User talk:Klymen

Welcome
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! &mdash; Kbh3rd talk 14:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Hi Klymen, thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia. So far I think I like it here. I love research, and I also love a good debate. Hopefully I fit in okay. But thank you very much, you are the first person who has really acknowledged me and I appreciate it! Talk to you later! Karabeara126 06:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Persian/Iran articles
Welcome new user, but please note that the Persian and Iran articles have already had considerable discussion about organization, and the contentious modern history does not belong in the ancient history articles. --William Allen Simpson 18:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello!
Hello,

My name is Aytakin and I have seen the great contributions you have made to articles about of Iran and that is why I am contacting you today. I am wroking on a website (http://www.iranclub.ca] about Iran which will have everything from editorials and deep information on history to current soccer scores and live TV and our own 24/7 radio! I am also working on a wiki for information on everything relating to Iran. I am very much in need of some extra people to help me on this project. If you are intrested please reply, Thank you.

By the way, I wasn't sure if you were Iranian or not, since you didn't mention on your user page. so I decided to write in English. sorry. --( Aytakin ) | Talk 17:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject Iran
Please keep an eye on ths Open Tasks template, and make use of it. deeptrivia (talk) 03:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Azerbaijan
Hi there,

I just wanted to let you know that user, khoikhoi (MOD) keeps including the very offensive term, "south azerbaijan" on the Iranian Azerbaijan page. We should not let him post this propoganda and false information. That term has no place in an encycolpedia article. It is not relevent to the content. What a few seperatists call that region should not be shown here. If we dont stop this, people will start including the "a#abian gulf" as an alternate name on the Persian gulf page.

KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Condi Rice & Iranian Student Rumour
Dear Klyman: I just wanted to point out that there is no justification under Wikipedia policy to permit unverifiable rumour to be placed in an encyclopedia. The Iranian student rumour has been placed several times in the Condi Rice article. Please refrain from placing the rumour in the article again. It violates the following Wikipedia policy: Verifiability. Thank you. --70.114.205.215 18:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Parsis
Do you know what a Parsi is? The term "Parsi" may mean "Persian" but what it "signifies" has been in India way too long to be Persian anymore. Parsis, the Indian Zoroastrian community (excluding Iranis) do not speak Persian, do not dress or eat like Persians or follow Persian cultural customs other than Zoroastrianism. They have become thoroughly Indianized in the past 1300 years they have been in the subcontinent. Also, genetic studies show that their entire mitochondrial base is South Asian, showing great initial intermarriage with Indians prior to adopting endogamy. See Parsi article for details. Parsis generally see themselves as Indians, but are proud of their ancient Persian origins. When someone is called Persian in the modern sense, they mean explicitly "Iranian" as from Iran. A modern Iranian person overall. Parsis are no longer Iranians as they have lived and evolved their separate identity from Iranians and they no longer are completely genetically identical to Iranians, as genetics show. Freddie Mercury, as a Parsi, is also an Indian. Apart from a few years in Zanzibar (and among the South Asian community as well, huge South Asian population in East Africa then) he grew up in India. "Bulsara" is also an Indian surname, not a Persian name. Freddie Mercury's offical authoritative biography by Lesley Ann Jones states him as Indian Parsi, as does his birth certificate (albeit in those days British Indian). He may have sometimes called himself "Persian" as a sale tactic to make himself more glamorous to his fans. A documentary on him "Freddie Mercury: Untold Story" makes this clear. Anyway, regardless of what he may have thought of himself, this is an encyclopedic article, not a opinion article/profile. The fact is, like it or not, he was an Indian. And you know, it really doesnt matter because he personally saw himself more as British than anything else. We should remember him for what he was, a damn great singer, not for his ethnicity. But if we should start calling him Persian/Iranian, we should do the same for other Parsis as well. (ie: Zubin Mehta, Bapsi Sidhwa, Jamsheed Marker (from my native Pakistan) or J.R.D. Tata.) Hope what I said makes sense. Take care! Afghan Historian 21:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)]]. ps: If you want some verification of Parsis idea of themselves, ask User: Sohrab Irani. He happens to be a Parsi.

