http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/9th-UNCSGN-Docs/E-CONF-98-6-Add1.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.241.239.194 (talk) 02:20, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Shatt al-Arab (Arvand Rud), and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. -- tariqabjotu 14:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:Note to self: mediation collapsed.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, a request for mediation has been filed given the deadlock at racism by country. You previously offered comment on it, but were not involved in any edit warring. As such, I'm inviting you to add yourself to the RFM if you feel that you're part of the dispute. You can do so here. If you feel you're not involved in the dispute, please disregard this message and thanks for your earlier opinion. WilyD 21:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self: mediation collapsed.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Racism by country. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Hi, thank you for the barnstar. Also, I don't know how familiar you are with the topic (I'm certainly not), but there is this one article that needs work, Women in Arab societies. Feel free to check it out if you want. Thanks again. The Behnam 19:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:SPS: Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.[3]

Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by a well-known, professional researcher (scholarly or non-scholarly) in a relevant field. These may be acceptable so long as their work has been previously published by reliable third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.

Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP

I think the fact that a wikipedian controls the website makes the site even less acceptable as a source. While we could imagine a personal site of a well-known and established researcher might be a some sort of a source, the ell-known and established researcher himself should be able to produce the referenced sources for his works.

I remember arbcom about a using a personal site of a wikipedian who was a subject of an articleAlex Bakharev 01:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand your sentiment, I'll just note this:

When you want to hang a dishonest man, the easiest way to do it is just to give him some rope

— WilyD

It would be easier, and more pleasent just to hand out ropes and see whose feet stay on the ground. WilyD 13:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I completely understand - but being an administrator is not supposed to make you higher than a regular editor - it just means trusted to behave yourself and not delete the main page or anything. Anyways, I'd like to get past the block - and I'm not particularly worried about the objections raised, which are clearly spurious. Ah well ... sometimes it's nice to work on less stressful articles. WilyD 14:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your balanced view on the topic of the Persian Gulf as well. There is no need to have an argument for the sake of an argument. Actually, I've learned a lot from the debate and realised that some of my own views weren't constructive. --Persan en Japon 17:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm here for the long haul! See you online! --Persan en Japon 18:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it wrong for me to group some of the discussions on the talk page of the Persian Gulf page together. A certain person always leaves long verbouse comments (you know who) and it detracts from the concensus we're trying to reach.--Persan en Japon 13:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleared up some of the talk page, without deleting things so as to avoid being called a revisionist.--Persan en Japon 13:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to the Iran-Bangladesh relations article.Hajji Piruz 21:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yea that would be nice, but I cant find much information.Hajji Piruz 21:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did recently notice the page was unlocked (since it seemed like nobody cared anymore) - but I haven't touched it yet. My historical plan was just to go alphabetically by country down the list, ensuring everyone (except maybe the Pitcairn Islands) had an entry, but I haven't had time yet. Feel free to add any material you feel is appropriate. WilyD 14:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, that's fair enough. I'm not sure when that'll be - keep your eye on it. WilyD 20:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) --Aziz1005 12:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, I think it might be the Karun. The Honorable Kermanshahi 11:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know, do you think that it may be some type of vandalism? Maybe the user didnt see those and was only looking for a reference section.Hajji Piruz 15:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, not that I know of, but I put one in anyways.Hajji Piruz 15:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested ... Sign up then! [1] --Aziz1005 03:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make things clear, Hamedan of Iran has nothing to do with the Qahtani tribes? In Arab books they pronounce it as (Hamithan) or (Hamedhan). Hamadan is clearly the Arabic pronounciation of the Qahtani tribes and should not be merged with Hamedan.--Skatewalk 00:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This is the Hamadan talk page, please add to it [2]--Skatewalk 04:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought your comments at the proposed Arab WikiProject page were really insightful and useful. I'm looking forward to working with you on developing articles in dire need of improvement, expansion and balance. Il'iliqa. Tiamat 13:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say your idea toward Iran is biased and does not represent Iranian. The fake Iranian merit you have received is by an Iraqi user who is not qualified to give you such a reward. Be happy praising yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.125.249.166 (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I did read this article, it contains a lot of unusual information, propagandistic views and weasel words in the article Arab. I therefore would like to get a group with me who are able to rewrite this article in a best way to get best results. Anyone who want to join our team add your name below in the Arab Talk page. Please note that after the team has gathered, we will place "under-progress" tag. Irqirq 14:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for not replying sooner, I was waiting on someone to reply to me onthis subject. I looked at the references he had, the Europeans use the Arabic pronounciation, so he is right on that part. He wants to use the Arabized form.

Also Keep in mind that Persia was heavily settled by the Arabs from 7th-10th century, so the names were Arabized including Hamadan, Arabic was the official language for 300years, the modern Farsi borrowed alot of Arabic words, so you can't blame Britannica for using "Hamadan".

