User talk:Warrior4321/Archive 4

Thank you
Thanks for the barnstar! I appreciate it! CrazyPaco (talk) 02:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Vishtaspa
Hello! Your submission of Vishtaspa at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cryptic C62 · Talk 21:02, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Monster of Phineas-n-Ferbenstein
I'm sorry for not being able to adhere to those issues on the article, I suddenly lost any and all access to the internet for quite some time - if you could review it again once I place it at the GAN again, that would great!  The Flash  {talk} 23:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. I will gladly review it again, if you nominate it again. However, please address the issues that I had mentioned in this GA review. warrior  4321  13:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You got it! I'll place it on the review page once I go through a few things with this and other articles.  The Flash  {talk} 13:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

SIR,

I suggest you Look up Babylon on google earth, when you get the chance in NEW YORK

Review of The Sea of Monsters
Just wanted to tell you, the article is at GAN, so you can review it. :) Pmlineditor  Talk 16:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Women in the Middle Ages
Neutral point of view tag added. this only talks about the women in england or europe. there were people living outside of europe...) User:Warrior4321.


 * Of course it does, because Middle Ages is very much a Christian-centered perspective of history. The Aztecs, the Algonquins, the Brahmans, the Arabs or the Chinese probably have different names to mean the same thing, and some of those non-Christian cultures haven't entirely left the medieval mentality. I am of course open-minded about including non-European perspectives on medieval women, provided that sufficient cultural contexts are given. ADM (talk) 22:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

 * From the editor: Call for opinion pieces
 * News and notes: Footnotes updated, WMF office and jobs, Strategic Planning and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wales everywhere, participation statistics, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Video games
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

reversion in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
He made a flip comment. It's not worth an argument. - Denimadept (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Village pump
I think Camelbinky was just joking around (the discussion is based on that "unicorn" joke). I've known him for quite a while and he's a good editor, so I think you should leave him a message regarding your concern. Cheers,  Zoo Fari  23:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh my, I just made the same mistake by not reading above! My posting below is regarding this same issue, I had not realized ZooFari had beaten me to it. Thank you for the kind words Zoofari. I agree that this editor was acting in good faith but that some research on his/her part in reading the context may have been needed.Camelbinky (talk) 23:57, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Village Pump
You reverted my post, and I can understand why you thought it may have been vandalism. Zoofari knows my humor and therefore put it back, and anyone who had read the whole thread would have gotten the joke, you therefore may not have read the thread. I have a few suggestions you may want to start doing in the future when looking for vandalism on noticeboards and the village pump: 1- we dont censor on the village pump and therefore even if my post had been an act of vandalism, ignoring it instead of removing it is probably the way to go; 2- you may want to read the entire thread so you can get the context that postings you think are vandalism might turn out to not be vandalism after all; 3- if someone is a regular contributor to the village pump (as I am) chances are the editor didnt suddenly decide to become a vandal so some slack should be given especially if another editor has reverted your deletion; which leads me to the last point- if someone has reverted your decisions that someone was a vandal, that probably means they were a vandal and instead of reverting again you may want to contact the original person or the editor that reverted your decision to find out why. I understand you were acting in good faith, but a little research on your part could have saved you some time, could have saved Zoofari some time that he had to take to revert you, and saved time for the editor that reverted you the second time you decided you didnt need to investigate it. Oh, and it would have saved me the time of writting this extremely long diatribe and you from having to read it, and I'm sure respond to it, but feel free to save both of us the time by not responding, my feelings wont be hurt. I just ask you to please be a bit more careful and do some researching before reverting things, especially on discussion forums where jokes along with open and frank discussion is encouraged to lighten the heated tensions that may occur. Thank you for your time, and no hard feelings, just please dont revert me again, thank you.Camelbinky (talk) 23:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

A deletion

 * See User talk:Anthony Appleyard. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The Lion and Sun
I almost finished the article. The remaning work is some copy editing, re-organizing the citations, and adding some pictures. Could you please help me on copy editing?--WIMYV? (talk) 01:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Rfa
I closed my Rfa about an hour ago and left a strongly worded closing statement. I wanted to make sure that you know that I did not mean it in reference to you. Your remarks were kind and supportive and I am very appreciative. I, for the most part, left the message that I did because I felt that I offered a legitimate suggestion to be taken into consideration for future Rfa's that was dismissed because I was power-hungry, an accusation that I am deeply resent. In any case, I hope to see you around the encyclopedia.

