User talk:Ashrf1979

Uyunid dynasty
I have asked you multiple times to stop giving people the wrong information! It is a wrong and all your recourse are not valid. Pictures of coins show nothing of the history. I know everything about these coins, and it is said that it could not have been from that dynasty. The family it self was never Shia. That is the biggest clue in wich the dynasty was not Shia. Pleas stop this wrong doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibrahim888 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Once more STOP vandalizing the article
I have asked you to stop vandalizing the Uyunid dynasty article! But you have kept going! Pleas stop this vandalism, you are giving people the wrong idea of a great history! Ibrahim888 (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Stop the vandalism
Hello Ashrf1979, I have noticed that you keep changing the verified article about the Uyunid dynasty, and wright false information on it. I ask you to pleas to stope changing the correct information into false information. Pleas stop the vandalism. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibrahim888 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bahrain (historical region), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Chaldeans, Eastern Province and Assyrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Iraqi people
There has been a WP:RfC process at Talk:Iraqi people whether or not to cover ancient Mesopotamians, and there has been consensus among the participating users not to include them. Please respect the outcome of this community process. --RJFF (talk) 20:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

December 2012
Hello, I'm Rafy. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Shabak people seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.  R a f y  talk 14:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Replacing Image.
Hi Ashrf1979, you recent image removal on article Ali is unapproved by majority of the editors at the talk page as it can not be a lead image because it depict the artistic depiction and holds a perception of only a small group of people regarding how they perceive Ali. -- Ibrahim ebi (talk) 05:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bahrain (historical region), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rabia and Ahsa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Uyunid dynasty
You appear to be involved in a content dispute in the article and really should discuss your changes on the talk page. Rmhermen (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013
Your recent editing history at Uyunid dynasty shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 16:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 18:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Uyunid dynasty
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Your recent editing history at Uyunid dynasty shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Reported for edit warring
See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:13, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello Ashrf1979. It would be in your interest to respond to this and explain your side of the story. Nationalist wars in this part of the world usually lead to some kind of arbitration enforcement, which permits admins to take action unilaterally. For example the WP:ARBAA2 decision by the Arbcom is often used as a basis for issuing blocks or sanctions. To avoid this sequence of events,


 * Please give us your reasoning and show us that you are interesting in finding consensus for your changes. You do not seem to be willing to follow Wikipedia's rules for reliable sourcing. Last April you were reverting Bahrani people to make Nebuchadnezzar be a Bahrani even though there is no source for that fact. At this link I have proposed that you be indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia. As you may recall, I had suggested last April that this might be necessary if the problems with your edits continued. Here is a typical sequence of events:
 * You change an article to add incorrect information that has no WP:Reliable source.
 * An experienced Wikipedia editor undoes your change.
 * You then get into an edit war with the experienced person, trying to force your change back into the article.
 * We can no longer justify the risk of your adding wrong information to our articles. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit-warring, disruptive editing (POV-pushing), and refusal to discuss. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 21:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I think an indef-block was a bit harsh here. Yes he does have a history of POV pushing which led into conflicts with other users, including myself. But I believe that his failure to respond is mainly due to his poor command of English. I will ask him to appeal and pay more attention to policy next time.--  R a f y  talk 21:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * مرحبا أشرف، أدعوك لأن تطلب رفع المنع عن حسابك وأن تتقيد بقوانين ويكيبيديا في حال خلافك مع مستخدمين آخرين. بإمكانك طلب مساعدتي أو أي مستخدم يجيد العربية إن أحتجت لها.--  R a f y  talk 21:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The discussion at the edit-warring noticeboard which led to the indefinite block can be seen here. Ashrf1979 has been here since 2008, he is not a new user. He misunderstands our sourcing policy, he adds incorrect information and then he will not allow others to fix his mistakes. When he tries to explain himself in English, it is very hard to follow, and it seems he is unable to understand when others respond to him. EdJohnston (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of notable Bahranis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of notable Bahranis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of notable Bahranis 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.

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 notice from the top of the article. Arxiloxos (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Ayat Al-Ghermezi.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ayat Al-Ghermezi.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Bahranis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Bahranis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of Bahranis 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.

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 notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 15:16, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Bahranis


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of Bahranis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Dat GuyTalkContribs 18:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Nazik Al-Malaika02.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Nazik Al-Malaika02.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Iranian songs has been nominated for deletion
Category:Iranian songs, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Semsurî (talk) 16:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Category:Shia Muslim monarchs has been nominated for renaming
Category:Shia Muslim monarchs has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Constantine  ✍  18:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Iranian Zaydis


A tag has been placed on Category:Iranian Zaydis indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Al-Moussawi family has been nominated for renaming
Category:Al-Moussawi family has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Constantine  ✍  08:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)