User talk:Poorya0014/Archive 1

February 2013
Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without 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 text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article 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. The image on your user page is a copyvio (from this, for instance) and is tagged as such on Commons. Drmies (talk) 19:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sibche


A tag has been placed on Sibche, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "Click here to 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. BiH (talk) 17:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Suicide in Iran
Hi I have put a paragraph on my talk page brenont about your edit requests. In addition, I have some points that I'd like you to clarify. By duty soldiers do you mean active-duty soldiers or even active-duty military and paramilitary personnel? Also, I am unable to bring up reference #4 on Radio Zamaneh, except possibly in Persian (I don't read Farsi). Can you confirm that it is there in Persian as, when I search key words such as suicide on that website there are no articles found. --Brenont (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Content translation tool error
Hi,

Replying about your question on Village pump (technical).

Thanks for the translations to Persian, first of all!

About your problem: Does this happen all the time with this article? Or does it work correctly now? Does it happen with other articles? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 07:41, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks . The problem is now solved, however, just because you are here and have more experience than me in the English version of Wiki, could you please help me with 2 things?


 * 1- I would like to have this page, i.e. my talk page, to be archived the way my Persian talk page is. Could you do that for me? I tried reading the how to article, but failed.
 * 2- I would like to have standard user page, like the one that I have in Persian wiki, but I can't seem to find a "standard template" to add it to my user page. I also want to use calligraphic English there, but don't know how. Could you please guide me for this?
 * Thanks again,Poorya0014 (talk) 03:05, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm not familiar with either of these things. I am not familiar with such a template, and I archive my talk page manually. I recommend asking at Help desk. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, welcome to English Wikipedia
Hi, I'm sorry that we got off on the wrong foot, sometimes those reporting systems can be a bit pointy, please feel free to discuss any of the edits and ping me when I'm doing something wrong and I'll try to adjust, I hope that you enjoy it here. Let's all work collaboratively. PainProf (talk) 01:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks my friend. You also please apologize me if I only mentioned your name in my revert war report. You are right. You did only one revert and its not fair if I report it as a revert war. Sorry for that, but because anything I wrote on that article got reverted at least for more than 2 times, I thought I report that as an invert war. With regards to collaboration, that's why we are here! Thanks again for your nice behaviour. Poorya0014 (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey can you please help me with the auto archive bot? It seems like it does archive but I don't see the archive box in my talk page. How can I get that? Thanks,Poorya0014 (talk) 01:29, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I just added the template to your page :) PainProf (talk) 02:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

RFC on suicide methods lead
Hi

I looked over the RFCs, the one on the page is part of a much larger one which was quite comprehensive with regard to the hatnote, this was closed less than one year ago and all of those arguments were considered please see. closed it, he may be a useful resource if you would like to re-start this debate.

With regard to your other issue:

I propose an RFC with the wording:

"Should an article on suicide methods include scholarly works discussing means restriction and the rationale for the study of suicide methods"

PainProf (talk) 15:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I was the original closer of both RFCs. While I’m not sure of the conversation here in particular, the discussion was quite lengthy and I would expect an overwhelming change of community opinion to overturn the consensus found there, for what it’s worth. Steven  Crossin  Help resolve disputes! 20:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of suicides in the 21st century, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Variety. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Sexist comments
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Pinging
You said "It is interesting for me how you don't ping me so that I can answer as soon as I can." Pinging an editor is optional. Some editors dislike being pinged every time someone replies to them and incorporate that into their signature. You could adjust your signature to ask people to notify you every time they reply. Plus there is no rush.

As an example. If someone leaves a message on my talk page and I reply then I will usually ping them on the first reply. After that it depends on if it s a new user or not. However, if I am on an article talk page I will usually not ping them as it is an ongoing discussion. Getting several pings in a row on an active discussion can be very annoying.