Regards, Gaelen S.Talk • Contribs 19:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries. I know the failure of a RFA is hurtful and disappointing. Hopefully, you'll stay and pass your next one. { warrior  4321  19:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I hope so too. - Regards, Gaelen S.Talk • Contribs 19:40, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Invitation
I saw your valiant arguments at Articles for deletion/The Last One (Aqua Teen Hunger Force) Your name sounds familiar, and I am surprised I have not invited you to be a squadron member before. We would be honored to have you.

Thank you for the kind words and invite, as always {. Since, you are honored to have me, I am just as honored to join. warrior 4321  19:31, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That is wonderful, that makes my week. Welcome! Ikip (talk) 20:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

A warm welcome!
Glad you can join!

{| style="border: 4px solid #CC0000; padding: 6px; width: 80%; min-width: 700px; background: #FFFAF0; line-height: 20px; cellpading=30" align=center
 * colspan="2" |

Hi,, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron!

We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles that have been tagged for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

Deletion from Azar Kayvan
Hi

I'm curious about your recent large deletion from Azar Kayvan:

1. How did this article come to your attention?

2. When you said that it needs work, did you mean that you were going to do the work, or you are leaving it for someone else to do?

3. Why delete existing information, rather than leaving it there and noting that it needs work?

Simon Kidd (talk) 16:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The article is being rewritten by me. I am going to put the new article in a few days. The article work in progress can be found here. warrior  4321  20:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

 * Opinion essay: White Barbarian
 * Localisation improvements: LocalisationUpdate has gone live
 * Office hours: Sue Gardner answers questions from community
 * News and notes: Vibber resigns, Staff office hours, Flagged Revs, new research and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Stunting of growth, Polanski protected and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject National Register of Historic Places
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Superman Returns GA
Check if the Superman Returns article still needs improvement. igordebraga ≠ 15:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There are still a few things remaining, such as the bullet and the size of lead. There are a few thing left that don't have a done tag, and are required for GA criteria. warrior  4321  21:28, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Put some done in things that were fixed, but Wildroot forgot. What do you suggest in the lead? igordebraga ≠ 16:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There are many one or two line paragraphs in the cast section. As for the lead, why is there only one reference? Put many references or put none. As well, there are items in the lead which are not mentioned in the body. The lead is a summary of the body and thus should not contain new facts.  warrior  4321  21:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Inspired by The Dark Knight, turned all short sentences into one paragraph, added lead info on marketing, included the "stalled franchise" on the body; anything else?


 * Looks excellent. I will pass it now. warrior  4321  23:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello
I'm new to this, so I'm not to sure on how to edit what I posted from the book? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry2377 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Did you copy and paste directly from the book? warrior  4321  20:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Your comments have been attended to. ;) Pmlineditor     ∞    14:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And again, warriorz. Pmlineditor    ∞    12:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Dorood
Hi, I hope you do not mind, but it looks like you are working on Azar Kayvan.. I added some details on Suhrawardi's Zoroastrian Symbology and Influence (click on my link) and it may be of interest to link it to a future article on Azar Kayvan. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 03:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

 * New talk pages: LiquidThreads in Beta
 * Sockpuppet scandal: The Law affair
 * News and notes: Article Incubator, Wikipedians take Manhattan, new features in testing, and much more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia used by UN, strange AFDs, iPhone reality
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: New developments at the Military history WikiProject
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 05:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC) +

Featured article review/Second Crusade/archive1
Is there anything else that you see wrong? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:05, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The infobox has all the little flags which need alt text. warrior  4321  03:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Check now. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:46, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