freddie
his "persian" origins are explained in "parsi"! when people see "parsi", they know this is indian of persian descent. adding "persian" makes hims sound like a modern iranian! do we call Tajiks "persian"? While they may be, they are not called iranians. Sohrab Irani 14:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

also, you make mistake of saying his family considered themselves "persian". if you see interviews, (what few they gave) you'll see that they see themselves as indians. they dont change freddie's persian legacy because freddie kept india and his indian origin private. he wanted them to keep this privacy. they dont push for the change of the belief that much. and it wasnt really that important to him. he was trying keep some truth about his background to the public, so he disguised "parsi" with "persian". Sohrab Irani 14:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

actually this is what brian may said in an interview. and freddie's funeral was indian more than persian as there was no tower of silence but a cremation. he was cremated via zoroastrian rites. cremation's very indian. your logic of persian funeral would apply to other parsis as well like jrd tata and dadabhai naoroji who had towes of silence. parsis are proud of their persian past but when it comes between india and iran, they see themselves as indian. Sohrab Irani 17:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

ps: here's a cite about keeping his roots a secret www.queenonline.com/cuttings.htm Also, for more proof, look at the Sunday London Times Article cited in this wikipedia article on freddie where he is called "Star of India". btw, i added the persian claim to the Indian rock star section. Sohrab Irani 17:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Freddie Mercury
Hi Klymen, unfortunately I'm going on wikibreak right now, so I have no time to examine the situation, but I can tell you what should be done: Mushroom (Talk) 12:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If the article is getting vandalized, it could be temporarily protected or semi-protected, and the vandals should be blocked after they have been properly warned. This can be done by any administrator, so feel free to contact one of them.
 * If this is a content dispute instead of vandalism, and you need someone to mediate between you and another editor (or a group of other editors), please consider seeking the help of a mediator (or informal mediator). He/she will certainly do this kind of thing better than me ;)