However, belittling someone because they didn't know your preferences is not acceptable. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for informing me about your opinion. "Belittling" is how you call it. I call it "Requesting". The user is using vague language to attack my nationality and things that happened in my country. I used that example to show her it is not nice to indirectly throw slices of word to someone without clearly naming the person so that she can face the consequence of what says. You cannot hurt someone with your words and don't expect to receive an answer. In addition, naming someone in a conversation is a sign of respect, however, I don't want to ask people to ping me in my signature and instead, I ask them directly. That is my way of dealing with stuff. Also, just so you know, to me it is not acceptable to pick up a magnifier and try to pinpoint things that you don't like in people's behaviour. The reason is all of us may have things that other people may not like; particularly in Wiki where talking should be friendly. If you prefer, you can talk about the topic of the conversations I had with the user. Thanks again and I hope I didn't offend you by pinging.Poorya0014 (talk) 21:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 11:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


 * As I wrote above, You are welcome to hold your own personal beliefs, but as soon as those beliefs result in you belittling or mistreating women editors on this project is when we ask you to leave. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 11:35, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
 You have been blocked temporarily from editing for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:.
 * Commenting on another editor's "inner little naughty girl" and stating that "you are a woman and women tend to use their emotion more than their ration" is sexist and utterly unacceptable on Wikipedia. Abandon that type of interaction with your colleagues if you want to keep editing. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  23:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I wanted to defend myself with regards to accusations that the user had made against me in ANB but the section seems to be disappeared. Can you please bring the section back or do I have to create a new section? Thanks.Poorya0014 (talk) 21:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I assume that you are talking about WP:ANI and that the discussion has been archived. You can create a new section but I urge you to be cautious because, as explained below, you are at risk of additional sanctions if there is any perception that you are harassing another editor. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  00:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much bro for worrying about me. The situation is unfair as I was not given a chance to defend myself. I think the fact that you said: "Thanks. I did not notice your recommendation before blocking, GorillaWarfare, because I was studying this editor's contributions." shows that you yourself have understood how fast you have gone and how extravagant you behaved with me. Forgive me for saying this but such behaviour makes me think that you didn't want to solve the dispute in a friendly manner and that you wanted to take revenge. If so, you succeeded. According to wiki's protocols, it was my first time so you had to give me a written notice instead of intimidate block. Also bro you just saw a sentence from me that the user had cut and quoted, but I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you didn't study our conversation in the suicide methods talk page. Coz if you did, then you would have noticed that the user has attacked me and others 3 times; 2 times bashing my nationality and my personal life and 1 time calling others "under-informed". If wiki does not have any fairness and justice to defend myself, then I'd better be blocked. This wiki is nowadays not the one that I used to know. I'm not saying all these to you coz of block thing. I've been blocked couple of times in Persian wiki for different issues. What actually is my concern is the ration behind such injustice. To me I felt like the case of Alvin Kennard who was sentenced to life behind bars for stealing just $50. There should be congruence between the crime and the outcome. It's funny to me how you warned me that my behaviour is utterly unacceptable but her behaviour seems to be utterly acceptable. I will provide sources to prove there is no sexism in what I said and it is purely based on biology. Also a quick request if you don't mind. I noticed in your page that you care about neutralism in wiki. If so, please take a look at the article suicide methods and see how the neutrality is being violated. It is becoming suicide prevention methods. That is not an issue, but any matter in wiki should have its own stand alone article. For example, you cannot talk about the population of Italy in the article U.S. Thanks. Poorya0014 (talk) 01:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comparing a 72 hour block from editing a website to a person being sentenced to life in prison for theft is a bit strange. You were free to go about your other business during those 72 hours. Warnings are sometimes useful but administrators are not required to give advance warnings before blocking for ugly harassment. I have blocked thousands of editors for major policy violations without an advance warning and many of these blocks were indefinite. Your block is now over and you are completely free to edit in compliance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. You are not free to engage in any type of harassment of your colleagues or any other glaring policy violations. So, if you want to be warned, consider this a blanket warning against any future misconduct. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * By the way, I did read the talk page discussion before blocking you, and nothing I read there mitigated the severity of your harassing comments. That is why I wrote, "because I was studying this editor's contributions." Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