3RR Warning October 2009
You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. It is not that this information necessarily cannot be included, but it must be included in a neutral tone with adequate citation, the way to get this included is not to edit war on it. If you wish do discuss how it should be included (and I encourage you to do so) please take it to the talk page. Peter Deer (talk) 05:56, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The information which you insist upon is not encyclopedic, it is not in a neutral tone and it is not adequately cited. Take it to the talk page. Peter Deer (talk) 08:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why is this not a subject worthy of the talk page, I wonder? As for fixing it, I did, I removed the unencyclopedic content. And just because there is a source at the end of the sentence does not mean that you can add unencyclopedic content to the sentence and it makes it okay. If you are going to quote a specific someone stating POV things then that requires the proper citation of an attributed quote. There is nothing whatsoever neutral about "(with its concordant slaughter, enslavement, looting and destruction)" as an aside, not only is it an extraneous point, something that should by all rights be included instead in the Muslim conquest of Persia page instead, but the very way that is stated is so nakedly POV that it defies every convention regarding neutral tone and neutrality in general, as well as plenty of other perfectly attribution and encyclopedic guidelines.
 * In conclusion, I ask for the last time that you take it to the talk page and develop a consensus on it, and not keep ninja-editing it in and ignoring everything I've been saying. I've cited to you several important guidelines that it breaks and you are simply refusing to heed them. Please, stop edit warring, I'm not the only one who has had to revert your clandestine POV additions, and it's getting to be an issue. Peter Deer (talk) 21:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This should be taken to the talk page because it's not just between you and me, and in fact should never have been in the first place, this is regarding the article and the guidelines for wikipedia articles. And if you can't see how it can be made neutral, then you should be looking it up not just re-adding non neutral material, or talking about it on the talk page which you should have been doing in the first place.


 * You ask which guidelines I have posted but if you insist I can provide a list of guidelines you are failing to take into consideration: WP:NPOV, WP:TONE, MOS:QUOTE, and Words_to_avoid for starters. Something you should consider from the start is the point of the citation. Now look at the sentence right before and you'll see that it is quoted (though now I notice that it should probably be attributed in-article to Boyce, but that's a copyediting issue) whereas yours while also unattributed was unquoted and in parenthesis as an aside, which is patently unencyclopedic, using non-neutral tone to describe something irrelevant to the actual point of the sentence.
 * What you don't seem to understand is that there is a place for this information on Wikipedia, and more than likely in this article, but not where it was and how it is stated, and I really wish you'd consider discussing this in talk so that it's not just you arguing with my perspective but allowing the perspectives and input of all the people who work to improve and maintain this article. Is that really too much to ask?


 * information out of context, whereas what you cited was using the wrong kind of language, the wrong kind of citation, and was in the wrong place altogether. The fact that "other sources" would say this is irrelevant as they're not cited and it's directly quoted from a specific source. Can you accept that? Peter Deer (talk) 22:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Darius I of Persia
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Darius I of Persia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Articles like this which probably a number of people have worked on over some time should not be substantially changed without discussion. There was a discussion fairly recently on moving it to Darius the Great, the consensus was against it. PatGallacher (talk) 20:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Spotlight newsletter
Hi there. Just a really quick, short note. You're currently listed as a spotlight participant, here, but you are not on the list of people who want to get the newsletter. If you want to receive updates about spotlight, then please add your name on this page. If not, no further action required, and I won't bug you about it again. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  15:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Image problem notice
While patrolling new images I see that File:Nari contractor.jpg, which you uploaded is a copy from here which is not stated to be a freely licenced image of Nari Contractor, so have to assume it is copyright and as he is still living a fair-use claim is unliklely to pass. I won't tag it right now, so can you try to fix this or tag it for deletion? Thanks ww2censor (talk) 18:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I thought I had put a proper source and it was in the attribution category. However, I am currently busy right now, and I will handle it later by reuploading it better, when I get the time. I have currently put it for deletion, and it has been deleted. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. warrior  4321  19:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem. As a regular I thought a slight nudge would do the trick rather than a deletion notice. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 23:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Test
This is a test I've been asked to make against my will. The Earwig (Talk &#124; Contribs) 21:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

 * From the editor: Perspectives from other projects
 * Special story: Memorial and Collaboration
 * Bing search: Bing launches Wikipedia search
 * News and notes: New WMF hire, new stats, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: IOC sues over Creative Commons license, Wikipedia at Yale, and more
 * Dispatches: Sounds
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Tropical cyclones
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ahmed -> Achmad (Jeff Dunham)
It's not a matter of censorship. The specific, headlining redirect is inappropriate because the suggestion is that Jeff Dunham's act is the most notable thing related to the name "Ahmad" people would want to be redirected to. Let's compromise and leave it in but under Related Articles; I can't say it's completely irrelevant but stuffing it into the header comes of as prankish and, frankly, a little racist. P.S.: I'm newish to the community functions, would this be addressed more appropriately in the article talk page or edit summaries? Greg Ravn (talk) 23:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Spotlight Newsletter - October
 ChzzBot  ►  23:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * News and notes: WikiReader, Meetup in Pakistan, Audit committee elections, and more
 * In the news: Sanger controversy reignited, Limbaugh libelled, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Pbuh
i understand that you belive that there shouldn't be a (pbuh) after the prophet Muhammad's (pbuh)name on the "Muslim conquests" page, but it is how it's said (comonly) among muslims. and also, have some respect.

