thing is that editors truely think that your knowledge of Iran is not accurate. I still feel that I was right abot that hair saloon issue, because the source said Iranian, and did not say Muslim or any thing. It was again you who insisted on the interpretation of sources. Editors were kind enough to let you have your POV once but now you insist on your interpretations, use fool language, spam and attack people personally. So behave well, it is now you against at least 4 editors.--

7013:. He has been tempering with sourced statements, removing "democratically-elected" which is well-sourced, and backed by dozens of academic sources. He's been constantly reverting that page, while refusing to even use the edit summary, let alone gain a consensus for his controversial changes on the talk page. I warned him about this, he responded by making personal attacks against me, saying I don't have the power to block him. He seems well-versed in Knowledge, yet he has a strange editing pattern with long period of inactivity. I believe he is clearly a 9253: 4942: 8415:, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Knowledge administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community 387: 3559:

and give reference to an independent source of information, not the one that express anti-kurdish views of Syrian authorities. I have the same rights as you to edit Al Qamishli article. I forwarded your version of that article to Kurdish parties and organizations, and we are not happy about your version that is offencive and discriminatory against majority of Qamishly population who are kurds. We Kurdish organizations based in the UK are looking to take a legal action against you for racial discrimination.

4629:). It seems that Ahmadbatebi is a new wikipedia user who made some good-faith efforts to update his own biography to make it more accurate, and never had wikipedia's policy clearly explained to him. The whole discussion on his userpage (probably because of some involvement from sockpuppets who have since been blocked) seems to have fallen afoul of the "don't bite newcomers" and "assume good faith" wikipedia policies. I'd appreciate if you would revisit the decision to block this user. Thanks, 3455: 3419: 3383: 3347: 3311: 3232: 963:

English), that is a novelty to me! Not a word of thanks for having spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of my precious time to present a humane face of Iran to the rest of world on the English Knowledge (those faces that you are/have been so eager to remove, are supposed to demonstrate to the rest of the world that Iranians are also human beings!), but only ugly gestures from a group of self-serving people who find being addressed in English as a violation of norms of civility.

352: 2415:

the people who thrive by tagging images for removal should be instructed to be more mindful of their actions; had I failed to notice the latest tagging, also Nevill Mott would have been defaced by now. It worries me a great deal that I need to die myself and in the shortest time the images of a large number of people on the en.Knowledge will follow me to grave. Can one ever be certain that certain things will not just disappear from the pages of en.Knowledge?!

950:

city you yourself are living in; you have laid waste to the English Knowledge entries that I had put together at the expense of hours of my time! Just check the description of the Behnam House on the website of the University in Tabriz. It has been written in such a faulty language that no normal human being can understand what they are talking about. I have gone through tens, if not hundreds, of documents to write that short entry. The same applies to the

8050: 8853: 6803: 7412:" جعل تاريخ ايران توسط يهوديان و اروپاييان براي استفاده ابزاري از ايران براي بهره برداري سياسي و همچنين ايجاد اختلاف در جهان اسلام تاريخي ديرينه دارد. در اين مورد نيز مي توانيد به كتب "دوازده قرن سكوت - ناصر پورپيرار" و كتب مشابه مراجعه كنيد. " Translation: "The distortion of the history of Iran at hands of Jews and Europeans was used as a political tool and also to cause conflict in the Islamic word. With this regard you can also see the book of 9446: 9005: 8910: 8754: 6700: 9187:(i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at 9145:(i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Regards, — 9510: 8258: 21: 933:

to, and you are talking about not having the time to sort things out! Some English-Knowledge administrators are in a position to tell you the extent to which I have been communicating with people all over the world in order to place the things in this Knowledge on solid legal grounds (and for all of these, I have not become one penny richer). In one case, when I asked a self-declared "feminist" to provide me with a photograph of

6369: 4690: 9085:(i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. 5843: 4864: 7334:(who -surprise, surprise- has been banned for edit warring on the very same article after being given a second chance) for edit warring and content dispute. Since the dispute's been resolved since, I'd like to ask you to lift the protection. You're probably well aware of the fact that long-time protection hinders any kind of work on the article and thus foils any attempts at developing it into a quality one. -- 724:? Is it not time that someone puts an end to the destructive behaviour of a person who seems totally out of control? Meisam has not contributed a single sentence to the contents of the English Knowledge, yet he seems totally devoted to the obliteration of all Persian photographs from the English Knowledge! When is something going to happen? The irrational behaviour of this man is just making me mad! 9168: 9126: 9066: 9663: 7901:. Given the history, I think it's safe to assume that this is a deliberate campaign of stalking against certain editors of certain backgrounds. Also given the irregular nature of this user's contributions, most of which consist of reverts or comments against his targets, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Ankimai is actually a sock-puppet of someone else used for this type of stalking. 8332: 8299: 6443: 6410: 6331: 958:

over to here and tag for deletion another photograph uploaded by me. Of course, you yourself have also not been sitting on your hands: you have posted a "last warning" to my fa.Knowledge page, accusing me of uncivility. What is wrong with you Iranians? I tell you: uncivility is responding to someone's note addressed to someone else; my note was placed on your talk page and

2696:) about his behavior. He is doing similar things to me and another person in the Captain Kirk page. The other person is currently blocked from editing pages for 24 hours because of it while Arcayne hasn't been punished in any way. He also also deleted the notices that were placed on his discussion page against abuse and edit wars. Is there any way you can help? 5230:. Look what words he has used. Winkipedia is not a gutter that people raised in gutter would come here and insult others. Please look at the issue at hand: my only "fault" consists of having asked Stifle to act as an arbiter, and now I have to suffer the abuse of a supposed student. Some student! I have just placed an almost identical request on the talk page of 985:

culture to the rest of the world, in a time when that country is being portrayed as a terrorist nation by the public media the world over. This is a serious matter; in the opinion of many outside Iran the difference between "Iran" and "Iraq" is the difference between "q" and "n". Once you get bombed, in the manner of Iraq, then you will get spoken to like

2744:. But I am sad to tell you that some editors resort to quick-reverting of all my edits including removing inline-sourced material. They did not violate the 3RR rule but clearly engaged in edit war to revert any contribution I made. I do not want to go deep into the discussion topic, but editors agreed on putting efforts to balance the section. The user 7428:

permanently, given also his recent comments both in Persian and English wikipedia (edit warring and nationalist POV pushing). I really do not think such users should be able to edit wikipedia since a user that believes Jews madeup Iranian history and Turks have 7000 year history in Iran is not the type of user that should be editing wikipedia. --

8069:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 9137:(i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the 8211:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 8144:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 6113:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 4115:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 9077:(i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the 4798:(by copying-and-pasting the entry and its corresponding talk page) whereby the "history" of the original file has not been transferred properly. I should also be most grateful if you would kindly correct this shortcoming. For details, and why I took resort to the brute-force copy-pasting option, please consult the details 2575:

The emperor is however not allowed to overrule the advice. This is what is in the constitution.) As for the second, yes, there was a lot of media coverage favorable to him. This led to his popularity; that is, he is a kind of politician who fight for people. Bear in mind, though, that this happened a long time ago. --

1139:

page because I gave up, and I also deleted my attacking comment. So should we let all this behind? Sorry for making trouble Again. But still, I still think I have a point and I will continue defending it on the discussion forum, maybe you can give us your opinion about the whole issue... Your opinion is appreciated.

7817:, I can understand the hardship you're going through as an administrator and all the nonsense you have to deal with. I also understand that it's impossible to stop certain editors from disrupting Knowledge with input that lack academic value. But, because I've seen that you have done a good job fighting against 5894:. He is a single-purpose account without a single valuable contribution to the project, and his edits only consist of changing the standard English names of a geographical entity to a non-standard name. Despite several warnnings from other editors, he has refused to cease his disruption of the project. 5750:

article without explaining his edits. I told him that his behavior is not acceptable, especially since he removed sourced info without explaining his edits, and I told him that the issue had been discussed between two parties and an understanding had been reached between them. You are welcome to look

5024:

Can u understand persian? or you believe in some one else's translation? You have written" "fags," "sons of bitches," "whores," "bastards," and telling them to "suck" on your "" among other derogatory homophobic sexual comments" , I should mention I myself am "Gay" dear so I cant be homophobic! and I

2163:

the same sort of blind allegiance that we are seeing occur in many of the articles. While - again - no one should be addressing individual failings of individual writers, it is important to note that historical revisionism is not part of this encyclopedia, and those who would use it as a platform for

1986:

No one has said you are racist or something. Do not make things up. I howver, and I think most other editors, will go asking for your ban. And your lack of knowledge about Iran indeed dioes matter. Someone who thinks Iran is a new name does not deserve to delete a source about Sasanians. And the hair

1957:

spammed your usertalk page; clearly, you cannot provide proof of that. I do not care if you do not trust my knowledge of Iran. I don't expect my knowledge to be trusted. I expect citations, not your or my personal knowledge. Until you learn that, we are going to always be at odds. And, no, the source

1914:

Bax, you have been the largest source of uncivil behavior and personal attacks in the articles. I do not have to be steeped in the knowledge of Iranian articles - clearly, many of the people editing have little in the way of authority about Iranian topics beyond ethnicity. When I go to your user page

858:

they have introduced false colour. As for Fereydoun Hoveida, this photograph was widely available in pre-Revolution Iran. Aside from this, Fereydoun Hoveida being born in 1924, and this photograph showing him as a man of at most 30, the photograph dates from early 1950s at the latest. It follows that

258:

I see you have made alot of contributions to the Iranian Azeri page. After reading the article, im not sure whether the page appreciates the Iranian Azeris appreciation of their Iranian identification. Fro mwhat im reading, the page is more biased towards Azerbaijani nationalism. please contact me on

7949:

is putting false census data, and falsely sourced census data all over California articles. She/he does not post edit summaries and cleaning up after him has become too burdensome. Will you try to engage him in conversation or if he persists deal with him? I may be considered involved because I have

5320:

and is based on scholarly research is "POV." He keeps replacing this map with the one which is not scholarly and outdated. I warned him numerous time to stop vandalizing this article (by placing tags) and tried to talk some reason with him on talk pages. However, he does not cease blatant removal of

5274:

Hi, I would like to remind you of Knowledge's policies and guidelines, specifically WP:CIVIL (, ), WP:FRINGE, WP:OR (), and WP:STALK (). You have also recently been edit warring on Māzandarān Province, Mazandarani language, Tabaristan, and Kermanshah. All of these violations are contrary to building

5033:

also pls answer this: When an admin wrongly blocks a user without enough attention, can I use my other username to talk to that admin? What about if an admin blocks some one unfairly for 1 year? He should wait for 1 year to tell that admin the block of one year ago was wrong? Is it one of wiki rules

4138:

I want to answer your question on Hatoyama, which posted back in April :) Sorry about the lateness. I'd been away. Anyway, living in the US, I haven't been following the Japanese politics for quite some time. I honestly don't know, therefore, about the political inclination of Hatoyama. You may have

3823:

article please. It appears i might be in an edit war which i dont want. I made a simple change to two words which i felt were loaded and contravened wikipedia's NPOV policy. No changes to the context or substance of the article was made. It seems that three other users are taking turns to revert

3169:

Hi there, hope everything is fine. It has been that for a long time genetic page was criticized for not being complete, not by myself, but from many other users for many different reasons, being the admin you probably are aware of that. I have some knowledge of the matter, and tried to make changes.

