User talk:Nepaheshgar/Archive 2

finally archived it..--alidoostzadeh 21:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to say that I am very happy persons like you are around. I also thank you for your support to the truth. It was a;lso very nice of you knowing that aside georgian, also bakhtiari and Armenian is used in fereydunshahr county, however the city and the towns and villages which i mentioned still speak Georgian. I have also read some other of your editions. I meet forward to read more from you and maybe meet you in real time. Please feel free to contact me at my yahoo anytime Babakexorramdin 23:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salam. Man yek tarjome ba moqayese se tarjome qabli neveshteam. Lotfan nazardahid.talk:Iranian revolution#chosen translation--Sa.vakilian 03:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation (for moderators since this is wikipedia english): Peace. I have written a translation and compared to three previous translations. Please give me your opinion. --alidoostzadeh 04:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ali! I am going to nominate this for FA soon. It is now under peer review. It would be nice if you could take a look at it and comment on it. Ba sepaas. Sangak 14:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ali jan, dastet dard nakoneh. list e film ha ro ghablan dorost kardam ke badan be iek safheie joda tabdil shod: Filmography of Abbas Kiarostami. Rastee iek maghaleie jaleb peida kardam darbareie naghshe Irani ha dar French New Wave. iek section be Iranian cinema ezafeh kardam dar morede asar irani ha rooie French cinema! Take care! Sangak 09:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide diffs? Khoikhoi 09:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be better if you acted InShaneee to handle it this time; I'm pretty busy right now. Khoikhoi 10:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ali jan! Take a look at Bukhtishu. He is Iranian, isn't he? Sangak 21:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also Yuhanna ibn Bukhtishu. Sangak 21:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user admits that Yuhanna ibn Bukhtishu is not Arab (see the edit history), still added him to the List of Arab scientists and scholars!!Sangak 21:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salam!

Please see [1]. We need to change the WP:MoS for Persian transliteration. MoS forces us to use Arabic transliteration for Persian words. It makes no sense. Please see the problem I have now on transliteration of Kiarostami. [2] Sangak 12:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's make a guideline: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Persian) / WP:MOS-PE. ANy idea? Sangak 12:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I copy/pasted the Arabic guideline to my user:page. let's work here first and then propose it. User:Sangak/Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Persian)Sangak 12:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ali. This is my suggestion:

---

• The Safavids were a dynasty that ruled Iran from 1501 to 1722. They originated in (Iranian) Azerbaijan and are considered by many as one of the greatest Iranian Empires since the Islamic conquest of Persia. A predominantly Azeri Turkic speaking family whose classical and cultural language was Persian^[1][2], the Safavids established Shia Islam as the official religion of their kingdom, reasserted the original Persian identity^[3] of the region, and became the first native dynasty to established an independent and united Iranian state after eight and a half centuries of rule by Arab, Turkic, and Mongol dynasties.^[4][5][6][7]

---

I believe that this is the best and most neutral version. Everything is sourced and all major points are mentioned. What do you think? We could even add a few words about Turcoman militancy to it ... then everything should be fine. Please also see my comments to Grandmaster Tājik 17:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I would like to invite all those who reviewed "Abbas Kiarostami" during last two months to comment on the article at this "final" stage. The article is now featured article candidate. In case you have any comment, please let me know on the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Abbas Kiarostami page. Thanks.Sangak 16:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ali User:Ariana and I had a discussion on Bidel Dehlavi. I think Bidel has a stronger presence in Afghan music than Music of Iran. Apart from that Bidel has a strong presence in Iran similar to Saeb Tabrizi. User:Arania does not accept it. He thinks Bidel's poetry is incomprehensible to Iranians. Also he does not accept having "Bidel" in the article and replaced it with "Bedil". Just in case you have time please take a look at Bidel's talk page. Thanks. Sangak 13:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A link to an Afghan researcher's article [3] also see [4] Sangak 13:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I opened the Request for Comment as a step in dispute resolution on page Iranian Azerbaijan [5] Please provide brief statement of your arguments in first section (Statements by editors previously involved in dispute) The section "Comment" for third party opinion not involved in dispute thus far. You may wish to get acquianted with rules pertaining to RfC [6]--Dacy69 22:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salam