my e-mailis

"Afsheenshargh@googlemail.com" if you have any questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.92.7 (talk) 06:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Second Crusade FAR
Any last comments on this one? Cheers, Marskell (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Interview: Interview with John Blossom
 * News and notes: New hires, German Wikipedian dies, new book tool, and more
 * In the news: Editor profiled in Washington Post, Wikia magazines, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Re:Zoroastrianism categories
Hi Warrior4321. I have been changing Category:Zoroastrianism to other Zoroastrianism categories or removing it altogether if it already had a Zoroastrian related category. I started doing this for other religion categories (eg. Hinduism and Sikhism) because they had this template.

Even though Zoroastrianism doesn't have this template at the moment, I thought that moving articles from the parent cat into subcategories would increase its functionality. What happens in other religion categories, especially the ones a larger number of articles (like Christianity, Islam and Hinduism), thousands of articles go into Category:Christianity, Category:Islam, etc. The purpose of these categories (which is to group common articles together and make it easier to access similar articles) breaks down when they become too big.

I understand that Zoroastrianism isn't as big and doesn't even have that template but I thought for consistency that it should also apply here. Also there are not enough subcategories yet for Zoroastrianism to move all of the articles. If you believe that it isn't really needed then I can move on to other categories which are larger and in more need of diffusing. Regards, GizzaDiscuss  &#169;</b> 02:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