2574:

No, he wasn't arguing for any particular change. According to him, the correct interpretation of the law is that since ministers are appointed by the emperor, not the prime minister, they have to answer to the emperor. (The emperor appoint ministers according to the "advice" from the prime minister;

1138:

First of all I apologize for my previous behavior. Xashaiar Please let me ask you to forgive me. Sir, Mr. Khoikhoi if you want to block me then it's okay because i deserve it but please I hope you to be unbiased admin, we both break the rules... but if you read my last edit, i said I won't edit that

1052:

due to edit reversion warring. It appears that a single editor with polarised views regarding the subject matter of the article kicked this off by dismissing a significant number of incremental edits that did not align with their personal opinion. Can I request that the article be unprotected to see

7260:

Note evidence like this was also used for Russian case where about 15-20 users were sanctioned. However, I am only concerned with a behaviour of a user due to off and sometimes on wikipedia racism. As a person with partial Kurdish heritage (Kermanshahi), I take offense to the above and it is hard

6673:

If you truly feel I am waging a campaign in violation of wikipedia regs to distort the truth about the 1953 coup I would be more than happy to go before some wikipedia tribunal and give evidence from reliable sources for the changes I've proposed making to the article and let them decide if I'm the

5578:

Oh, and by the way, when I come to Knowledge, I an entirely focused on content and reliable sources. I don't have time for much else though I have long wanted to see this article improve. Instead of improving, it has become a matter of checking sources to ascertain whether they are misquoted and to

5038:

31 hours of my first block not during that 31 hour, pls pay attention, therefore the second block because of breaking of first block was wrong because I didnt break the first block, I dint break second block as well I just answer them in their talk page I didnt edit any pages in encyclopedia. Can I

2569:

Thanks for your response, but I'm still somewhat confused. Kan is saying that the Minister for Health and Welfare should answer to the Emperor instead of the Prime Minister? Is this he a neo-imperialist or is there a different reason why he would say this? I apologize for my ignorance, I don't know

2403:

also from this address, however the problem is that the image of Mott at this address is rather darkish (something that is likely not to reproduce well on less-than high-quality computer screens). Even despite this fact, I think given the circumstances the image would serve the purpose of the entry

1891:

I am - and I think I am not the only one- tired of Arcayne's behavior. He deletes every warning to him on the talk pages. Even he deletes every thing which asks him be civil or even read more about the subject before he comes with big statement. What I see is that Arcayne either does not much about

1744:

How could you tell? Was there a checkuser, or was his pattern of edits simply obvious? I would love to be able to block the nationalist edit warriors on sight but I'm still not sure what all I can do under the revised terms of ARBAA2, and while this was an obvious case, I erred towards only warning

932:

Meisam, there are over 70 million people living out there in Iran, and they seem not to feel any responsibility for sorting things out (that is, insofar as Knowledge is concerned). I am sitting 8 thousand miles away, with the additional handicap that almost none of my e-mails to Iran gets responded

887:

the photographs on the English Knowledge that you have tagged for deletion turn out to have been uploaded by me. It raises the serious question whether you have something against me personally, given the fact that tagging these photographs prove to be nearly your sole "contributions" to the English

8552:

Human geographic articles - for example settlements and administrative subdivisions - may have national and first-level administrative subdivision flags in infoboxes; however, physical geographic articles - for example, mountains, valleys, rivers, lakes, and swamps - should not have flags. Where a

7377:

I was wondering if you could please take a look at User:Unflavoured's conduct on this page. He uses the non-English non-standard term "Irani" to address other editors, which I suspect is meant in a derogatory way. He also insists that the official Saudi version of the events should be given equal

5340:

I'd like to thank you for getting involved in this by blocking the article. I hope it will draw the attention of my opponent to stop accusations and asserting me as vandaliser and get him to the conversation topic. Unfortunately he hadn't referred to my arguments yet. I had already applied for the

5055:

Also can an English admin blocks a user because of some disscutions in the Persian wiki? It has its own admins and the Persian admins should block me not English admins. Also I answered the Persians in Farsi in English wiki because my English is not as good as my Farsi, so I used my mother tong to

4668:

Follow-up: de Déchy proven to be correct photographer. I went through the box of lantern slides at the AGS myself, and removing taping, found a bit of provenance that it was scanned from a German-language edition of a de Déchy book. Found book, page number, they are correcting image information on

3986:

is a reliable source for the claim that the name "Afghan" was already in use in the 7th century AD. That is a totally unscientific claim, since Ferishta lived in the 16th century in India and could not have known that. I have explained that on the talk page, but the new user ignores the discussion

3872:

Yes, but keep in mind that you should be sticking to the content. I applaud your efforts to take the issue to the talk page, but in order for there to be a healthy discussion, stick to the content and content only. Your talk page headers for example are counter-productive and only make things more

3558:

I am an original resident of Al Qamishli and human rights activist. On which evidence you base your history part of Al Qamishli article, which is clearly not factually correct and discriminatory against kurdish population of Qamishli. I was trying to write factualy correct version of that article,

2414:

Thank you for the changes. I believe that the person who had tagged the image (for its additional use in the entry of St. John's College) had been in fault: s/he should have done what you have done, namely eliminated the secondary use of the image, instead of tagging the image for removal. I think

2386:) is jeopardising the existence of the photograph at issue, I propose that the photograph in the latter entry be remove. Incidentally, I have another photograph of Sir Nevill; is it possible that I upload it and replace the present photograph in the entry of St. John's College with the new upload? 2296:

article (besides people checking spelling and such) in recent months besides myself. I had no reply from KneeJuan - the person who was deleting what was as far as I could tell a good despription of the IRI - and I thought people familar with Iran would be in a better position to judge how suitable

2003:

I am going to assume good faith that you have simply forgotten these things, Bax. If you want me to, I will be happy to provide you with Diffs and links proving that each statement you have made here is incorrect. I did not say that Iran is a new name, only that Iran is the proper name for Persia,

1938:

Look Arcayne. DO NOT TOUCH MY COMMENTS AGAIN. ok? then to say something: Please do not spam my usertalk and I am not interested to which policy you refer. YThe only thing I know is that you will be banned and I hope it if you go on like this. And about that case: No one has called you a racist and

957:

If you have problems at fa.Knowledge, try to resolve them there! Don't come over to here and act like a vandal! Yesterday I left a note on your fa.Knowledge page. A person named Raamin got himself in. Remarking that my note was addressed at you, he has taken revenge (just like a Mafioso) by coming

949:

of search on the Internet! Most seriously, I would be deeply ashamed if I were you! If this is uncivil language, your behaviour in the course of the past several weeks has been anything but civil. You have been acting as devil's advocate, without at any time feeling responsibility towards even the

665:

hi Khoikhoi, in the Persian people article ,the Persians are translated as Iranian in Persian, while the term Iranian can be referred to any of the Iranian citizens from Azerbaijani ,Kurd, or Baluch, also Iranian or Indo Iranian is neither correct since Indo Iranians include many ethnic groups who

9104:

Er, I kinda forgot to check my wikimail account for about eight months and just noticed that you sent me a suspicious-looking email on 15.10.2012 with a pdf attachment an a rather minimalistic comment. Was it really you, or was your mail account hijacked by an enemy of the Greek chauvinist junta?

5778:

article. You are evidently a long-time editor on Iran subjects, so you should be able to spot my enthusiasm for what it is: newness to the subject. I have no particular interest in Iran! All I have been interested in doing is restoring a sense of neutrality to that article, such that the tempo of

5658:

to the cited source. Besides the obvious POV issues with User:BoogaLouie's editing, he has a history of falsifying sources, making false attributions and using questionable material on biographies of living people, that's just the latest example of it. Here are two other examples that come to my

5254:

was in that article. However, it seems that that version was a little too simplistic, as the diaspora do seem to call themselves "Circassian" or "Cherkess" even though no one in their homeland ever used that term. So perhaps that needs to be explained? I don't edit much anymore, so I was hoping

4706:

status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient

4653:. Image fi000094 is curiously similar to the de Déchy image. Their provenance claims it was taken in 1933 and was scanned from a lantern slide. In 40 years, the buildings have not changed, and both photographers experienced the same lighting conditions, cloud patterns, and snow patterns. Curious. 4366:

Hi. I would like to start an article on the Hottentot language. I see that you have been involved on the redirect page of the same name. Hottentot is still used in the current linguistic literature to indetify one of the Khoisan languages (Ladefoge and Maddieson 1996, chapter 8). You can also see

3792:

We know as a Muslim Arab people there are no nation called Assyrian it’s false name, we know there are few hundred Christians living in Qamishli ,and they came from Greece and Turkey as asylums and Syrian government give hem full right in Syria ,and most of them they went to Europe and America,

901:

in 30 years ago to images description page (not your source for image as they are not 30 years old). I'm admin in fa.wiki and we have lots of problems due to copy-vio of re-uploading your images to there. Honestly I don't have enough time to accurately check your above comment. JUST ADD SOURCE TO

6982:

Hi! Could you take a look at this article? There were a few reverts, and the ip editor is not willing to engage in the discussion. Imho semi-protection would help. I've already asked Future Perfect at Sunrise about but he's barred Against using admin actions there, though he agrees with me. Best

984:

Now, please leave me in peace and stay where you are an administrator. I have totally lost my patience with you and your fellow fa.Wikipedians. In the meantime, you may consider to ask those 70 million people living in Iran that they might (just might) do something to introduce their country and

459:

Clearly, the software managing the image page is the cause of linking to the latter, incorrect, image file. I should greatly appreciate it if you would kindly look into this problem. I did some attempt to change the second of the latter two addresses into the first one, but was not successful.

