User talk:Azarbarzin

February 2017
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 16:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Why Do think Foreign Policy is poorly referenced ?Azarbarzin (talk) 06:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Twitter is not a reliable source
Your interpretation is wp:synthesis See wp:Twitter and wp:selfpublished. Jim1138 (talk) 09:33, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

user: Jim1138 - Many thanks! I've posted views of Reza Aslan on Ahmadinejad, based on his articles in Foreign Policy and The Atlantic. Are those reliable sources? Azarbarzin (talk) 09:53, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe they are RS. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:57, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

February 2017
Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

This is the second time I am asking you this question - why do you revert the comments of Aslan regarding Ahmadinejad - Do you consider Foreign policy as a poor source? if so. why? Azarbarzin (talk) 22:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

This is the article I referenced: if you continue to delete it you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.Azarbarzin (talk) 22:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 12:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Reza Aslan is on the advisory Board of NIAC - Please pay attention to the reliable sources Azarbarzin (talk) 18:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

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 that 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. Timothy Joseph Wood  20:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * I have used the article's talk page. I have provided reliable sources pertaining Reza Aslan being on the advisory board of NIAC.

October 2017
Your addition to Union League has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Diannaa I am grateful for your note. However, I would like to cordially direct you to read the following page: . - I'm almost certain that you DID notice that the article I used from Sewanee Review, Vol. 20, No. 4 was dated (Oct. 1912 - approx. 105 years ago), pp. 485-497 - allow me to quote from Stanford's site on fair use: "'* All works published in the United States before 1923 are in the public domain.'"-- If I could be of any further help in that regard, plz do not hesitate to ask. Azarbarzin (talk) 02:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Nathan Bedford Forrest
Sorry, but ? What is the point of this? Drmies (talk) 21:28, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Drmies Hi...I have explained it in detail on the arbitration page - Azarbarzin (talk) 21:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * here is a link to the RfA Arbitration/Requests/Case. I'm not sure how to respond, but have tried to give some relevant diffs. In the meantime, User:Azarbarzin, I notice you haven't made many (any?) edits to Talk:Nathan Bedford Forrest to explain your edits to the page. Further, looking through your edit history, I don't see any edits to article talk pages. I'm not sure if you've seen or used them before, but I encourage you to discuss content disputes on article talk pages. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I have posted on the talk page. In all of this I was hoping that when others push the revert/delete button, they would have the courtesy of including a brief reason. Azarbarzin (talk) 22:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * OK--as it happens I am an arbitrator, and I have just voted to decline this premature case. Azarbarzin, you also didn't give a reason to include it. I see you're complaining about a "genuine attempt to divulge & portray the history of his ancestors"--looks like you're suggesting that the side that wants to take the picture is racist? That pony will not fly here. Make your case on the talk page please. Drmies (talk) 23:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I am a firm believer of not accusing others. It's impolitic to do so. I'm not suggesting anything either. I do not know you, hence I would not suggest anything about you. If I came across as sticking a label on your forehead of a racist, I sincerely apologize. I'll refrain from rendering an exegesis on the views of others. I still believe that the African American gentleman is making a genuine effort to portray his ancestors' history. All veterans deserve that. Azarbarzin (talk) 23:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You seem to be thinking I am talking about you when I am talking about your edits. I am not aware that "veterans" are worthy of more ... more what? than non-veterans. Drmies (talk) 01:22, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I quote: looks like you're suggesting that the side that wants to take the picture is racist?I ...Your use of the pronoun you mislead me. I'm not suggesting anyone is racist. The concept of race is archaic. Veterans deserve to have their efforts and sacrifice disclosed, regardless of their cultural background. It's not an issue/concept of "more". Napoleon Nelson, included. cheers Azarbarzin (talk) 11:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Your case request has been declined.
Case permalink: Special:Permalink/809776116

In response to your request for arbitration of this issue, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

In all cases, you should review Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact a member of the community if you have more questions. Kostas20142 (talk) 12:11, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Kostas20142 A bit of old news, but thank you nonetheless. A few friends and myself are discussing it in Talk:Nathan Bedford Forrest. cheers Azarbarzin (talk) 12:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

May 2018
Your addition to Robert Whitney Imbrie has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information.  Hut 8.5  21:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * In case there's any doubt as to the copyright status of the work, it is marked as "COPYRIGHT: © Cambridge University Press 1986" by the publisher.  Hut 8.5  21:46, 31 May 2018 (UTC)