***NOTE***: Due to technical errors, certain parts of the talk page never got added here. These were :, , , , , , , , , 

Use of templates
Please be more cautious in warning editors for being incivil. Of the examples you left on Simanos' talk page, what was incivil about this? Nev1 (talk) 23:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Calling someone a POV pusher is a personal attack on the editor. Remember, Comment on content, not on contributors. warrior  4321  23:11, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * You're kidding right? People are allowed to call a spade a spade. used edit summaries such as STOP WITH YOUR DIRTY JEWISH LIES!!!! BASTARD!!!. That's being incivil, not what Simanos was doing. I suggest you think next time you hand out a warning in case it "damages the community" or "deter users". Nev1 (talk) 23:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nev1, I was just about to report him because it seems in the last few days he has given such false warnings not only to me, but to many other people too! I fear his account has been compromised cause I doubt he could be a member of "wikipedia good articles group" and give such crazy warnings. Simanos (talk) 23:21, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Nev1, have you read the page you linked? It states It's OK to let others know when you think they're acting inappropriately, but a bit of politeness and tact while doing so will get them to listen more readily. One can be honest and direct about another editor's behaviour or edits without resorting to name-calling or attacks. Calling someone a POV pusher is name-calling. Directing the IP editor to the NPOV policy would have been a better solution. Simanos called the kettle black and was just given a friendly warning. warrior  4321  23:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * (ec) So you think that saying "pretty please" to the IP would have stopped him from vandalising? Be serious. The IP was a POV pusher, stating as much is not incivil.
 * I'd also like to know why you didn't warn the IP to be civil?
 * Simanos, I wouldn't go as far as to suggest Warrior4321's account has been compromised, but there is an obvious problem with use of warning templates as the above two sections demonstrate. As for the interaction with it became clear pretty quickly that the IP was a sock of a banned user who was not prepared to be reasonable. In this case, it is poor judgement to 1) ask the person dealing with a troll to be "civil" (there was no serious breach of civility there anyway) and 2) not deal with the troll by reporting them to WP:ANI or asking them to be civil. The sock was blocked, the warning given to Simanos was inappropriate, now it's time to move on, although I urge Warrior4321 to seriously think about his actions as this looks like a recurring problem. Nev1 (talk) 23:30, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 other people were given a no personal attacks template. I only grabbed the two or three names at the bottom. Nev1, you do realize that this is -one- of the three scenarios of personal attacks from Simanos. Asking people to go away and get a life are definite personal attacks. warrior  4321  23:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Warrior4321, uncivil would be for me to call you "stupid because you are of Persian decent and we know how idiotic those were". But I didn't (because I actually admire the ancient Phoenicians and Persians and others), all I did was present the FACTS. The fact was that the IP hoping sock-puppet was getting banned day in day out (to quote another Monty Python sketch) and I presented that fact in the talk page along with some basic reasoning for those bannings (the facts of his insults I copy-pasted from elsewhere). Last I checked, copy-pasting someone's insults is NOT a personal attack. It is a presentation of the TRUTH. If you have a problem with that, maybe you should go have it checked. When it became obvious that the BANNED IP user was not going to listen to reason I made light (fun) of him with a few Monty Python quotes to lighten the mood and make it certain that he should get another hobby and that wikipedia editors would be relentless and fair, so that he would go away. I did not insult him directly at all (like he did with my mother and poverty and ugliness, he also did the same to other users). So stop wasting your time and ours (if you're not compromised). Simanos (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * "If you have a problem with that, maybe you should go have it checked." - That is a personal attack. It doesn't matter that you copy pasted his attacks, the fact that you made a personal attack makes you just as bad as him. If he is a disruptive user, then get an administrator involved, don't get involved in an attack war. Lastly, I am not Persian. warrior  4321  23:50, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, that is not a personal attack. That is you quoting me out of context. What I said was that copy-pasting someone's insults to prove their disruptive ways is not an attack. It is the truth. And that if you disagree with something as basic as that means you have serious issues and you need help. I'm not a mean person, I care about you and your well-being. Get well soon. Oh, also I did not get involved in an attack war. I reverted vandalism by a banned sock-puppet and I presented evidence in the talk page for my actions so that no other editor would think ill of me and revert me, to inform other editors in other words. Admins were already involved as is shown by the banning of a dozen of his IP sock-puppets in the last week. You're being disingenuous. As for you not being Persian I was making an example of an offensive thing to say, I could have used anything, German, Black, etc (and aren't you Parsi btw?) Simanos (talk) 00:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well then, that's good. I was starting to think you might be a mean person ;). Alright, if you truly believe you did not insult the editor, I'll leave it as I was just trying to inform you originally anyway. I was not trying to get you in any trouble. Parsis are an ethnic group of Zoroastrians that migrated to India after the Arab Invasion. That makes me Indian, not Persian, doesn't it? :)
 * Well it says on your user-page that you are Canadian, so I guess that makes you of Persian or Iranian ancestry but migrating from India to Canada. What did your ancestors (before moving to Canada) feel like? A displaced Persian/Iranian living in India or like an Indian with a minority religion? Simanos (talk) 00:41, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * (ec) I said in my original post here "Of the examples you left on Simanos' talk page...", so I'll leave it to you to judge whether I'm aware of the other scenarios. I'll just remind you that the IP was a sock of a banned user, something you seem quite happy to ignore. And as a final thought, I fully support the notion that someone who deliberately sockpuppets to cause disruption on Wikipedia, as user:Orijentolog did through the IP, does need to get a life. Happy editing, Nev1 (talk) 23:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:22, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Darius copyedit
I don't think I'm going to have time to copyedit Darius, though I will keep it on my watchlist. As a general rule, it's best to ask for copyediting when their is little left to do on article, since a copyeditor's work is largely on the sentence level, so if you find another copyeditor I'd wait to ask them till you've finished expanding the article and believe it's ready for GA. Good luck with the article. Incidentally, you don't need to use the talkback template if you reply here; I will keep this page on my watchlist for a while. Mike Christie (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The article's expansion is complete, and the article has been put up for GA nomination. A copy edit anytime soon would be appreciated.  warrior  4321  04:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

thanks
thanks for telling, those edits initially intended to be minor edits, nevertheless they suddenly became large scale addition/edits.
 * after more then 5,000 edits, i think i know how to tackle any possible wiki problem.

regards الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  13:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Before reverting my edits to the versions of unknown ips, try asking me why i reverted their edits, only reverting things just because they look strange to u dosnt help, i created those articles and i guess i hv info regarding those battles, as how many were involved on both sides. However i will appreciate addition when it is backed with a source, or unsourced additions are usually feared vandalism.

الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  16:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * As for Battle of Toulouse (721) fell in category france or not, you might want to see this, also Battle of Yarmouk and Battle of Manzikert and a feature article Second Crusade. also take a look at , , , vary your's this . its a tradition on wikipedia, cant be changed over night.
 * You may also would like to move Rashidun conquest of persia back to muslim conquest of persia as per consensus obtained here when u requested a move for Muslim conquest of Syria.

الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  16:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 09:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Lawn Gnome Beach Party of Terror
No, no, no, really? You failed it when those small little mistakes would have taken me not even 5 minutes to fix? Seriously? I am quite appalled that you did not even give me a chance to fix such tedious things. Zazzle is without a doubt a reliable source to source that something is available on their website, and there are no cultural references because there aren't any. Quite honestly, I'm flabbergasted that such misconduct was taken in a GA review.  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 20:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Uhm, no. Those small little mistakes were just a few of copy edit examples that needed to be done on the article. The entire article was not copy edited. You can be as appalled and flabbergasted as you want, but there was no misconduct during the review. The reason it was failed (as indicated on the talk page) was because it needed a copy edit. As I was reviewing the article, not copy editing it, I was not required to copy edit the entire article, even if you could change all of it within 5 minutes. The copy editing there is evidence that copy editing is required, as I only copy edited the lead and a few sentences from the body. Getting a copy edit does not take 5 minutes. Sites like eBay and Zazzle are not reliable sources. Notice how Youtube is not a reliable source, even when trying to provide evidence for the movie. A reliable source in this scenario might be a newspaper article. warrior  4321  23:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your argument and though I completely disagree, I understand why you failed it. Cheers,  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 00:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Lion and Sun
The admin notice board was another opportunity to talk to you. We had some conversations before. As you may know, I have nominated the Lion and Sun for GA. Is that possible for you to review the GA nomination. My goal is to make the article FA. If I succeed, I am going to write another GA article from Zoroastrian related articles.--WIMYV? (talk) 03:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism against Biographies of living persons
When a Wikipedian is insulting me here in the fawiki article at the same time that he is asking me to bear him in my talk page, it's really too much asked. If User:WIMYV (Behzad Modarres) deletes the insults that he has added to the article on my name in fawiki, which is strongly demanded in Biographies of living persons, then he can protest if I still don't tolerate him. Javanbakht (talk) 05:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * What happens on the FA wiki stays in the FA wiki. Sort out those troubles there. On the English wiki, you have attacked him several times. It is not too much to demand, please stop attacking him. warrior  4321  12:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It is really ridiculous that Behzad Modares and other insulters still insult me in their recent edits here in the article on my name in fawiki, and come back in the english Wikipedia to define personal attack! My name is not a tool for minor persons who have no idea of the estimations of a scientific organization, publishing books about me and my award and to keep insults on the articles on my name in Wikipedia! The article should be deleted in Wikipedia, because Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Javanbakht (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Could you please take proper action against, Javanbakht's personal attack on her last comment "minor persons"?--WIMYV? (talk) 20:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss
Hello Warrior4321. You've been invited to take part in the discussion at Talk:Darius I of Persia. Regards. -- WikHead (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Valley Girls (Gossip Girl) GAN
Thank you for your review. I felt I had given the article a thorough copy-edit and do dispute some of your suggestions (I was waiting to correct them until the full review was done, as your edit summaries stated there were more to come), but I'll take another look at it. It is your right to fail, but you only mentioned minor problems in the lead; would you please offer a few more from the other sections? I'm not asking for a complete copy-edit, just a starting block so I know what to look for. Alternatively, you could give me general advice (such as by linking one of User:Tony1 tutorials) or put the article on hold for the suggested seven days so I can have another pair of eyes look at it. Please reply here; I have your talk page on watch. Thank you. Liqudluck ✽ talk 03:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, since you asked so nicely, why not? I'll put the article on hold, why don't you try getting a copy-edit from the league of copy-editors? It just seems a little rough in several places. Like "Valley Girls" doubles as both a Gossip Girl episode and the pilot episode of Valley Girls, a Gossip Girl prequel and spin-off television series that would chronicle the life of Lily Rhodes during her teenage high school years while living with Carol in 1980s Los Angeles. Something like Valley Girls served a dual purpose, both as a Gossip Girl episode and a possible pilot episode for the spin-off series for Valley Girls. The spin-off series would chronicle the former life of Lily Rhodes during her teenage years while she was in high school and living with Carol in the 1980's. I will change the talk page tag to "On Hold", but do not want to go through the process of re-adding it on Good article nominations. If it passes, it will go to WP:GA, if it doesn't, it doesn't need to be recorded anywhere else other than the talk page. Sound good?  warrior  4321  04:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's perfect, thanks. The League looks pretty backed up, so I'll probably try asking around or just staring really hard in hopes that something will come to me. Liqudluck ✽ talk  05:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, go ahead and re-fail it. I've made no effort to improve it, which is actually a good thing since I really should be focusing on studying for my finals. I'll take it through a peer review and a copy edit and possibly nominate it at GAN again in a couple weeks. In your opinion, it was just the prose keeping it from GA, right? Thanks for your review! Liquidluck ✽ talk  07:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I noticed the "currently a GAN" template is still up on the talk page, so I'm just commenting to make sure you've seen the above comment. Liquidluck ✽ talk  21:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I could keep it on hold until your exams are done. They should be done next week, right? WarriorFor  ThreeToOne  21:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 15:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