4452:

I'm working on compiling a book containing information about almost all Non-indigenous ethnic groups living or working in Pakistan. The population of a particular ethnic group would be obtain respectively from their diplomatic missions in Pakistan including regions with significant populations,

6669:

of the article. Where is there anything untrue about the CIA or Mosaddeq? All I want is to eliminate the cartoonish, propagandistic, good-versus-evil tone of the current article and include reliably sourced information about the involvement of Iranians in the coup and the importance of the in

5572:

And that attack was to cover up the criticism he was receiving on the 1953 Iran coup talk page for a separate long but non neutral page he had drawn up ostensibly claiming that Mossadegh was a dishonorable figure in Iranian history, part of a series of off-talk pages he has created to push his

5516:

This is unbelievable. My "overall behavior" "editing tendentiously and passive-aggressively"????? I've been bending over backwards to play by the wikipedia rules - avoiding edit wars, explaining my problems with the crude, unencyclopedic edits on the talk page. Have you looked at Kurdo's and

6660:

page. I’m trying to remake what is currently an inaccurate, badly written embarrassment to wikipedia. If it looks like a campaign to you it is because your long-term block and the aggressive reverts and claims not backed by sources by the editor Kurdo have seemed to me so patently unfair it’s

3120:

Are you by any chance 1)an Armenian? 2)related to an Armenian by blood, marriage, or freindship? 3) Are you benefiting from the genocide industry directly or indirectly by payments of cash or in kind ( in return for your services and in the form of salaries, fees, book sales, reviews, panels,

962:

on Raamin's talk page. Uncivility is behaving like a Mafioso (as Raamin has done) by coming over to here and tag a photograph for deletion because I told him that he should mind his own business. As for Farsi being the language to be used on fa.Knowledge (you admonish me for having written in

8445:

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your

3034:

This is a malicious decoy complaint from User:Alefbe. My IP is a static IP and is associated with no registered user, it's very easy to point your finger at anyone and shout murderer! but do you have any proof? User:Alefbe is edit warring unconstructively to the point of pure vadalism on the

7427:

and I have explained to him that terms used in the republic of Azerbaijan are irrelavent for a province of Iran, as in Iran, such a term is not used. However, he tries to a cite weblog in his support and he knows already that he can't do that in wikipedia. I request his ban be reinstated

7863:

and etc., as Turks. Of course I do not care too much about those wikipedias (although misrepresentation of history bothers me because others might get the wrong information), but is there a place I can complain about with regards to this blatant distortion of history in other wikipedias?

6899:

This was Binksternet's 6th block in 6th month, last time he was blocked, he also promised to "stick to 1RR" only to engage in further disruption right after he was unblocked. So he has been basically let off hook, I suspect off-wiki lobbying by another admin to have played a role in this

874:

It is remarkable that you seem to have gone on a crusade of removing all Iran-related photographs from the English Knowledge; in many instances you would not have done so it you had made the slightest effort and checked the sources given in the relevant copyright statements. An example is

1962:

say that the attack was motivated out of hatred for Iranians, but rather Muslims. No one is kind to anyone here in regards to allowing POV. My edits are guided by policy and guidelines, nothing else. I don't care whether you are Iranian, Iraqi or Martian. I just want you to maintain some

2030:

I am done with feeding into this bs. Khoikoi, you should be ashamed and de-sysopped, and not necessarily in that order. You've handled this rather extraordinarily poorly. Bax, the warning stands: next time you make a personal attack, there will be repercussions. Full stop. -

8419:, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students. 2958:, regarding your rather incomprehensible cleaning of external links. Methinks you have some ulterior reasons for your actions, as none of your statements seem to conform with reality. As I have mentioned to you earlier, I disagree with you in the strongest possible terms! 6282: 5579:

occasionally move the text of the article forward. Writing an article is not all that difficult but it is extremely difficult when someone like Boogalouie has developed a personal theory of a topic that he spends impressive gobs of time trying to write into Knowledge.

1829:

Persia is redundant, and have said so no less than four times in article discussion (politely). As well, it might be worth noting that the user's only other edit to the article was in December, wherein he reverted another user's characterization of Osama bin Laden

5714:

Hi, Can you look at the new user.. he constantly uses the terms "Persian fascism", "Persian ethnocentrism" and etc. for Western scholars.. Such labels are not helpful for Knowledge. I have asked him to stop several times and engange in proper discussion. Thank

5956:, and you reinstated BoogaLouie's block for using a sockpuppet to evade his block. I do not see the evidence that demonstrates RevolutionExpert is a sockpuppet of BoogaLouie. I have examined RevolutionExpert's few edits for similarity of style, and I do not see 5341:

help of the Mediation Cabal 3 days ago and had just asked for "the 3rd opinion" when I got the message, that you have blocked the article. Thanks again for drawing the attention of all sides on the need to discuss and use the procedures for reaching a solution!

5275:

an encyclopedia, and all are blockable offenses. Please cease from disruptive editing and try to contribute to Knowledge in a more positive way. Consider this a warning, for if you continue in this manner you will be blocked. Khoikhoi 06:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

7378:

weight in the Lead, as the academically-accepted version of the events. This is like a nationalist editor from Turkey, insisting that Turkey's version of events should be given equal weight as the academically-accepted version of the events in the lead of the

3001:

to your attention. I do hope that you will kindly give it the consideration that it deserves. It is my considered opinion that some people on Knowledge are abusing their administrative privileges; sadly, I have been reminded of Mafia practices. Kind regards,

9179:(i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the 5782:

I get the impression you think I am a political hawk out to defend the U.S. or the CIA. That is not the case. My favorite articles to work on are ones about abolitionists and suffragists of the 19th century, and artists, poets, architects and musicians. The

2828:. Now I suggest and ask you to look at iran's talk page and see how the user bestofmed acting against most of the editor (not only me). Moreover he-she accuses me of the ownership of the article. Please count the number of my edits of that page. Thank you.-- 4648:

The source for this image is no longer available, which would be nice to investigate the provenance. The American Geographical Society Library at UWM has the collection of W.O. Field, which can be found digitized on their Images of Russia and Caucasus page

7261:

to edit some articles (with the same user) given that he made such comments. But if there is wikipedia guidelines broken, it is coordinatied editing and voting for nationalistic POV pushing. I have send the relavent evidence to your email. Thank you.--

1648:. Anyway, I will continue my discussion on the talk page and will ask for a third opinion than see if I can proceed to other alternatives. Finally, to be honest I expected a notice on Xashaiar's talk page from you as he kept reverting my edits every time. 6624:

I'll be around the next few days trying to work on determining the prevalence of scholars supporting/not-supporting the notion that the Cylinder is "Charter of Human Rights." Perhaps you might want to address his in the same manner that he addresses it?

2004:

and has been for less than 100 years; maybe its the fact that this is your second language that causes you to make these mistakes, but frankly, I am starting to wonder if your inability to be polite is motivated by something other than language problems.

5659:

mind right now, although I am sure there are plenty more examples, given Booga's track record and his style of editing: 1. He adds a false story to the biography of a living person, essentially accusing that person of being a rapist and endorsing rape!

4049:

For edit waring, for ignoring reasonable requests, for attacking other editors' credibility, for calling other editors prejudiced, and for editing the text in another user's Talk page comment, I've posted a report about about our friend BehnamFarid on

5979:", but I am still interested in finding out what evidence you are seeing. What are all the socks and sleeper accounts that you have discovered? You have not edited since June 7, so I don't understand how you could be part of an ongoing investigation. 5028: 5815:

with the suggestion that, since the mediation is progressing slowly, both images should be removed so as not to imply that the one on the protected page is the "correct" image. I agree with Thepm's request. Would you be willing to make that change?

2735:

I hesitated too much before posting this. I want always to avoid contacting admins and the admins' noticeboards. But you told me that I can leave a message on your talk page if an issue arose. Since February 25th, we started a discussion to improve

2139:

Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own

1297:. I don't object reverting my edits but he can do it edit by edit not after I and others make tens of edits without objections, someone will come and revert all of our work suddenly. I didn't revert the article and will not revert it in the future. 6238:

Hi Khoikhoi. I'd like to request that my user page be deleted. I'd appreciated it a lot - I think I would prefer not to have one, and would rather that it be deleted by an administrator over a blanked page with a history etc. Thanks for your time.

6829:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

2553:

Sorry abut the lateness of my reply. For the first one, I meant to say that the minister is accountable to the Emperor not the prime minister. For the second, I meant to say that his action was applauded in mainstream media. Hope this helps. --

8879:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

8439:

The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and

9566:

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to

8324:

6435:

3584:

This is actually the question I came to ask you; is there more to this than I'm seeing? This user is right that there's a POV problem in that article, and he didn't get any warning except the one from the bot... I'm a little bit puzzled.

7840:

Hi, I do not speak Turkish but recently, I noted that in the Turkish wikipedia they consider the theory that the Medes were Turks (the two users pushing this viewpoint were banned once on English wikipedia but apologized and now are free:

2808:). The second one has a personal attack. I guess you did not react to my reports. Now in Iran page he has made lots of edit, and almost everybody on the talk page is against his edits and in the last 24 hours he has made three reverts ( 5321:

the map which compliments this article, especial this section on Roman history. I seek your advice and guidance in this matter. I dont want to get involved in edit-rv wars and only try to improve that article. Thanks a lot in advance.

3508:पेरु समाजवादी पार्टी (Partido Socialista del Perú) पेरुमा एउटा समाजवादी राजनैतिक दल हो | जुलिओ सेर्जिओ कस्त्रो गोमेस दलको महासचिब हो | २००६ संसदीय निर्वाचनमा दलले १३४१६६ मतहरू (१.२५%) पायो | तर दलले संसदमा कुनै क्षेत्र जित्न सकेन |[२ 4264: 4239: 1839:

I encourage you to participate; I would be delighted to witness how you would handle matters, and might even find it insightful. If you find yourself unable to participate, please let me know, so I may proceed in another direction. -

5929:? I'd recommend locking the article to the status quo version, to prevent their tag-team reverting. Although locking the article may prevent a few productive edits, it may put a stop to the contentious and disruptive edit warring. 7448:. This precisely the type of nationalist edits he was banned for before. I note that users have been banned before for fringe POV pushing and tendentious editing. The fringe source pushing is precisely but of this behaviour. -- 5356:

Dear Khoi, There is a problem we might be having at this case. I did ask for informal mediation and 3rd opinion but there have been no responses, and no willingness to resolve the issue from the other editor yet. 2 questions arise

3511:

Peru Socialist Party is a socialist political party in Peru. Julio Sergio Castro Gomez is the party secretary. In the 2006 parliamentary elections, it won 134166 votes (1.25%). However, it did not win any areas(?) in the election.

2458:

is not acceptable. It had been a long discussion on that redirect. He-She deletes that without any explanation. I hope you see how serious is this kind of edits. I ask you please do something about this user and ask him-her to get

716:? He seems to have set out on a crusade of tagging all photographs ever uploaded by me for deletion (what he does with the works by others, I do not know). One of his latest "achievements" is tagging and removing the photograph of 9603:

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in

9119: 8369:

6480:

9059: 5457:

in Knowledge. According to our records, you participated in a large number of AfD. We are currently soliciting editors with a long record of participation in AfD discussions to send us their feedback via a very informal survey.

3094: 4054:. You might start there if you do want to get involved, I understand however if you don't. I fear there is a language barrier, and I seem to be unable to explain the problem with repeatedly adding YouTube videos to an article.-- 8229: 3039:

article. Ironically it is me who has him under suspicion of using socks, and I have proof to backup my soon to be made sock investigation of him. For more information see the edit history of myself, User:Alefbe and the article

6184:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

6146:

2100:. Upon creation, Ioj jumps into the same disputes as Bayrak did, with same views, and a poor command of English similar to that of Bayrak. Bayrak has already used several sockpuppets. Could Ioj be another? What do you think? 752:

Dear Khoikhoi, could you please kindly find out what underlies the erratic behaviour of OrphanBot? It says that "The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image", where "The image" refers to

6652:

Am I one of the "couple of editors" you refer to whose waging an "ongoing activist-type campaign" to "essentially legitimize the coup"? Who have made "plenty of infringements" of wikipedia policies "in the past few months"?

