Talk:Rostami

Reverted changes
I am restoring the changes that were reverted by IP user 58.173.252.58. This is not a surname page. It is a disambiguation page. The surname page now exists at Rostami (surname). Please don't revert these changes again without discussion here. Also ping to: Coastside (talk) 20:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! the surname page and the disambiguation page will be edited under the guidelines only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.173.252.58 (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Response to Reverted changes
Dear Coastside A revision is being prepared explaining why a family name is used for places. These are absolutely related to each other, please do not split and tear off the page, nor remove/edit the information that you have zero knowledge about them. Thank you!
 * With respect, talk pages are where these discussions get worked out. It's better than simply reverting changes with no explanation. As it is now, there is a disambiguation page at Rostami and a surname page at Rostami (surname) and they are fairly redundant.  This issue appeared on a list of pages needed cleanup at (see discussion).  This is why I attempted to clean up these pages.  I look forward to seeing what you say you are preparing, although it would be better to explain here than just revert and ask other editors to wait.  You don't own the page. Coastside (talk) 23:03, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Dear Coastside please read this as friendly as you can: This not a matter of ownership. Please respect authors for their time spending on Wikipedia enriching its sources. An editor for no reason splits each section of this page to new pages that you call them redundant. Please ask them to provide a reason instead of condemning the writers. That editor has also deleted references, images, detail and hyperlinks and we do not watch our time be unfairly wasted.This "disambiguation listing " is not needed once a page covers everything. please allow authors to develop their work. we do appreciate your kindness <3 <3 <3
 * Thank you for your message. I agree we need to be respectful. Wikipedia (and the world) would be a better place if we respected one another more. I certainly had no intention of condemning any writers.  If you intend to merge pages, you should consider using the merge to template to explain your intentions and prompt discussion.  That way other editors will be aware and will consider holding off making other changes while that merge is in process. Coastside (talk) 01:04, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, if you had a Wikipedia account, you could create a new version of the page in a separate user subpage. That way you could take your time adding information and references and, since you page would not be "live", well-intentioned editors would not revert your changes - because your are basically breaking every guideline for disambiguation pages at Rostami. When you have finished your changes, a disambiguation for Rostami will still be needed for readers who want to quickly scan a list to find the article that they want. Leschnei (talk) 13:12, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * To add to what Leschnei is saying, you probably intend for this to be an article page (a surname page or something else), but it's tagged as a disambiguation page. There should be a separate disambiguation page for the term Rostami, and your article page would link from that.  That is what the person who split off the Rostami (surname) page was trying to do, I think.  I understand you don't like the split, but you can't treat disambiguation pages as if they were article pages. Coastside (talk) 15:23, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

I see you reverted (as I had reverted previously) to make this page a disambiguation page instead of an article page. Please review thread here. There are editors who are trying to make this an article page of some kind, and they are frustrated by loss of content and misalignment with the Rostami (surname) page. I think we should discuss path forward here given the good faith effort to resolve. Coastside (talk)
 * Yes, I understand, please give me a few minutes to work on the solution... Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

New article Rostami (place)
In response to the reverts etc detailed above, I have created Rostami (place). The new article could use some citations. I hope this helps. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

A question for the editors / New article Rostami (place)
Would one of you please explain WHY! instead of merging these little pages (Rostami name, Rostami surname and Rostami places to one page) you just split them into more and more pages? this makes readers confused, authors dissapointed and a big mess in wikipedia! this is where we are at the moment. No reader searches Rostami Name or PLace, they search one keyword, say "Rostami" so there should be one page providing all the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.173.252.58 (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Because Rostami is a disambiguation page not an article. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:46, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * There must be a disambiguation page because when readers search for Rostami, it is not clear what they are searching for. The disambiguation page helps them find the page they are looking for.  Disambiguation pages do not contain encylopedic content, just navigational aid to find the right article.  Take a look at Washington.  This is a disambiguation page. It lists articles on people, places and other articles named Washington.  There is even a link to an article on the name Washington (name), which includes a list of people with the name and a link to an artile on Washington (state).  In general Wikipedia articles follow this approach, breaking the topic into pieces that are of interest to the reader.  How is Rostami different from Washington?  You mentioned that "No reader searches for Rostami (name) or Rostamit (place)".  Right, people will search for Rostami and they will find a disambiguation page that helps them find the right article.  When you say "there should be one page providing all the information", I would ask you to consider if all the content under Washinton was included on the disambiguation page.  That would not be helpful to readers.  The idea of a Rostami (place) article was to have an article discussing all places in Iran called Rostami.  The idea of Rostami (surname) is to have an article about the name and people with the name.  The fact that the lead section in each article has the same information should probably be corrected.  Either the place name came from the family name or vice versa, so one article should point to the other for an explanation of the history of the term "Rostami".  The Rostami (place) article is a kind of set index article for things of a certain type (in this case places with a common name).  Lastly, please consider that if you think most people who search for Rostami would be interested in an article on Rostami (place), then you could argue that Rostami (place) should be the primary topic.  In this case, the article would be placed under the name "Rostami" and the disambiguation page would be renamed "Rostami (disambiguation)". An example that is done this way is London.  The main page (primary topic) is about the city, and a hat note at the top of the page links to London (disambiguation), which contains links to other articles about topics related to "London". Hope that helps. Coastside (talk) 22:14, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Editors Agreement Rostami (place)
Although I see no point in creating such a multilayered and uselessly sophisticated structure, I appreciate your time explaining the details. regarding your examples, we need to consider the sheer bulk of information on those topics (london/washington) are NOT comparable with Rostami. Rostami as one article can cover all these headings in one single page, including origin, examples of its use as the name of people and places. why not leaving this as simple as it REALLY is and saving time for covering more important topics pal! :-) Please take a deep breath and imagine a single page with three subsections. Rostami page, subsection1 origin SS2 examples as a name of people, SS3 examples as the surname of people, SS2 examples as a name of places. Are we done pal?! :-)  with respect, can we agree on that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.173.252.58 (talk) 05:45, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I am really just trying to help at this point. I don't have a desire to split the pages.  As you pointed out, someone else split the surname page.  My issue (and others) is that the disambiguation page itself was not handled like a disambiguation page.  The problem started because that page used the disambiguation tag, which classified it as a disambiguation page instead of an article page.  That's why I and others worked to format it properly as a disambiguation page.  I know what you are suggesting.  I see you want to do two things. First, you want to make the article the primary topic so that the page "Rostami" goes right to that page (which as I said above means moving the disambiguation page to "Rostami (disambiguation)".  And second, you want to merge several pages into one, because you think they do not merit being split. The right way to suggest a merge is with the merge or merge to template.  I honestly don't have a big concern at this point. I explained earlier how I got involved in the first place.  I am merely trying to help you understand as a supportive fellow editor on Wikipedia.  There are ways Wikipedia works by convention, which can be tricky to learn.  Simply reverting other editors changes usually doesn't get the desired result.  I am hoping to point you on the more productive path. Coastside (talk) 07:03, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

user @Shhhnotsoloud
This is unfortunate to see your unreasonable edits are consistent, they were, are and will be reverted unless adding real value to Wiki pages as an author. Your contribution will be appreciated if adding useful information.


 * No IP:58.173.252.58 the reasons for the deletions are clearly explained above. Please stop re-adding lists of people - as these have their own page, and run-on text - as this is a disambiguation page - an index - NOT an article - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 12:55, 14 February 2019 (UTC)