Another Featured article for Iran :-)

I need to thank you for your kind support. Thanks and All the best. Sangak ^e 11:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add those sources to the article then. Just make sure you don't make the intro too complicated. I think the main point is that people in the Republic of Azerbaijan call it "Southern Azerbaijan" (such as GAMOH), and Iranians resent this. Khoikhoi 19:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay done. But I do think it should be moved to the new section usage and etymology. The official position of Iran should be respected in such articles. Also I do not see the reason why controversial matter should be delat with in multiple articles. --alidoostzadeh 19:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate in the discussion. Jahangard 21:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Come on, for obvious reasons. He just keeps helping Iran-Related article and I appriciate that. Arad 03:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

which info are you talking about? Are you guys (you and Heja Helweda) referring to the {{main}} ed parts? They were copy of the main articles of those rebellions. There were already some {{main}}'s. I added some more. If it is something else, let's add that information as well. If it is about Heja Helweda's recent addition, I put the reference somewhere up there in the text, if you guys (gals) want to, we can add the following sentence:

Since 1984 Kurdish resistance to Turkification has encompassed both a peaceful political struggle to obtain basic civil rights for Kurds within Turkey and a violent armed struggle to obtain a separate Kurdish state.

I thought this was a repeat, now I see it may not be. Maybe, we should explain what other basic civil rights (other than language related ones) were lacking specially for Kurdish people after 1983. --deniz 05:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again it's me, Deniz. This time it's about your revert to Khoikhoi's edit on Turkey article. The book is available on Amazon.com, and we can 'Search Inside'. I checked page 199, and I edited accordingly. Can you please revert back, I should not do it, I am on the verge of breaking 3RR. I am happy about this 3RR rule, we get to have a chance to talk maybe because of that :), but you are not talking back. Does doostzadeh mean 'son of best friend'?