2570:

much about Japanese politics. Also, I see that his actions were applauded by the mainstream media, and therefore the public began to see him as a hero and an advocate for the people, right? Khoikhoi 04:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

9670: 4890: 3936:

has been reverted a number of times by an unregistered user. There was a debate about the proper name of the the peoples in China who speak Wakhi and Sarikoli and there was a concensus to change the title of the page to

3824:

the article to include words that push a POV. I have read the guidelines and sought to have a discussion on the talk page, unfortunately they seem to not want to discuss it and continue using those specific words only.

1963:

professionalism and not insult me or other editors. This isn't a new request, but one you seem to think doesn't apply to you. This means calling people fools, racists (and yeah, you did call me one) and attacking them.

8883:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

6833:

2279:

more carefully. The idea is that going to a third party should only be attempted after all previous steps fail to resolve the dispute (i.e. once you make a clear attempt to get a consensus with your fellow editors).

4784:--- the originally-uploaded photograph had an editing error (at least it looks like as if there is an error in it), and not being able to make the corrected photograph "current", I uploaded the corrected photograph 4302: 4192:

which directly contradict his claims. I have asked him 3 times to come up with reliable sources and all he can provide are 3 weak links with no significance. This has been questioned by many other users, including

9648: 7310:

to move the article title to "Iranian Azerbaijanis". Im not familiar with the process on fully protected articles. However the template says to ask an administrator to make the edit. Could you move the article to

9405:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 5630:

as it seems there is an editor there in "serious breach of Knowledge code of conduct and core polices." What bugs me is I keep asking what the WP:OR-and-WP:POV is and I never get a reply only more accusations.

3710:. He claims to have support from 3 people on the talk page, but from looking at the discussion page, that is clearly not the case. I undid him, and he instantly reverted me. Any help would be appreciated. -- 2911:. He insists on including external links to non-reliable websites that are merely relevant to the subject (they are only relevant to its name and for that, we already have a link to UN). This was also discussed 9191:. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Regards, — 7445:

HI, user Ebrahimi-Amir is now pushing a psuedo-scholar by the name Zehtabi (who claims the Medes, Sumerians, Elamites, Parthians, Urartu and etc. as Turks). You might want to read the Persian page on Zehtabi:

4852: 467:

has been deleted. I think this must be a mistake, since the photograph could be used under the "fair-use" copyright (to my best knowledge, there is no free image of this ensemble available). With kind regards

6276: 5810:

article on March 28 to prevent edit warring. Since that time there has been a third opinion and a mediation case initiated (with me as mediator). Thepm, who provided the third opinion, recently contacted me

4184:. He claims that the term "Kabuli" is another name for the Pashto language, which is pure POV. He cannot come up with a single reliable source and is stubbornly rejecting and ignoring valid sources such as 2603:

J2 as Anatolia instead of Mesopotamia (Mesopotamian Anatolia or Mesopotamian Levant is still Mesopotamia), While Anatolia includes coastal Med regions with low J2 % & no supported evidence of J2 origin.

1383:

of the article that included his OR by quoting the same Nietzsche was OK for him. This contradicts his reason for removing my addition. his edits on persian related articles concerns me. Please help. Thank

3044:. Furthermore, my edits are mainly layout centric and don't constitute the addition of any new or controversial material. Isn't it a shame that some people like to waste their own and other peoples' time. 3941:, rather than Pamiris of China. Despite this concensus, an unregistered user has been reverting every reference to Tajiks back to Pamiris and has been deleting sources that support the term Tajik. Thanks 9657: 5316:

vandalizes the article because he does not like the Roman map and keeps removing it without any reasonable justification, his argumentation does not show how this map which has been modified numerously

3216:

Hello, friend. Mr.Ozawa has been a powerful in Japan. But he is not a popular man. Because he is a schemer. Knowledge is a fair site. Portrait should be a nice one if he is a evil politician. Thank you.

8171:

on Orartu's talkpage. I'm unclear if you placed that there as a warning that he would be put under sanctions, or to inform him that he is under sanctions. He is not logged as being under sanctions on

7175:

does not address my concerns. If he wants to be unblocked, he needs to admit that he was used as a meat-puppet, agree to having a mentor, and avoid making blind reverts in the future on all articles.

3125:. I don't believe this response is necessary when I've posted information stating that Akcam did his academic research for his doctorate long before his employment with the University of Minnesota. -- 9678: 9172: 9130: 9070: 8416: 3857:(with the exception of his talk page so I could talk to him) which include highly questionable rvts of my stuff. A large part of the problem is KneeJuan's rvting without discussion in talk pages. -- 3669:

would then start to edit-warring, and we already now what will happpen then, you will block me for (not) breaking the 3RR, but not your friend. Also, feel free to block this other fellow contryman,

2454:

that shows how stable was the Iran page before his attacks). Now I have restored to an earlier version to see what Bestofmed means, wants... But one thing is out of my blood control level: the edit

9327: 6661:

motivated me to keep trying despite two years of futility. If it looks to you as though I’m trying "essentially legitimize the coup" and "cast" Mossadegh "in a bad light", then take a look at my

4625:

Hi, it looks to me that the deletion of user:Ahmadbatebi is an error. It seems to me that this user was blocked for no good reason, after a discussion that included a bunch of sockpuppets. (See:

1484:.Unesco workers say "130-150 000" !!! And what's 50,000 people ? Where do you live? Don't world ? Lazs one of the most important ethnical people of Anatolia-Turkey !!! Read that again both of you 8655: 6307: 4481:

03:52, 14 May 2008 EdJohnston protected Komotini ‎ (User:Aee1980 creating new IP socks to revert this article while his registered account is blocked (expires 03:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC))) (hist)

8433:

All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.

5493:

I have asked Skywriter to cool it. However, I am also very concerned about your overall behavior. I'll list my concerns (including diffs) later, but in the meantime I highly advise you to stop

8553:

single article covers both human and physical geographic subjects (e.g. Manhattan), the consensus of editors at that article will determine whether flag use in the infobox is preferred or no.

7256:"I would follow ..’s suggestion not to exacerbate any admin, even Dmcdevit. I personally can’t stand that bigot Kurd Khoikhoi, but we have to work with all of them and drag them to our side." 1861:

It doesn't escape notice that you had plenty of time to respond to my post on my user talk page, and yet still seem to have missed addressing a problem in an actual article. Interesting... -

9490:

being renamed to "Sinhalese language". There is a current move request to change the name from "Sinhalese language" back to "Sinhala language". Perhaps you'd like to drop by and support it?

5056:

answer them. They answer me in Farsi as well, why dont you block them too? (pls have a look to my talk page to see their answers in Farsi). Pls have a look to my answers in the talk page of

6674:

devious “activist” you claim I am. If they find in your favor I'll leave wikipedia. But until I must ask you not to accuse me, portraying yourself as some elder statesman of wikipedia. --

2711:

Dear Khoikhoi, just wish to mention that the above-mentioned photographs have now been restored, thanks to your tireless efforts - thank you! There remains only one problem which I mention

1527:

Islamic science came into being in the 2nd/8th century as a result of the vast effort of translation which made the scientific and philosophical traditions of antiquity available in Arabic.

1053:

whether a constructive dialogue can ensue to address any significant areas of disagreement. Blocking unwilling participants rather than protecting the article may produce a better outcome.

2281: 6975: 3927: 3787: 3729:

Out of curiosity: why do you keep your past accounts (D. N., Q., and H. are the ones I'm sure about) secret? Private, anyway; they're not linked to or mentioned here or on your userpage.

8234:

As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the

5601: 4878:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also 1477:

Khoikhoi What's your problem about Lazs and their language ? Laz was spoking by 33,000 persons in 1983.You know that very well.But now is 2009 !!! And read that the last one:Article of

8646: 5666:, claiming that the Post had reported that Rigi was arrested by "the intelligence services of the United States, Pakistan and Afghanistan,", falsely attributing this report to the Post 5429:

is another one.. lately it seems to be a custom of some countries to try to make a history from the historical relics of their neighbors. I would appreciate permanent ip-protection in

3635: 859:

the photograph is at least 50 years old. Even when one disregards these facts, not only was Fereydoun Hoveida's brother executed in Iran, but also the Iranian state confiscated in 1979

9161: 8547: 4889:

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

2699: 8929:

Doubling of Imbros (Gökceada) article. The district and the island are exactly the same place. Gökceada is the current name of Imroz (Imbros). No need for two articles for one place.

5787:

article I created is now GA-Class, and it tells of one of my favorites, a socialist sculptor who was pro-labor, and had communist sympathies. That's the Binksternet you do not know.

2608:

The same user also insists that J originated in Anatolia! Which is mind boggling since he also insists that J1 originated in Yemen! Instead I used the term Southwest Asia to be safe.

1821:

Seeing as you have voiced doubts my ability to participate politely in article discussion, might you be persuaded to share some of your magnificent wisdom and awe-inspiring civility

7985:

will lead to consensus in favour of making these conventions official, but so far only a few editors have left comments. If you would be interested in taking a look at the proposed

7089: 6639: 1428: 9683:

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. —

9156: 5019: 9037:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 6363: 6289: 9094: 7166:, as they were canvassed on the Azerbaijani Knowledge. Editors should not act as mere revert machines for their ethnic peers, with little or no other contribution to the project. 2730: 8247: 6169: 2007:

And please, don't bother warning me yet again. You don't even know the difference between a block and a ban. Maybe you might want to learn it before tossing around threats, Bax.

745:" This is utter madness! Idiotic to the utmost! If Meisam cannot read English, what is he doing here? Is it not time that someone put this person in the place where he belongs? 7562:

Despite the fact that North Azeri has no relevance to Iran, where South Azeri has a regional language status in Azeri-inhabited provinces of Iran, these editors act as if they

7410: 9033:

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

8252: 5857: 4533:

It is stated that he is of Kurdish origin in the article and I've added a reference to it. But there are still ones who delete that information. Is there a way to avoid this?