So you wanna say that you read how she tried to bash my nationality by trying to distort the main topic of discussion (suicide methods) and connect it to the crash of Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 and the explosions that had happened in some of Iran's nuclear sites? so you want to say that you noticed how she called me helpless just because I write about suicide or suicide methods and it is my topic of interest? So you wanna say that you read how she calls suicidal people "under-informed". And you wanna say that none of these violate anything in Wiki, but when I mention a scientifically-proved fact about the biological differences between men and women, I am sexist? No bro. I think you are not fair and your are not trying to settle the dispute. You're siding with the user. You are matured enough to know that in any dispute, there is no way that only one person is wrong or right. Now about the comparison, I am really shocked about your response. I thought the fact that a poor man (black or white, doesn't matter) has to spend all his life in prison just for stealing $50 to probably feed his family, who is already oppressed by the 1% rich, was going to be important to you. Me and that man have a lot in common. Apart from being humans who have hearts that understand each other's feelings, we both have been subject of injustice. It is not just a simple website's block that bothers me. It is the interaction of people with me that is my concern. I wish you never become a judge in real world. Also, I know that the block is over and no need for telling me that. I also know that if an admin behaves in an extravagant manner, it is still my right to seek help from other admins or a higher authority. In addition, I'm not looking for warnings. Warnings are for before blocking but not blocking and giving warnings at the same time. You said you have blocked 1000s of editors by now. I hope you've given enough space to them to defend themselves. In addition, CONGRATULATIONS! That is plenty of so much power. I really wish I could become an admin some day, but my only fear is what will happen if die? Will I still be able to enjoy my administrative power in the other world? And as the last thing to say, during those 72 hours, I was trying to figure out a way to help a skinhead redneck understand that nations always love each other and these are the corrupt governments and politicians who want war. Those who are being benefited by selling weaponry to make their bank accounts grow bigger and bigger, want war. we, as nations, shouldn't let them win. We should make love win. But you know what? Unfortunately, I wasn't successful. Maybe if the block was longer, I had more time and could do more research on this. Thanks.Poorya0014 (talk) 06:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The only comments I have after reading this is do not harass your fellow editors and do not call me "bro". I am not your bro. Cullen<sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  15:43, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Please note dents&diff=1026197235&oldid=1026196301 my warning to you at ANI. Any block for such a subsequent comment is likely to be indefinite. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 23:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Wiki has protocols to deal with such situations, hopefully, and staying calm and more importantly, being friendly is part of it. For example, as far as I know (and maybe I'm wrong) IF, and I'm saying only IF it is clear to admins that a user has violated any of the rules, no matter how hard it is, it shouldn't be dealt with by blocking immediately, particularly if it is the first time. Usually the first time should start by a written notice in user's talk page. And that as I said, is only IF enough time is given to the user in question to defend him/herself. I'd be glad to know your opinion on this. Thanks.Poorya0014 (talk) 21:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * In some circumstances, egregious behavior (such as making sexist comments against another editor) is met with an immediate block, in this case a short one. My comment above can be considered your written warning not to make similar comments because the next block will be indefinite. I would recommend taking your own advice to be calm and friendly, and not make such comments again. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I meant a written notice BEFORE blocking. All the time, when an admin thinks that a user has violated a rule, according to wiki's protocols, he/she should give the user a written notice instead of jumping on the block button; particularly if it is the first time that the user has such disputes. After that, if the user is unable to provide proofs to defend him/herself and repeats the behaviour, then blocks should start from 24 hours, and then if for the third or forth time the user continues the behaviour and it is clear to more than 1 admin that the user insists on his/her behaviour, then at that time yes the block should be indefinite. In my case it was a big misunderstanding and I will provide sources to prove that what I said was not sexist at all. Me and you have had 3 encounters and in each you kept repeating this threatening language of "You're gonna be blocked indefinitely". Stop this please. It is not friendly and constructive. You said it once and I got it, no reason to repeat it multiple times. It seems like this block functionality give people so much power enjoyment. I wish you success and hope that you can perform the same level of power enjoyment in your real life outside wiki. Also, you had mentioned that: "You seem to have a lot to say about how to have a proper argument on a Wikipedia talk page, but that you think that kind of commentary or attitude is at all acceptable on this project shows you have much to learn." Unfortunately the section is archived otherwise I would write you an answer there. All of us are learning things everyday. I think you also need to learn the proper way of talking to a nice anti-femenist gentleman like me. I absolutely have 0 (zero) tolerance for rebelliousness. In addition, you should know that wiki does not work based on a user's personal choice. As I mentioned before, there are protocols in place to deal with disputes, which unfortunately some admins forget to follow because of that enjoyment that jumping on the block button gives them. Thanks Poorya0014 (talk) 01:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The block has expired and you have been adequately warned about subsequent behavior. If you genuinely wish to double down on your previous behavior (In my case it was a big misunderstanding and I will provide sources to prove that what I said was not sexist at all.) Cullen has explained that you can reopen an ANI discussion (though at your own risk; I do not expect it to go well for you). Otherwise I would strongly recommend taking the warning and moving on, rather than continuing to push the bounds of civility by repeatedly calling Cullen "bro", accusing other editors of being on a power trip for asking you to follow basic policies, and making comments like I absolutely have 0 (zero) tolerance for rebelliousness. You are welcome to hold your own personal beliefs, but as soon as those beliefs result in you belittling or mistreating women editors on this project is when we ask you to leave. I am sorry you feel we have been repetitive, but it was (is) not clear that you are understanding the importance of this. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