I was thinking, maybe he will prefer to use a distinguished pronounciation (Hamedan), but its hard to change the Arabic name of the city because thats what the city became after the Arabs settled Persia.--Skatewalk 06:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course it should fall under the scope of the WP Arab world since any article related to historical or modern-day Arab is automatically part of the WP Arab world. It is the same when Ctesiphon/Al-Madain which is in modern Iraq fall under the scope of WP Iran, despite the fact that no Persians left in modern Madain. Best regards--Aziz1005 13:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at my original query, I made no mention of AlexanderPar. I asked for some advice from this admin, who started the Arab Wikiproject, on whether these article should or should not be put under the project. I would still like an answer on this. If AlexanderPar has a problem with this, then he only had to go to the [Arab Wikiproject talk page] and put his reasoning there instead of chasing me to this talk page and accusing me of POV pushing. It has only been a few days since he was put on parole by Arbcom.--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 16:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to worry Ahwaz. After all, it is just a template we use at articles talk pages w/ the aim to locate them and enhance them. They are not categories. It doesn't deserve all this fuss. So no big deals. Thanks for letting me know. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now we have settled the matter of what Wikiprojects are for, could I put the WPARAB template back on these talk pages?--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 17:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The appropriate venue where to get the advice is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Whatever they'd recommend you'd follow. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A user known for his/her Anti-Arab agenda made it his/her mission to claim that all Arabic dialects are independent languages, starting with Egyptian Arabic dialect. Egyptian Arabic (Maṣrī مصري) is an Arabic dialect. has to be clearly emphasized in the Egyptian Arabic article

• The only language to branch out of Arabic is Maltese. Can you please help me organize these articles?.

Arabic dialect has to be clearly added in the infobox an openning sentence so it dont get confused as a language!--Skatewalk 20:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that it matters if the article says "Egyptian Arabic" or "Egyptian Arabic dialect". To any normal person, the two mean the same thing. There are plenty of other areas on Wikipedia where those with an anti-Arab point of view are pushing their agenda. It is best to save your efforts for the worst examples, rather than get into a revert war over this.--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 09:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amen my wise Ahwazi friend--Skatewalk 16:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help Zerida (and her sock-puppets) understand that Egyptian Arabic is a dialect (because now she is claiming that its a language!), I think she is already taking it personal! (Egyptian Arabic)I mean once they declare every dialect a Language I will have a beautiful resume with 22 languages on it, but as of now unfortunately the constituition of Egypt and every Arab nation only recognizes one Arabic language as the only Arabic language!--Skatewalk 18:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ahwaz territory. There are question about the truthfulness of the article and whether such a territory exists. Since you contributed to the Ahvaz article, I am hoping that you would consider participating in the Ahwaz territory deletion review to shed some light on whether the Ahwaz territory in fact exists. -- Jreferee t/c 17:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fyi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Michael2314 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Meganslaw&diff=166935224&oldid=165605190 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hisham_ibn_Oamr_Alharbi&diff=prev&oldid=166933818

someone put it on administration board but nobody acted I don't think

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Blockitis.2Ffalse_accusations Reayreu 22:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is nonsense, of course. There has been no check user and there is no correlation between my edits and these users. It is just yet more bad administration.--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 23:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. I don't believe you had anything to do with those accounts. I've retagged them as socks of Neutralizer. Sarah 01:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for standing up for the ethnic minorities of Iran and taking a stand against the Pan-Iranians and for breaking up Persian-chauvinism propaganda.

I have read the article, which by far still expresses the Fars chauvinists’ point of view, regarding the ethnic minorities in Iran. What seems disturbing to me is that the individuals, who are propagating the current Iranian regime's point of view in each and every article related to Iran, do not acknowledge Amnesty International or UN as valid and neutral sources. They keep posting Pan-Iranian propaganda and disguise it as coming from valid sources. The so called valid sources (e.g. disputed individual like ABCs Alexis Debate) actually recycle the Iranian state's biased propaganda, which in turn is picked up and utilized by the Fars chauvinists to emphasize their own view. This seems quite self-contradictory. The same individuals claim to be opponents of the current regime, but at the same they serve the regime's purpose. It makes me question their true cause. Furthermore, they apparently lack in-depth knowledge about the various ethnic groups in Iran and the conditions in which they live in. More specifically they claim that the Balochs supported Iran in their war against Iraq, but on the contrary throughout the history the Balochs have resisted all subsequent Persian/Iranian dynasties. Nevertheless, the Balochs have never identified themselves with the ruling Persian elite. They have always regarded the Persians as suppressors.

The Pan-Iranians also make false allegations about the Persian language being the primary and the preferred language in Iran. Well, I know of many Balochs who don't even understand nor speak Persian. In a scientific viewpoint, their mother tongue, which is Balochi, classifies as the primary language and Persian as their secondary, not the other way round. Furthermore, I don’t know of any university in Iran in which the Balochi language is taught.

Anyway, I admire your patience. Keep up the good work.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morara (talk • contribs) 00:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of Iranian Arabs, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Iranian Arabs. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Jeepday (talk) 11:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2005 Ahwazi unrest is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is discussed at its deletion discussion page 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.

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. Thank you.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

سلام علیکم. ببخشید شما فقط در ویکی انگلیسی می نویسید؟؟آیا در ویکی فارسی هم تا کنون ویرایش داشته اید؟ قاسم منصور (talk) 09:59, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

تحیاتی اخی العزیز. نرحب بقدومک ان کنت راغب بالحضور بویکیبدیا الفارسیة و وایضاً نتشرف بالتعرف علیک.--عباس ☢ ✉ 10:14, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]