3108: 7973:, i.e. conventions that can be used to determine the most appropriate titles for articles related to the Tibetan region. This came out of discussions about article titles on 282:. Among other things, we collected a number of recommendations for getting your point across while keeping out of trouble. We're here to help! In any event, we invite you to 8506:

and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

8204: 6377: 2766:. As you might have noticed I avoided touching the section for almost 2 weeks engaging in discussion to reach a WP:CONS. Following WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF, I asked politely the 2932:

you should answer these two questions 1- Why you insist on your own transcription, while it has not an offical status any where? 2- Why you remove other editors sources? --

2159:

While I can see why clarification that someone isn't being called a "miserable fool" needs to be placed, I think that Schopenhauer's quote was originally written to denote

1918:

My behavior is respectful. Assuming good faith doesn't mean overlooking bad behavior, and your personal attacks have not helped you get any faith from me. Consider that. -

1076:, a relatively new member who pushes for POV and writes long, pseudo-scientific theories on various talk pages that may be interpreted as racist propaganda (for example in 902:

IMAGE PAGES. If you could not found the 30+ publication source, change the copy-right tag to fair-use please. I don't intend to delete these images. Thanks in advanced. --

6131: 4710:

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following

867:

a public property in Iran. Be it as it may, it is perverse, and farcical, that in 2009 one should be haggling about a dingy photograph of a dead man by the name Fereydoun

9457: 4923: 1636:

you will notice that others are reverting my edits which were accompanied by sources. I have not done any revert only additions or modifications (I removed my edit about

9644: 9504: 8724:

Greetings, I noticed your interest in the Knowledge Ainu proposal in the 2005-2006 timeframe, and am writing to let you know I have brought it back up for discussion at

8266: 7318: 4375: 3770:

Hello Mr. Khoikhoi, It's me Mussav. I'm wondering if the 1rr is over. I believe it was 3 months period and since it was started on February I think it’s over now on May.

1816: 2881:

Thanks. 31 hours seems better. I did notice that he seemed to simply ignore your comments. Hopefully after the block he'll pursue some sort of dispute resolution. -

9522:. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. 6345:

I hope I can live up to everyone's expectations, do my best for Knowledge, and take to heart the constructive criticism. Always feel free to message me if I'm around.

6106: 5135: 4071: 3610: 2144:) in his comment. This is really concerning and humiliating Iran and Iranians, as far as I can understand. Could you please help once more with this user? Thank you.-- 6896:. User:Gwen Gale has unilaterally unblocked Binksternet, despite a clear consensus on AN/I that the block, given for Binksternet's harassment of me, was appropriate. 8796: 6319: 6064: 5860:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. 5830: 5151: 4275: 4253: 3121:

speeches, essays, travels, gifts, awards, rewards, films, documentaries, grants, scholarships, aids, and all other forms of personal benefits too long to list here?)

1779: 1058: 7194: 5161: 3826:

Your advice would be much appreciated and if I am in the wrong (i have read all the guidlines and WP policies and know I am consistent with them) I wont pursue it.

2858:

and has been around for several years. In addition, 24 hours seems to be the duration for most first-time edit warring blocks. This duration is even suggested at

1953:

Very well, I will not remove your personal attacks again; if they recur, I will simply report you and you can explain your personal attacks to someone else. I have

1589:

the banned user in that article. Keeping that in mind, what Bejnar is doing is basically meatpuppetry for a banned user. This is not the first time, unfortunately.

9518: 8270:. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license. 7066: 6381:. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license. 4582: 3913:

about the edit disputes on the relevant article talk pages or on my adversary's talk page. Bear in mind all reverts ended with my adversary's version standing. --

3573: 2589: 9713: 5751:

at my edit logs and see for yourself that I have never engaged in socketpuppetry. So, I am asking you kindly to put an end to his disruptive behavior. Thank you!

9010: 8998: 8172: 3950: 2987: 2969: 8436:

All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.

3808: 3118:

Accusations of being "Anti-Turk" and/or Taner Akcam, demands to reveal my "true" identity, the member of a group of Armenian falsifiers, or all this nonsense:

2010:

Golly, Khoikoi - see what only warning one person does? It sends a message that empowers others to act like jerks and condones their behavior. Excellent job. -

8061: 7718: 5203:) I Just want to ask you for semi-protection of this page from further vandalism by IP users. could you please do this? rhanks for your listening. with Regard 5034:

that blocked user should wait for ending of block, even he cant answer in the talk page of that admin about unfair blocking? I shoud mention that I had edited

4305:, and then a bot came in to correct a double redirect so that the page can't simply be moved back again. Can you use your administrative powers to make it so? 3071: 2520:

The article says, "Kan also wrote a best-selling book Dai-jin (lit. minister) in which he tells the minister responsible for the Emperor." What does this mean?

9202: 8557:

Since two admins (me and John) have contributed to the discussion, it may be best to have a trusted 3rd admin actually make the change, so we're all neutral.

8091: 8028:, feel free to hack slash and burn. After a few of the more active geo editors have first say, I plan on setting the community at large to slash and burn it. 3964:(regarding the photograph of Mohammad-Ali Foroughi)? I find it extremely annoying that people come along and do the amoral things that they do. Kind regards, 2778:

methods is informal or formal mediation. May be you can help us resolving the issue quickly as you seem to be interested in Iran related-articles. Thank you.

9732: 9481: 9439: 9026:

if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see

8842: 6621: 6506: 6187:

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

6149:

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

4875: 4857: 3670: 1738: 941:. Frankly, I stand aghast with your attitude! What is that propels you through life? (Your latest "achievement" is the complete removal of the photograph of 692: 9022:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 6992: 6683: 945:, a man almost 90 years old.) These are not rhetorics! Those dingy photographs that you have so successfully managed to delete, were the results of my many 9727: 9449: 8042: 6976: 4493:

As the article is still semiprotected 15 months later, I wonder if you would like to take a quick look and see if you think it could be unprotected now. --

2774:(he removed the message later). Well I am asking you to mediate or point me to a solution in order to stop the edit war. My next step after following most 1349: 1080:; I have removed his comments by now). After asking him to stop, I restored his text, claiming that a talk page is a "discussion forum", clearly violating 9370:, asking few questions. You may be knowledgeable about the topic. I would be more than happy if you could have a look and comment. Thank you very much. -- 7162:

The edit war on that particular article is not the problem. The main issue is the blind nature of his reverts (after months of inactivity), which violate

6202: 2082: 879:; in total disregard of the explicit statement (written in Persian - one assumes that you can read Persian) in the lower part of the source page (that is 4051: 5155: 4032: 3294:

It's good to have the issues sorted. I expect you know much of the story here; nose about my user space for back story, and feel free to email. Cheers,

2463:

before editing one word on that page. That page is the work of so many people with so much discussion. Allowing someone to come in and do the following

8876: 6164: 4080: 4072: 2787: 2425:, and thus inherit the characteristics (often the most unpleasant ones) of their writers! Think of the Daleks: Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate! 6050:

and I can't log in with this account blocked on english wiki because it is a sock puppet of Daniel10 and has been blocked indefinitely. See my other

4242:

you claim that the of the name of the city of Iaşi originates from the ancient Iazygi people who once lived there. Do you have a ref for this claim?

8137: 7847:

I am wondering as a knowledge person in history and also as an admin, what can I do exactly? In tthe Azeri wikipedia, it is worst and they consider

7006: 6339: 4267:

you claim that the of the name of the city of Iaşi originates from the ancient Iazygi people who once lived there. Do you have a ref for this claim?

4108: 3067: 3059: 2598:

J1 as Yemen instead of the Arabian Plate (Arabian Plate includes Yemen is a better geographic term since we can't prove that J1 originated in Yemen!)

290: 8398: 7343: 2621: 9633: 8898: 7766: 5996: 4698: 4092: 3281: 2486:

I would like to know, up to when I have to revert this , when in the Talk page it has been mentioned what are the sources what are the reasons...--

1855: 1837:.Of course, there is little in the way of discussion to seek a consensus before any of these edits, but that goes without saying. Or maybe it does. 688: 9176: 9134: 9074: 9054: 8430:

Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)

7349:

Hi there. As you've not been around, I've unprotected this following a request at RPP. I've watchlisted and will reprotect if it flares up again.

5247:

Could you take a look at this article? I liked it a couple years ago, when it was a very short article that explained Westerners' use of the term

2639:

is not only trying to destroy the article's FA stsus, but also insults others on the talk page. And, if you have time, please also take a look at

9499: 9434: 9303: 8742: 6555: 6541: 6079: 5057: 4684: 3711: 2439: 1427:

Hi Khoikhoi - I see you deleted a previous incarnation of a pan-Arabism article which seems to be resurfacing under variant names, and is now at

589:, you reverted the request for image copy-right to unverified claim of copy-right tag! The CC copy-right have not been mentioned in source page. 9525:

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

8725: 7221: 5878: 4678: 2060: 5223: 5084: 4284: 2188: 2106: 1328: 9476: 7896: 7887:

has been following me around on Knowledge, popping up on random unrelated articles or discussions where I contribute, just to either revert me

4842:. Further, as you may have noticed, that problem with the photograph of Ms Kheradmand was very amiably resolved yesterday. With kind regards, 4719: 1259:

Sorry - yes, of course, the block is fine. But possibly it can be lifted in view of the blocked user's statement not to continue editwarring?

7932: 6598: 6582: 4453:

languages spoken and religious affiliations. I'm not very good with writing so it would be great, if you would like to collaborate with me.--

2093: 850:

on the Persian Knowledge coincides with the one on the English Knowledge, the exceptions arising from the fact that the former photograph is

304: 283: 9351: 7495: 7474: 7457: 3298: 8893: 8175:, nor does there appear to be a prior warning that he would be placed under sanctions. Would you be able to clarify what the situation is? 7830: 6887: 6393: 6014: 5075:

this user was prohibited from editing in en-wikiedia by you for one month and he was noticed that he can't edit with any shape or form.(see

4317: 3873:

personal, which is not what we need right now. Please go back and change them to something that addresses the conetnt, not the other user.

3139: 326: 8577: 4638: 4519: 9534: 8282: 7990: 7982: 7964: 7202: 7184: 7097: 6550:. He/she uses this account mostly to makes random statements like "x is arab" in almost every talk page he/she visits. This is violating 4662: 4353: 4332: 3600: 3123: 2220: 9548:, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter 8737: 8532: 8510: 8306:, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter 6567: 6417:, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter 5988: 5977:

discovery of sleeper accounts, possible sockfarm; still under investigation; block reset pending the completion of ongoing investigation

4928: 4061: 2240: 2046: 2025: 1996: 1981: 1948: 1901: 1431:. This doesn't read to me like an encyclopedia article - do you have any thoughts on whether/under what criterion it should be deleted? 9593: 8497: 8359: 6207: 5444: 5061: 5047:(which r same person) asked for block and an admin blocked me before enough attention. I dont and wont edit any pages in encyclopedia. 4751: 4216:

I realize you don't normally answer questions about editing disputes but could you perhaps point the way to resolution of this dispute

3622: 3159: 2941: 2316:

Please don't do it again, as it is a blockable offense. Once all previous attempts at dispute resolution have truly failed, please try

2097: 1029:. This is a courtesy notice only because you seem to have been involved in some edits or discussion on the subject recently. Thanks, 35:. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. 8993: 7997: 7533:

During recent months, I've seen concerted efforts by nationalistically-driven editors who go against scholarly sources and the common

5640: 4707:

information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

3192:

Thanks, I didn't realize that. We should've taken the issue to the talk page, but I don't think User:TheTriz would complay with that.