ps. search for 'most scholars' on the book's Amazon.com Search Inside site. deniz 03:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to advise you that you are at your limit for reverts for the day. If you revert one more edit, you will be in violation of the 3RR. I mention it so as to give you the opportunity to calm down. You are encountering resistance to your removals, and that should indicate that it isn't some conspiracy blocking you. There are people who feel for the correct reasons that the statements should be included. You should take the time to read them before either getting yourself blocked for 3RR or ending up in an edit war, which doesn't aid the article. I didn't need to tell you this, Ali. I wanted to, in the hopes that you understand that people can disagree with you and still be correct. I hope you can find a way to contribute positively to the article in the future. -Arcayne 02:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think it is now enabled. Newroza ve jî pîroz be! Asoyrun 18:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of edit summary, which you left in Newroz as celebrated by Kurds, is not acceptable. Instead of engaging in these attacks, please invite Heja helweda to the talk page of the article. Thanks, – Riana ^{shiny disco balls} 05:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 23:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't [7] this true? Thanks. Asoyrun 14:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to insist on this, but just take a look at the population chart in that page. The numbers simply do not add up to 54 million. This only damages the credibility of a good article. Just for one moment forget about my presence and sum up the numbers in the table, you will see what I mean. Cheers.Heja Helweda 05:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay you might be right. --alidoostzadeh 02:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ali many thanks for your kind message, and Noruz Piruz. Sorry for delay in responding you to your message, since I went back to Iran for Noruz holiday. Kind Regards, ← ← Parthian Shot (Talk) 00:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your vote here while I was compiling votes, but I noticed that the post didn't show up in your own contributions list, as everytone else's did on theirs. I just wanted to confirm that you did in fact cast your vote as linked? You can respond on my Talk page if you would. :) -Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object to referring to him as Persian, but that doesn't mean he wasn't of Arab origin, unless there are Persian tribes named Taym and Quraish that I haven't heard of. Slacker 00:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a matter of having an Arabic name, but rather a matter of him having an Arab tribal apellation ("Al-Taymi"). He claimed descent from Taym of Quraish. So, even if he was Persian, his origin was Arab. I don't know what you mean exactly by "statements in Persian", but if you mean writings, well some of the figures referred to in WP as "Persian" wrote entire volumes in Arabic; some even wrote exclusively in Arabic, does that necessarily mean they weren't of Persian descent? I propose saying that he was "a Persian ... of Arab origin" to comport with the fact that he belonged to Quraish, or otherwise referring to him as a "Muslim" philosopher only.. Slacker 00:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend, please note that I'm not denying that he may have been Persian in the sense that you speak of, nor am I arguing that the article should not refer to him as Persian. However, if he belonged to Taym, and spoke Arabic, and wrote practically all his books in Arabic, then you can't just omit the fact that he was of Arabic origin. He even has some poetry in Arabic! The "mawali" argument is not valid because he lived well after that system was abolished (that's why you don't see tribal apellations in the names of people like Tusi, Ghazali, or Omar Khayyam). The Sayyids of today are different because most of them don't know Arabic, unlike Fakhr ar-Razi, but saying that they are of Arab origin would not be false (otherwise, why don't we stop calling Robert DeNiro an Italian-American?). If you want to say he was Persian, fine, but don't say he was "of Persian origin." Also, the book by Gazanfar that you cite does not say he was "of Persian origin" but only that he was "Persian-speaking", so I think we should take out that citation and keep the other one by Eaton. Slacker 02:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that they're not contradictory. Slacker 02:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Slacker 02:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are completely correct that your sources are excellent and of the highest quality. please proceed to write the rest of the article, and restore anything that anyone may have removed. It is very possible that the article will be taken to AfD, but if it is strong enough you shouldn't have any problems. I have removed the db tag. If it goes on again do not remove it yourself, but let me know. . I'm a very experienced academic reference librarian, and I can help as needed.DGG 08:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the current mood at WP recently has been against short stub articles. i think its absurd, but in practice you really need to at least start to fill it in very quickly. The best way to write an article these days is to write it first outside WP and then copy it in. DGG 08:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the quotes from the Treaty of Turkmenchay and Treaty of Gulistan as they only seem to rephrase what is already stated and they appear to support the Azerbaijani nationalist concept of a "divided Azerbaijan." -- Aivazovsky 11:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ali, please respond before restoring the quotes again. -- Aivazovsky 21:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding these edits, [8][9][10], you should realize that I am free to remove them if they are unsourced. But you recommend that I add a citation needed, so you seem to acknowledge the need for a citation. Why then did you not tag them yourself? Also, since you support their continued presence in the article, I'm expecting you to find a real source for them pretty soon, or I will re-remove them. Thanks for you help. The Behnam 16:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iranica says they ruled "...parts of Arran and Azerbaijan".Azerbaijani 23:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so we can put "most of Arran and Iranian Azerbaijan", but still, Iranica says Arran, not South Caucasus.Azerbaijani 23:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats what I did before you reverted me.Azerbaijani 23:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I put ..."parts of Arran and Iranian Azerbaijan" so now it matches the Iranica article. Hope its fine now.Azerbaijani 23:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is okay I guess.. But I think it would be better to have their territory at their minimum and maximum extant. I am pretty sure during their max it was most of Arran, Iranian Azerbaijan and actually other territories in Iran. During their minimum, it was probably Nakhchivan or something. --alidoostzadeh 23:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, why do we even need to say the territory? Thats in the main article. I think we should just take out that information completely.Azerbaijani 00:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

20:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Bless you for adding the Persian to Ash-e anar. Is this a delicious soup? I've never tried it. I don't think most Persian restaurants here in the U.S. even have it on the menu. Badagnani 02:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]