You are absolutely not in a position to tell me who I can call bro and who I can't. Change your position to an easy and friendly position. But I tell you my reasons just to clear things. Us men, have our own ways of calling each other to show our friendliness. If he doesn't want that, he will tell me and I'm not sure why you talk on behalf of people. Why do you think I don't understand that the block is over? Why do you think I don't get a simple English sentence with a simple syntax that If I do A, the result is going to be B? Why do you keep repeating stuff to me? I don't want to double down. I courageously set boundaries that if anyone, particularly a woman, wants to interact with me, I DO NOT TOLERATE REBELLIOUSNESS. Remember that you are in MY talk page, not an article page or an article's talk page. Thanks for worrying about me not to open a new section in the notice board, but your kind admins had taken away my chance of defending myself by blocking me and the section that the user had created is now archived. In a world with justice, when a person does the worst crimes, the court at least gives him/her to defend him/herself. I'm not accusing some admins that they enjoy this virtual power due to the fact that they may lack this type of power in real world; I'm just saying it out loud. Editors like you, are not asking me to follow basic rules; they are threatening me. Asking is different than threatening. And to answer your last sentence about me misbehaving with women, I say contrary to what you think, I love women. If I talk about a scientifically-proved difference between men and women, that is not sexism. These differences are actually making the world more beautiful. The fact that women do multi-tasking better than men or the fact that women are more emotional than rational, not only make the world beautiful, but also are proved in biology. In addition, there is no degrading or billeting. I will provide sources and explain more in the notice board. These differences are the ones that today's Feminism is taking away from us and instead, it is growing girls, who instead of giving love to their human children and their husbands, are forced to seat down in front of their computers in a lonely cold quiet corner of their independent apartments and write codes in to a soulless machine, which is absolutely against feminine nature of a girl. Oh and in my opinion, cats will never replace human children. That is just me, but again I hope you don't accuse me of animalism. I forgot to say that although you really want me gone from Wiki, but there has been an improvement in the way you talk to me. Before you said: "You're going to be blocked" but now you're saying "We're going to ask you to leave". The second version is more kind and polite. Thanks.Poorya0014 (talk) 06:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * the fact that women are more emotional than rational Bruh did you really need to double-down on this? You know that comments like this are what caused your block. — <i style="color:#8000FF">Czello</i> 07:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shahid Mohebbi Complex for the blind


The article Shahid Mohebbi Complex for the blind has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "I don't want to nominate this article but cannot seem to find any sources for this (outside of those that are Wikipedia mirrors). Happy to be proven wrong. —"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AFreshStart (talk) 22:12, 11 October 2021 (UTC)