2065:

Just one comment -- I see nothing wrong with Arcayne's behavior in any issue I have seen so far. He does seem to be singled out a lot.

9282:

it and make it go away, and no hard feelings; after all, it's just a small token of appreciation. If you like it, just add your name

9214:

Hi, this request concerns a user who you've previously blocked. Any advice you could give about how to proceed would be appreciated.

9042: 8865: 8837: 8719: 8379: 7682: 6909: 6815: 6792: 6490: 6302: 6228: 6068: 5613: 5604:.) If he had shown where the "not spelling his pen name correctly" happened, I could have replied and maybe cleared the issue up. -- 5517:

Skywriter's edits? Do you think perhaps some other editors have been editting not just passive-aggressively, but aggressively?? --

4971:

it and make it go away, and no hard feelings; after all, it's just a small token of appreciation. If you like it, just add your name

4643: 4620: 4615: 2104: 757:(please also note the idiotic sentence "The image ... the image"; what is this sentence supposed to convey? A sane person would say: 8713: 7898:

Looking at his talk page, I noticed that you had actually warned this user previously, for similar behavior towards another editor.

7570:

mentality, editors who ignore you, editors who ignore WP policies/guidelines, editors who ignore academic sources, editors who play

6519: 5526: 4985: 3896: 3882: 3751:

No, a politician cannot be a mayor and a member of the Diet at the same time. So, the article must be updated accordingly. Best, --

3080:

See our edit histories and make your own judgement. I'm not wasting any more time with this. I have more constructive things to do.

2356: 1271: 9613: 8453:

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

6881: 5588: 3225: 2837: 1098: 911: 897:

Dear BF, Its not important when the photos are taken. Taking photo do not mean its publication. Please add source for these images

803: 8081: 7925: 6536: 1933: 1414: 450:

If you copy the address of the deformed photograph (using the address-copying facility of your browser), you will have this one:

7270: 7196:. I would prefer for someone else to be their mentor, but will take them on for a few months if nobody else puts up their hand. 6620:

I know that you are passionate about editing. Wanna try your hand at addressing Folantin's suggestion at bottom of section here?

6514: 6038: 5488: 5483: 5212: 5183: 4723: 4591: 4392: 2179: 1132: 9239: 7364: 6843: 6670:

motivating the US to do what it did. An accurate article would have plenty to condemn about the CIA or praise about Mosaddeq.

6259: 5510: 5382: 5080: 4439: 4221: 3134: 2890: 2096:

in an impressive manner. I think he is responsible for starting the most recent Persian Gulf-related argument under the account

1876: 1724: 1704: 1605: 1148: 765:

a copyright statement there, clearly and unequivocally specifying the "status of the image"! Thanks in advance for the trouble.

9384: 8973: 8817: 8447: 8208: 8141: 8009: 7986: 7970: 7959: 6826: 6767: 6110: 6008: 5969: 5771: 5335: 5178: 4478:

21:23, 18 April 2008 Future Perfect at Sunrise protected Komotini ‎ (edit warring (expires 21:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC))) (hist)

4112: 3261: 3211: 422:

Dear Khoikhoi, it seems that the software running the Knowledge image pages may contain an error. To see this, please click on

5796: 5350: 5201: 5198: 5195: 5192: 3866: 2643:

who is most likely another sockpuppet of NisarKand. I have asked for a checkuser file, but no one has replied yet. Thank you.

2362: 829: 586: 8503: 7484: 5545:

as opposed to the editors themselves. If there are any behavioral issues concerning other users, it should be addressed in a

5417: 2153: 9295: 7446: 5765: 5568:

Editing tendentiously does not begin to describe BoogaLouie's history. He recently filed a complaint against me for a typo,

2671: 1831: 1822: 1617: 1371:

which bothers me (also his answers to others as seen on the talk page). I think his actions are against the wikipedia rules

737:, please note that the appropriate copyright statement is given, the reason for using the latter statement is provided, yet 574: 536: 9430: 9340: 8273:

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

7780: 7777: 7774: 6585:

is looking for supporters, editors and collaborators for creating and better organizing information in articles related to

6384:

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

5825: 5801: 5670: 5669:, when in fact the Post makes no such observation, and only quotes a weblog by Jundullah , saying they had made this claim. 5660: 4542: 3979: 3733: 3680: 3113: 2983: 2712: 2111: 2101: 1253: 1167:) is inserting a totally irrelevant language into the article. He is ignoring the criticism of at least 3 other users (see 883:), you tagged the photograph for deletion. I am utterly dumbfounded by your behaviour. What is mystifying is the fact that 417: 8698: 7599:

doing this. But, he is not the only editor who is actively manipulating scripts for Iran-related articles and pushing for

6787: 5724: 4391:

I notice that you were one of two admins involved in semiprotecting this article over two years ago because of attacks by

2339:

a time consuming, less-than-helpful maize. What exactly would you deem a permissable way to resolve the dispute besides

1402: 1026: 677: 9621: 9180: 9138: 9078: 8387: 8088: 8037: 7245: 6854: 6688: 6494: 6312: 6060: 5943: 5147: 4739: 4271: 4249: 3840: 3468: 3432: 3396: 3360: 3324: 3288: 3245: 3081: 3045: 2293: 1775: 1542: 1208: 1054: 7873: 7437: 6466: 4462: 3996: 3702:

Hi KhoiKhoi, it seems Mttll is back and up to his old tricks again. This time, he is mass deleting whole sections from

3577: 3089: 3053: 2875: 1467: 298: 9652: 9453: 9417:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

8599: 7822: 6294: 5752: 4578: 4454: 3971: 3663: 3569: 3217: 2659: 1586: 1582: 659: 647: 9589: 8355: 8224: 8065:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 7734: 7674: 7638: 6358: 6271: 5704: 5463: 5117:<<it doesn't need special power for blocking me. it just need kissing the ass of administrators as you did.: --> 4403: 3835: 3631: 2124: 1533:

claims. I guess this is a serious violation of wikipedia rules. Would you please do something about this. Thank you.--

792: 412: 9226: 8671: 8212: 8145: 7783: 7607:, to push for irrendentist POV not backed by academia, has been projected by the following users, to name just a few: 7463: 7147:. They are also a long standing member of multiple WMF projects, even helping build Azeri Wikinews on the incubator. 7030: 6547: 6114: 5916: 5681: 5562: 5538: 5421: 5130: 5060:. You may block me for the forth time just because I used my right to answer(the freedom to talk). Regards,Signed by 4116: 3800: 3760: 3595: 3075: 2771: 1353: 1185: 700: 337: 8566: 7080: 5746:

has no right to harass me, since I have not broken any rules. Also, he has been removing sourced materials from the

4279: 4257: 3793:

Canada .we never hearted about Assyrian in Qamishli ,maybe a few people left in Qamishli not more than 200 people.

3741: 3647: 2495: 2241:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=History_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran&diff=274961453&oldid=274952179

1336: 601: 376: 312: 9379: 8604: 7931: 7893: 7055: 5903: 5330: 4177: 3846: 3771: 2924: 2845: 2523:

It also said, "His action was completely unprecedented and was applauded in public media." Did you mean the public

2292:

My idea was to get input from editors in the Iran wikiproject as it seemed there weren't many other editors in the

1789: 1783: 1500: 1445: 989:(which is supposed to be a motivational speech). You all have your heads deep into the sand and do not realise it. 7899: 7813:

This is not okay, especially if this sort of behavior goes unchecked without any intervention from an admin. Dear

6520:

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:BoogaLouie/Archive_2#Have_I_been_disruptive.2C_made_false_accusations.2C_etc..3F

5049:

I havnt got any answer to my questions yet! why the image I have uploaded was vandalism? May I know? just because

4810:) --- essentially, the file "Mohammad Mosaddegh" existed as a "Redirect" file, and therefore "move" did not work. 4128: 2208:"Hailing from Bangladesh, after failing his GCSEs Husain drifted between Islamic groups achieving little of note." 1324: 517: 492: 453: 9426: 9336: 9323: 9019: 8977: 8821: 8571: 8168: 8122: 7978: 7566:

any page they push for these changes in. I think it's very unfortunate to have to face editors with this sort of

7541:, to historic figures, to geographic locations. Simply, what these editors are doing is removing any instance of 7156: 7129: 7105: 6771: 6610: 6298: 6253: 5831: 5812: 4853: 4525: 4379: 4370:. I would like to discuss this with you if neccesary. I will interpret silence as agreement after a short time.-- 4233: 3904: 3814: 3201: 3029: 2979: 2087: 1555: 1380: 1368: 696: 522: 8235: 7296: 7144: 5667: 4822: 3692: 3660: 3276: 2820:). Note that the last one is "actually a revert". The reason why his addition is not acceptable is explained in 1754: 359:

Dear Khoikhoi, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Day, and that 2009 brings further success and happiness! ~

9674: 9472: 9034: 9014:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 8486: 8085: 7891: 7678: 7634: 7391: 7284: 6646: 6474: 5760: 5297: 2405: 1062: 889: 325:

and needs to be re-written. Also, shouldn't the Lakhmids be the group mentioned revolting against the Persians?

9027: 8659: 8490: 8070: 7742: 7690: 5264: 4395:

who has now apparently been inactive for well over a year. I've opened a review discussion on the talk page,

3058:

Dear Khoi. This IP's edits are very disruptive. He does controversial edits and calls all other editors sock (

2855: 2805: 2801: 2584: 2563: 1598: 1038: 9597: 8952: 8620: 8363: 8349: 7888: 7694: 7240: 6970: 6662: 6634: 6460: 5104:

too. in this page as you see he said <<the user User:Bahramm 2 is kurd! (and probably chauvinist!): -->

4567: 4497: 4206: 4152: 3719: 3179: 2693: 2652: 2335:

Obviously you're watching me for blockable offenses and I don't want to make any false moves. I've found the

2265: 1803: 1440: 1112: 580: 265: 242: 236: 230: 224: 218: 212: 206: 200: 194: 188: 182: 176: 170: 164: 158: 152: 146: 140: 134: 128: 122: 116: 110: 104: 98: 27: 8667: 8636: 7910: 5742:. I have never engaged socketpuppetry, and I have clearly no connection to that user whatsoever. The person 3922: 3782: 2821: 2132: 1562: 636: 8651: 8194: 8102: 7942: 6997: 6944: 6932: 6248: 6216: 6033: 5856:. I do not think that this article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at 5807: 5686: 5532: 5227: 5011: 4021:

is causing problems; he is guilty of edit-warring. Could you please kindly look into this problem? Thanks.

2896: 2336: 2310: 2251: 2245: 1641: 1311: 1202: 92: 86: 80: 74: 68: 62: 56: 50: 44: 7010: 6897: 6657: 6190: 6152: 5775: 5498: 5441:... a view of all the recent ips shows consistent attempt at introducing them as something they were not. 2547: 2480:

that again changes the sentences to the way the user wants and not the references say. Is that acceptable?