images
when i release my work under Text of the GNU Free Documentation License, license, then it make no sense to dispute whether i add my name to it or kate winslet's ! :when i hv already released it under free license then legally its free even if its name is File:mohammad adil rais's all rights reserved image of campaign maps of alexander III, when its free its free, common sense ?
 * so the whole campaign makes no sense, just waste of time, more over in one such tag putting u had removed my image's license !, i think i need not to tell u tht if ur image lacks license even if thy hv 20 pages of description, they simply got deleted. look like u dont hv much of a troublesome experience in image uploading i hv more then enough, during my time on wikipedia after uploading more then 150 images.

regards الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  18:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * So what if it's free? You don't need anyone's name on the image name, it's long and annoying. Nobody wants to have to type your name along with the regular image name, when they are adding an image to an article. It's redundant and unnecessary. Dude, stop bragging? Why do you always toot your own horn? I have more than 5000 edits, I have uploaded more than 150 images. So what? That doesn't make you immune to errors. warrior  4321  19:38, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * so far no one hv complained about those long names, whn the concerned editors complain about it i will take action. Serious editors r interested in my work not their names !
 * I made them for byzantine sassanid wars and the author of tht article looks good and grateful, thts wht matter to me. U apparantly hv nothing to do with it.
 * Frankly i see ur useless interruptions in my work as rather offensive, why among those 3000 editors only u always come up with some thing....
 * As for been immune from errors, no i am not, but i feel like u are wikihounding me ever since.

and as long as my signs dont cost u a crash in stock market, try avoid fixing them for free .. ! الله أكبر  Mohammad Adil  19:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * How did I interrupt your work? I never even messaged you, you messaged me. It is basic knowledge that it takes much more time and effort to type a longer name for --no reason--. I do not want to argue about this anymore. You are not involved in this anyway, I did not ask you for your permission nor request you to do anything. I have placed the tag for an admin to do his job. By the way, author of tht article looks good and grateful, thts wht matter to me. U apparantly hv nothing to do with it. is wrong, very wrong. Every Wikipedian is an author of every article, the major contributor of that article is not the author. I have everything to do with it. Get your facts straights before trying to insult me.  WarriorFor  ThreeToOne  20:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I moved one of these images, before I realized that the first part of the filename was not just a name, but of the author. I feel uncomfortable with such rename suggestions, and I have not executed the other move so far. Though it is true that it allowed, that does not mean it should be done. A filename only needs to be correct, descriptive and rather unique. The filename became less unique by removing the authorname, making it more viable for commons nameconflicts, and it was not necessary either, as the name was both accurate and descriptive. If the uploader requests so, i will even move my on move back to the original. I have to add however, that I would prefer it if Mohammed appended this kind of information, instead of putting it at the beginning of the name. That makes the filenames easier to understand for editors. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 20:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * thanks theDJ, i request to move it back to its original name. such names were intended to make my image unique in sense that they dont mix up with others and tht follows wikipedia image naming policies. الله أكبر  Mohammad Adil  20:19, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, I hope you take my advice of adding such info at the end of the filename instead of the beginning for future uploads. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 20:31, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * so warrior i think u r satisfied now ? الله أكبر  Mohammad Adil  20:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I talked to three other admins, and even though they agreed with me, they told me that it's not worth fighting over an image's title, and to just leave it. Therefore, even though I'm not fully satisfied, I'm letting it go for now. WarriorFor  ThreeToOne  20:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * whatever.... no hard feelings. الله أكبر  Mohammad Adil  20:57, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course not. We're all working to improve the encyclopedia. Let's continue doing that. WarriorFor  ThreeToOne  20:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)