about scanning books
about scanning books to prove he's persian, most books, (including lesley jones offical bio) call him parsi indian. also, it's not fact, as his dna's partly indian and he doesn't even know the language! your sources are from music fan club editors (jacky smith is the head of the queen fan club) and vhi, whereas mine are offical biographic material provided by the family. he has persian descent of course, but "parsi" signifies that fact. and what about other parsis? why cant we call them persian? but to be neutral, we merged them to "first indian and persian rock star". user mandarvich felt it was the best way. Sohrab Irani 16:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Baron Cohen
What is a fact? That his mother has Iranian ancestry? Far from it. It's almost certainly wrong. It started on Wikipedia and spread, as these things do, all over. It's been on Wikipedia for almost half a year. Before September you couldn't find it anywhere else, online or off. Now, of course, thanks to us, it's everywhere. It's the ultimate Wikipedia victory when we create our own source. I blame myself. I am an idiot for not removing it in August when I should have. If I did, we wouldn't be having this conversation. So, that's a mistake I won't make again, that's for sure. Now everyone who wants to say his mother is Iranian has a "source"! (which, curiously, used the exact same wording as our Wikipedia entry did back in the day). Anyway, see the long discussion at Talk:Sacha Baron Cohen, I'm certainly not the only one who doesn't want information that's almost certainly false and totally unconfirmed (i.e. there has never been an interview or anything where Baron Cohen actually said it himself, nor of course, will there ever be). I hope you remove it, because I certainly plan to as soon as my 3RR up. This whole affair started with Wikipedia and I am really working to end it here as well. Mad Jack 05:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The strongest evidence to me was this guy who claims to be related to him and gave a full detailed geneaology of his mother (and says she is of German Jewish ancestry). Most of his posts are on Talk:Sacha Baron Cohen or over on my talk page (of course that's not a reliable source for an article, but...). He's also Israeli and he says no one in Israel knows anything about Baron Cohen's ancestry. I know there are sources dating from the past few weeks - mostly reviews and the like - that mention the Iranian stuff, but we've got to give ourselves credit for that one. If there are really sources pre-dating Wikipedia (i.e. from before July or August of this year) I will be really pleasantly surprised. Also, his mother's maiden name is apparently Weisser, which of course isn't Iranian..... So I dunno. Mad Jack 05:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Same problem with the sources you just cited. The first is the Guardian article from September of this year which uses the exact same language as our very own Wikipedia article did and is clearly a paraphrase (see discussion about that on Talk:Sacha Baron Cohen). The next is Yahoo Movies, which credits no author and is not a reliable source in general. The next is an article from one week ago. All are post-Wikipedia and none were done with Baron Cohen's personal involvement so it's clear the information is not coming directly from him. Mad Jack 05:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, like I said before, anything that predates Wikipedia could be reliable. Basically anything before July of this year. Why on earth would Yahoo Movies be a reliable source? It's exactly like NNDB, the IMDB, or Wikipedia. A gigantic collection of biographies with no credited authors and no cited sources. Anything without a credited author fails WP:RS. I could start my own site, call it the "FDHB.com" and put in a biography of every famous person ever. Would that make me a reliable source? As for the Guardian, see the discussion at Talk:Sacha Baron Cohen. I'm not the only person who realizes they obviously used Wikipedia because their wording is almost exactly like ours was at that time. I'm aware there's a multitude of sources that's sprung up in exactly the last month that says his mother is of Iranian origin, just as I'm aware that if I had deleted that bit of info in August, there wouldn't be a single such source. You know how you do or don't do something, and then months later you regret it and wish you could do it over again? That's exactly how I feel about that. Like I said above, Wikipedia created this and now we can rejoice that it's come full circle, I guess. Now, you told me that it's "well known in Israel" and that you would find sources, presumably ones predating roughly summer 2006, that say his mother is of Iranian origin. Mad Jack 06:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're going to contact Kristy Scott? Excellent! Thank you very much. However, you should ask her what her source was if she doesn't say Wikipedia or denies it (which I can plausibly see her doing). You'd be surprised how many news and media sources take our information nowadays, whether they explicitly acknowledge it or not. That's why it's important to remove uncited info as soon as possible. Thanks again, Mad Jack 06:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, as far as I can tell, that Guardian article in September was the very first to mention Persian (I googled it in August and found nothing except us at the time). Mad Jack 06:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not using the guy with the German info as a source (nor did I plan to include his info in the article), but I do believe he is right. As for Yahoo, again, any website that includes biographies of hundreds and thousands of people and credits no authors or sources is not reliable, whether it has "Yahoo" in the name or not. The Guardian is, of course, a reliable source, which is exactly my problem in this case. :-) Mad Jack 06:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please look at the conversation on Jack's user page User_talk:Jack_O%27Lantern- the info was added back on April 15 by a vandal so it's unlikely to be true. Arniep 23:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

To Klymen - actually Wikipedia is not "obligated" to keep anything in any article, even if it's been reported in a reliable source. For example, on the Baron Cohen article, there are at least three other editors beside me (Arniep, Remygreen, and the anon IP with the geneaology) who would like the information not to be in the article because of reasonable doubt that it is false. As for the Guardian thing, come on! Their text is nearly identical to what ours was at the time! It's blatantly obvious. I don't see the need for keeping the information there so even more reliable sources can be created to prove it. :-) Don't you think it's a little strange that the only piece of information in the media out there are the exact same two lines that have been on Wikipedia? I.e. "An Israeli of Iranian heritage" or "of Persian Jewish descent". That's it. No mentions on whether Sacha speaks Persian. No mention of where in Iran his grandparents were from. Nothing except Wikipedia. Mad Jack 17:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The point though, is as before. No article on Wikipedia is required to include any information (well unless it is absolutely vital, like that Baron Cohen is an actor and that he has a movie named Borat, etc. - you get the point), even if there is a reliable source for it (which of course, there is). If there is significant doubt about something, which I think you've acknowledged that there is, we should not include it, especially since by including it we are chanelling it further as undisputed fact across the net (and probably creating more of these "reliable sources"). Our "Sacha Baron Cohen" article is the #1 Google match for a search on that name. Mad Jack 01:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Again, no piece for information "has" to be included in any article, even if it can be verified. In fact, Sacha Baron Cohen is one article that's a perfect example of when something is technically verifiable, yet probably should not be included at this time. Mad Jack 03:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kllymen,

I am the cousin, living in israel..Who in Israel knows of his Iranian Descent?? There is one third or fourth cousin who married a girl of Iranian descent.(whose first cousin is my next door neighbor)..This is, sadly, as close as we get to any Persian connection.. 212.150.13.15 07:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Ballet dancer
My version didn't say "German heritage", it said "ballet dancer from Germany", which is what the source said. Also, I added where his father and grandfather where from Wales, and his mother's profession, neither of which you should delete. Mad Jack 06:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You seem to misunderstand the definition of Vandalism, which is defined as "Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." As quite obviously my edits are made in the very attempt to uncompromise the integrity of Wikipedia, whether you believe they are the right thing to do or not still does not make them vandalism. I could just as easily say your edits are "vandalism" because I believe they are inserting incorrect information into the article. Same difference. Mad Jack 08:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, I guess this means we would basically need a family tree that goes back something like 10 generations if we are ever to remove the "Persian" stuff from the article. Just terrific. (Well, I guess the German grandmother thing is a good first step, though) Mad Jack 08:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, appreciated if you do not revert again. I included the "Persian" info, such as it is, in my latest revert, though I added bits of the Welsh and German background that you removed. Mad Jack 08:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I really haven't come up with any new excuses. But if someone agrees with me and wants to remove it - I'm certainly not going to stand in their way. Mad Jack 05:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wait a minute - I didn't re-remove it. My only edit was removing "Jewish" from the header, because it shouldn't be in the header of the article under WP:MOSBIO. I didn't remove Persian Jew again and I don't see the point, since I know someone will just revert me, whether a sufficient number of people agree that it's likely wrong or not. I've given up on any method other than another source that gives the blow-by-blow on his background - that's what I'm waiting for. Mad Jack 05:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

What "****"? I sign with four of these: ~ Mad Jack 06:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, just use these - *. Two will get you farther, etc. Mad Jack 06:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wait, that wasn't the question, was it. What appears after these that I don't have? Mad Jack 07:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

AMA
Hello, I am a member of AMA and I am very much interested in your case. I am willing to help you out in this. If you want me to help you out say so on my Desk, if not please tell me. Have a nice week and god bless.--Sir james paul 23:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I can not find the case at AMA, can you find it for me and give me a link to it on my talk page. Thanks.--Sir james paul 12:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What have you tried to resolve this?--Sir james paul 12:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I want all talk about this to be on my desk, okay?--Sir james paul 12:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I saw your comment on his talk page that asked him to please edit in good faith, this could be taken as you saying that he did this in bad faith, wich is not being civil. Please be kind during the rest of this ordeal. If both of you are friendly we will get this done faster. Please be civil. Also I think we should set a date to get this settled, do you agree? The debate for this will be on my talk page, I will moderate it. When debating this make sure to use evidence. Also please read this. Have a nice week and god bless.--Sir james paul 16:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Leave a oppening comment on my desk please. Tell why you believe it should be in the article, evidence you have, at least one compromise, and anything else you want to add.--Sir james paul 17:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC) Wat do you think you could do to help end this mess? Read this, it might help. Have a nice week.--Sir james paul 12:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I would love it if you would be a part of finding a compromise. Have a nice week and god bless. --Sir james paul 21:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll be talking with him while you are on a break.--Sir james paul 19:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Smile


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Checkup
How have things been since I closed your case? Have a nice week and god bless. P.S, answer at my talk page please. --James, La gloria è a dio 03:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

300 Edits
Recently, you changed the name of the section Reaction in Iran to Depiction of Persian, stating that the "subtitle didn't fit the context." I would suggest that you were somewhat incorrect in that edit, that all but the last sentence refer to the specific hugh and outcry in Iran, the only non-Iranian reaction being Warner Bros. response to that reaction. I don't like to revert the edits of other folk unless they are patently vandalism or tendentious, and yours is obviously neither; it's just a mistake, and I think it might be better for you to correct the edit yourself. People tend to respect that more, when someone can admit they made a minor mistake (WP:BELLY). Cheers! Arcayne 14:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)