1657: 1376: 1180: 481: 9422: 9283: 9263: 9241: 9207: 9184: 9142: 9082: 8965: 8921: 8899: 8809: 8765: 8743: 8516: 8157: 7738: 7726: 7698: 7666: 7416:" Note Naser Pourpirar believes all of Iran's history up to the 19th did not exist and was made by Jews! 7134: 7060: 6759: 6711: 6689: 6181: 6170: 6091: 6021: 5067: 4972: 4952: 4930: 4586: 4447: 4140: 3550: 3525: 3503: 3266: 2859: 2438: 2329: 2228: 641: 503: 9367: 7686: 6893: 6866: 5779:

events leading up to the coup will be related accurately, just as in the military articles that I edit.

4770: 2051:

It is not very hard for any body to see your arrogance. And next times no personal attacks to people. --

9617: 9605: 9582: 9575: 8969: 8813: 8704:

Now "File:2005 0308 urkel.jpg" is tagged for deletion. Do you want to save this image from deletion? --

8383: 8371: 8343: 8189: 8096: 8019: 7746: 7399: 7330:

About 2 weeks ago you've protected the article mentioned above on grounds of a report by an IP sock of

7320: 6763: 6482: 6454: 6126: 6051: 5938: 5883: 5709: 5308: 5166:

I see that you've participated in such a vote before. So I'm informing you of a new move request here:

4914:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- 4871: 4711: 4702:. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the 4634: 3972: 3707: 3148: 3009: 2992: 2904: 2270: 1683: 1513:

has added the sentence "The availability of a vast new scientific, philosophical and antiquity work in

1093: 847: 817: 813: 9114: 7301: 3555:

On what basis you blocked my account for editing Al Qamishli page and blocked page from being edited.

1765: 1232: 8869: 8624: 7730: 7670: 7306:

Hi Khoikhoi, a while ago you put the "Iranian Azaris" article under protection. In the discussion we

6819: 6572: 5853: 5720: 5651: 5627: 5413: 5174: 4674: 4658: 4384: 4224:

and specifically could tell me if deletion of a POV tag against the will of the tagger is allowed? --

4124: 2955: 2937: 2912: 2817: 2813: 2809: 2763: 2760: 2756: 2753: 2513:

article, and I was wondering if I could ask you some questions (as you appear to be the main author):

2477: 2470: 2455: 2056: 1992: 1944: 1897: 1807: 1799: 1732: 1518: 1393: 1321: 1319: 1317: 648:

http://en.wikipedia.org/This_article_does_not_cite_any_references_or_sources.#How_to_format_citations

559: 317: 5365:

If one of the parties gives no agreement for official mediation, how should the dispute be resolved?

5362:

How long should 1 wait and if there are no answers can I proceed to filing formal mediation request.

3545: 1306: 1220: 9375: 8917: 8903: 8733: 8632: 8611: 8562: 8033: 7955: 7630: 7035: 6354: 6143: 6132: 3746: 3737: 3674: 3187: 2864:

Users violating the rule may warrant a block from editing for up to 24 hours in the first instance.

2344: 2078: 1547: 809: 8663: 8616: 5281:

Are you sure that you didn't write this by mistake? --Parthava (talk) 05:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

5191:

hello, my friend. according to these vandalism that done by IP users and even some new users. (see

4422: 3484: 3448: 3412: 3376: 3340: 9703: 9177:

provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year

9135:

provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year

9075:

provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year

8681:

I have replace the non-free screenshot with non-free promo. By the way, I found out that you are

8528: 7869: 7491: 7470: 7453: 7433: 7275: 7266: 6324: 5774:

in an arbitration request, you wrote that I have been "constantly engaged in POV-pushing" at the

4611: 4547: 4157: 3652: 3516:

My pleasure. Have a great day! (I assumed you preferred I continued to write on your talk page.)

3085: 3049: 2626: 2340: 2317: 2198: 1966:

And do us both a favor; do not ever presume to counsel me about behavior: I find it offensive. -

1108: 934: 646:

Could you inform GranadasPromegranite/62.56.79.248 that references have to be cited according to

342: 9322:

or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a

8548:

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Icons#Discussing_the_proposed_exception_for_geographical_articles

7658: 5891:

Since you're an active administrator, could you please take a look at this user's contributions

5743: 5735: 5087:.) He even in my talk page insulting me of being chauvinist .like this one in persian language: 4007: 3238: 3231: 2854:

Hi. I agree with the block, however - I'm thinking that 48 hours is a bit harsh. The user has

2473:

that changes the content and still gives reference of the previous version is acceptable to you?

7826: 7370: 6502: 5756: 4997: 4825:, and see whether there is any possibility to save the photograph from deletion. Kind regards, 4516: 4494: 4458: 4400: 4396: 4348: 4312: 4211: 4189: 4148: 3946: 3849:. You'll also notice that following my attempt to engage KneeJuan in constructive dialog I did 3756: 3221: 3164: 2580: 2559: 2193:

Now that my block is expired I'd like to ask you to have a look over what got me blocked - the

1578: 707: 532: 497: 475: 405: 369: 6814:

is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to

6305:. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at 5960:

in action. Did you perform a checkuser test? Do you have some other evidence I am not seeing?

5921:. Both are engaging in counter-consensus POV edits. How should I handle these two breaches of 2998: 2825: 2737: 9556: 9495: 9316: 9197: 9151: 8537: 8403: 8314: 8153: 8113:

page. As you edited the Johann Hari/Talk page between 2004 and 2011, your input is welcomed.

7236: 7125: 6938: 6647:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#1953_Iranian_coup_d.27.C3.A9tat

6630: 6425: 6122: 6004: 5984: 5965: 5949: 5792: 5594:... He recently filed a complaint against me for a typo, not spelling his pen name correctly. 5388: 4630: 4538: 4328: 4185: 4058: 3804: 3765: 3724: 3591: 3130: 2617: 1759: 655: 606: 513: 488: 454:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/19/Brian_Pippard.jpg/422px-Brian_Pippard.jpg

333: 8580:

as inappropriate for the committee at this time. Feel free to explore alternative options.

4900:

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

1640:

Iran as there is an ongoing WP:CONS on the talk page). Second I was preparing to follow the

1458:. Let's hope this puts a stop to the spate of persistent vandalism in these two articles. -- 9413:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 9358: 9050: 8502:

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at

8474: 7795: 7546: 7542: 7217: 7198: 7152: 7093: 7051: 6914: 6679: 6532: 6224: 6198: 6160: 5934: 5716: 5636: 5609: 5522: 5409: 5405: 5285: 5260: 5170: 5143: 4919: 4879: 4766: 4670: 4654: 4371: 4245: 4229: 4171: 4120: 3918: 3892: 3862: 3796: 3697: 3618: 3565: 3521: 3499: 3155: 2933: 2897: 2352: 2306: 2261: 2216: 2052: 1988: 1940: 1893: 1771: 1628:

With all due respect to you but I do not think that I am the one who is not respecting the

1226: 1154: 1004: 684: 294: 279: 8773:

This article should be deleted as the relevant info is already in the Azerbaijan article.

6524: 4650: 4626: 8: 9418: 9371: 9208: 9090: 8981: 8825: 8729: 8709: 8694: 8682: 8628: 8558: 8220: 8029: 7951: 7878: 7148: 6877: 6775: 6656:

If so I must ask you to reconsider your claim that you have been "closely" following the

6350: 6244: 6047: 6039: 5995:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at

5700: 5596:

It took me a while to figure out what he was talking about but it refers to being called

5584: 5240: 5208: 5126: 3560: 2783: 2383: 2382:

Thank you for your response. If placing the photograph in another entry (i.e. in that of

2252:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:History_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran#Deletion_by_KneeJuan

2194: 2074: 1653: 1482: 1436: 1422: 1034: 9610:

Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

8376:

Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

7516:. Nevermind presenting accademic sources and university sources to such users. He won't 6487:

Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

5248: 5121:

he makes me really nervous I think you should extending his block. thanks for your help.

275: 9530: 9468: 8860: 8844: 8761: 8747: 8524: 8482: 8278: 8243: 8200: 8184: 7906: 7865: 7622: 7604: 7596: 7513: 7509: 7487: 7466: 7449: 7429: 7400: 7387: 7339: 7292: 7262: 7172: 7140: 7075: 7026: 6905: 6862: 6720: 6563: 6389: 6073: 6029: 6013: 5899: 5729: 5677: 5326: 5293: 4838: 4792: 4727: 4607: 4368: 4294: 4180:) is pushing for a POV expression and term (and has meanwhile - as it seems - violated 4098: 4088: 3938: 3933: 3715: 3688: 3295: 3285: 3257: 3197: 3010: 2978:

Two anon editors are edit-warring over population figures. I don't know who's right.

2833: 2491: 2395:

is the URL I had referred to and you asked for. I have already taken the photograph of

2149: 1538: 1495: 1410: 1389: 1214: 1128: 938: 880: 784: 678:

http://www.loghatnaameh.com/dehkhodaworddetail-c4407b040598473a99122acce128f89b-fa.html

9252: 5401:. Anonymous ips are annoying such articles daily and have not contributed anything. 4941: 4870:

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for

3845:

I am happy to discuss content being reverted, in fact that is what I was trying to do

9629: 9549: 9394: 9385: 9346: 9291: 9110: 8948: 8792: 8590: 8543: 8307: 7479:

Besides the English wikipedia, the user went on Turkish wikipedia and introduced the

7379: 6988: 6965: 6742: 6615: 6606: 6498: 6418: 6233: 5438: 5426: 5378: 5346: 5217: 4904:

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

4891:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/National Socialist Japanese Workers and Welfare Party

4807: 4775: 4747: 4600: 4593: 4435: 4418: 4385: 4361: 4342: 4306: 4144: 4001: 3942: 3752: 3541: 2886: 2871: 2687: 2576: 2555: 2500: 2285: 2172: 2039: 2018: 1974: 1926: 1869: 1848: 1717: 1697: 1676: 1463: 1332: 1168: 1067: 1043: 759:

It has been identified that the copyright status of the image has not been specified.

528: 508:]. I explained my motives at talk and editsum's, and your third opinion can help us. 397: 361: 260: 8935: 8779: 7821:

in the past, I'm hoping that you continue taking such matters seriously. Thank you.

6729: 4006:

Dear Khoikhoi, I should like to request you kindly to take an appropriate action on

3982:. A new user is inserting factually wrong information in the article, claiming that 1689:

Again, you are wrong, Khoikoi. See my response on my talk page as to how and why. -

791:, destructive is against civility. You also have not answered my former comment yet 444: 323: 9491: 9487: 9414: 9398: 9192: 9146: 9120:

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

8467: 8149: 8118: 8110: 8025: 7936: 7600: 7413: 7355: 7251: 7232: 7121: 7043: 7036: 6928: 6839: 6783: 6626: 6316: 6267: 6118: 6087: 6000: 5980: 5961: 5869: 5821: 5788: 5600:, not by him, but by Kurdo. (I know, big deal, but it was one of more than a couple 5597: 5479: 5235: 4976: 4843: 4826: 4814: 4534: 4467: 4324: 4133: 4055: 4036: 4022: 4011: 3965: 3831: 3778: 3586: 3175: 3126: 3025: 3003: 2959: 2920: 2724: 2716: 2701: 2613: 2426: 2416: 2409: 2387: 2376: 1811: 1750: 1623: 1548: 1344:

He is biased and does not represent the Islamic or Iranian POV. Neutrality needed.

1302: 1237:, whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is 1196: 1144: 990: 951: 942: 907: 892: 825: 799: 776: 766: 746: 725: 717: 651: 632: 624: 597: 509: 484: 469: 386: 329: 308: 9060:

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

4803: 3887:

I think all mentions of KneeJuan in talk headers (by me) have now been removed. --

1766:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:BoogaLouie&redirect=no#Blocked

1379:. His reason is "nietzsche is not an authority on Zoroaster" however the previous 616: 9706: 9698: 9046: 8989: 8934:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

8889: 8833: 8778:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

7994: 7281: 7047: 6848: 6728:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

6675: 6551: 6528: 6470: 6220: 6208: 6194: 6156: 6102: 5975:

Today you exended BoogaLouie's block for another month, with an edit summary of "

5953: 5930: 5922: 5784: 5663: 5632: 5605: 5518: 5256: 4915: 4762: 4716:

Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

4563: 4225: 4202: 4167: 4163: 3992: 3955: 3914: 3888: 3858: 3653: 3614: 3517: 3495: 3480: 3461: 3454: 3444: 3425: 3418: 3408: 3389: 3382: 3372: 3353: 3346: 3336: 3317: 3310: 3151: 3104: 2667: 2648: 2632: 2451: 2348: 2302: 2257: 2212: 1663: 1633: 1613: 1594: 1514: 1372: 1282: 1176: 1089: 612: 570: 555: 541: 464: 8230:

South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute

4799: 4733: 4217: 3732:

mail tattersalt atsign gmail period com if you'd prefer not to discuss it here.

1522: 506:

during the past months. Can you help me and user:Adoniscik out of this conflict

9596:

justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See

9410: 9402: 9330:. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing! 9286:, but again, there's no need to feel upset if you don't. Love and best wishes, 9275: 9271: 9267: 9217: 9099: 9086: 9023: 8705: 8690: 8362:

justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See

8216: 8162: 7517: 7371: 7163: 7018: 6873: 6473:

justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See

6240: 5957: 5926: 5696: 5580: 5204: 5122: 5050: 5040: 5007: 4975:, but again, there's no need to feel upset if you don't. Love and best wishes, 4964: 4960: 4956: 3489: 2847: 2797: 2779: 2640: 2460: 2447: 2392: 2120: 2112: 1649: 1570: 1530: 1510: 1432: 1262: 1244: 1081: 1073: 1030: 1022: 1010: 590: 437:

is displayed. Click now on the deformed photograph, and you will be led to the

4604: 3020:. Also, it's very probable that this IP is associated with a registered user. 2612:

The user is presistant & refuses to open an account or discuss the edits!

2594:

Proxy or IP 74.60.14.141, this user insist on marking the place of origin of:

986: 9721: 9464: 9406: 9188: 8958:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

8802:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

8478: 8239: 8177: 8127: 7918: 7902: 7842: 7814: 7791: 7575: 7567: 7563: 7538: 7534: 7407: 7383: 7335: 7288: 7177: 7070: 7022: 7014: 6999: 6952: 6901: 6858: 6752:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

6666: 6559: 6025: 5895: 5885: 5849: 5835: 5747: 5739: 5673: 5555: 5546: 5503: 5322: 5289: 5108:

he morever insulting me by some bad words like this one in persian language:

5069: 4911: 4901: 4894: 4883: 4836:

Dear Khoikhoi, thank you for your kind efforts regarding the history file of

4756: 4504: 4181: 4084: 4018: 3875: 3684: 3666: 3640: 3253: 3193: 2829: 2767: 2749: 2745: 2540: 2487: 2396: 2322: 2145: 2127:

on an Iran related issue. Has come back and accuse us of being biased and of

1645: 1629: 1534: 1406: 1385: 1364: 1345: 1277: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1018: 322:

What is currently written on this article appears to be a copyright violation

9625: 9287: 9279: 9106: 9015: 8686: 8581: 8066: 7884: 7818: 7787: 7579: 7571: 7409:.. This user was banned before. In Persian wikipedia the user has claimed: 6984: 6956: 6602: 5918:? Alefbe and Mani have been insinuating that I am a sock of Babakxorramdin 5908: 5692: 5655: 5494: 5374: 5342: 5076: 4968: 4743: 4572: 4431: 4414: 3537: 3531: 3304: 2908: 2882: 2867: 2775: 2705: 2683: 2276: 2165: 2032: 2011: 1967: 1919: 1862: 1841: 1710: 1690: 1669: 1566: 1459: 1455: 1358: 1160: 1014: 9544:

Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to

8292:

Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to

7845: 7798:

clearly state that Arabic script is utilized for the South Azeri language)

7794:

mentality, even though academic sources found in the South Azeri language

7307: 6920: 6403:

Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to

2372: 1485: 351: 9658:

File:Assyrian state proposed during World War I.jpg listed for discussion

8463: 8412: 8114: 8106: 7350: 7331: 6924: 6835: 6779: 6746: 6263: 6096: 6083: 5999:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

5864: 5817: 5475: 5241: 5231: 5226:

be sanctioned against. See what garbage he has written on my talk page,

5101: 5044: 4508: 4194: 3827: 3820: 3774: 3703: 3171: 3021: 2916: 2636: 2400: 2364: 1795: 1746: 1558: 1298: 1191: 1140: 1100: 1077: 903: 821: 795: 738: 713: 628: 620: 593: 7114: 7090:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive688#Unblock_request

6525:

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:BoogaLouie/Archive_2#Reply_to_Khoikhoi

5468: 4627:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Joaj/Archive

3854: 1668:

You are wrong. See my response on my talk page as to the how and why. -

712:

Dear Khoikhoi, could you please look into the destructive activities of

8985: 8885: 8829: 8391: 7974: 7852: 6699: 5892: 4559: 4527: 4408: 4198: 3988: 3536:

I saw you are also adding cat. R from alternative language, great!!! --

3476: 3440: 3404: 3368: 3332: 3100: 3095:"Ethno-History and the Armenian Influence upon the Caucasian Albanians" 2663: 2644: 1609: 1590: 1451: 1172: 1164: 1085: 650:. This was posted in the talk page and subsequently ignored. Thanks! -- 566: 551: 550:

by anon user was justified and I had that expressed in the talkpage. --

7520:. He will completely ignore whatever you write and however you reason. 6277:

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Prehistoric carnivora

5691:

What's the rule on writing your own biography on Knowledge as in what

3773:

So can I be normal member just like other members? Thanks in advance.

1375:

that no one is owner of an article. He removes sourced materials like

743:

This image or media does not have information on its copyright status.

278:, a bipartisan effort to improve collaboration on and coverage of the 7883:

Sorry to bother you about this. But I am distressed by the fact that

7860: 7856: 6622:

Knowledge:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Cyrus_Cylinder_and_human_rights

5370:

Unfortunately I have failed noticing these cases stated in the rules.

5029:

I used my second username to answer the admin, not to edit any pages.

5020:

Who told you that I have done such insults which you have translated?

5003: 4703: 2971: 2741: 2510: 1107:

Good morning or evening. Please help me on what to do regarding this

1049: 888:

Knowledge, aside from inserting the "fa" tags into English articles (

754: 734: 721: 271: 6368: 4780:

Dear Khoikhoi, I should be most grateful if you would kindly remove

4689: 3149:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/barack-obamas-1.html

2421:

Yes, I did know that the culprit was a bot. But bots are written by

7017:, possibly a sock-puppet, and should therefore be treated based on 6948: 6558:

are disturbing. I do not want to answer to those comments. Thanks.

5863:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

5842: 5654:

about BoogaLouie misrepresenting a source, and attributing his own

5434: 5398: 4863: 4781: 4512: 4468: 3983: 3611:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Farhanbavealan

1521:). The reference is to what I had added previously. The reference ( 876: 808:

These images need source for being published in 30+ years ago too:

483:

recent edits? They seem rather contentious and libelous. Thanks! --

8685:. I wonder if you don't mind that the screenshot be deleted under 8456:

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

5318: 5111:قدرت خاصی نمیخواد! یه کم ....های مدیران را مالاندن میخواد که کردی 4785: 3978:

Hi Khoikhoi. I hope you are fine. Could you please take a look at

3206: 2796:

Yes khoikhoi, It would be nice if you can help us. I reported the

863:

that had belonged to family Hoveida; this photograph is therefore

20: 9401:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge

5467:. Should you have any questions about this project, feel free to 4555:

2. Am I allowed to delete my contribution in various talk pages?

4298: 4286: 4010:. Some people seem intent to make an issue out of it. Thank you. 2748:

in particular is refusing any edit (although I told him there is

854:: they have taken out the man standing to the right of the frame 547: 7406:

Hi Can you please take a look at the recent action of this use:

1741:

with this message: "User:Hetoum I making crazy reverting spree"

1574: 463:

Incidentally, I have noticed that the photograph on the page of

253: 9638: 9231:{{ers:user:xqbot/LD-Hinweis|Westarmenien|stark überarbeitete}} 8133: 7067:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unblock request

6810: 6794: 6707: 6693: 5858:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Slovakization (2nd nomination)

5251: 4399:, to see if the semiprotection is still thought necessary. -- 4104: 3494:

Not nearly perfect yet, but here is my first attempt: Cheers,

3063: 3041: 3036: 3017: 2347:

could you refer me to someone who might. Have a nice day :-) --

445:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/19/Brian_Pippard.jpg

9662: 5083:). he even with this IP in my talk page change my answers.(see 3662:, the reason is given in the talkpage (see Garzo's last entry 2211:(the "source" cited for that is Husain's book the Islamist) -- 1554:

Hi Khoikhoi. I hope you are fine. Please take a look at this:

1294: 7848: 7480: 6594: 6586: 6578: 5919: 5079:) but he is still editing with this (188.158.197.116)IP (see 3659:

Feel free to revert your friends pov-edit in Syriac language

2297:

the text in question was to the article, than something like

1290: 1111:(note the edit summary which is not fine with me), also this 7193:

Thank you for responding quickly. They have agreed to this

7042:

FYI - due to updated info, and new sources - the article on

6977:

Talk:Insurgency_in_the_Republic_of_Macedonia#Slav_extremists

6281: 3928:

Could you please take a look at the Tajiks of Xinjiang page?

3910: 3909:

It's been a few days now and there's been no response to my

3788:

Assyrian (Assyria) just relegins (Christian) it’s not nation

3471: