User talk:Warrior4321/Archive 5

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 12:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Airplaneman talk 01:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:Ahura Mazda
Dear Warrior4321. I do not see the version I restored which says And your version which says quite the same. The point is that you changed "Old Iranian" to "Old Indo-Iranian" (though you also did "Indo-Iranian-> Indo-Persian" which I do not see why? Why in Wikipedia there is so much controversy over Persian<-->Iranic?! This changes are "sometime" ok but please, please, if linguistic views matter let us do not change arbitrarily and we should follow the specialized sources as closely and precise as possible. As Boyce mentions " AHURA MAZDĀ ...the Avestan name with title of a great divinity of the Old Iranian religion, who was subsequently proclaimed by Zoroaster as God. His Indian counterpart, it has been argued, was the nameless, exalted Asura of the Rigveda; but this identification is not universally accepted. So how could we put Indo-Iranian identifican in the lead? I guess we just say what Boyce summarized in the lead paragraph of her article. The detail of this "Old Iranian, Old Indic, Old Indo-Iranian, Proto-Indo-Iranian" and the dispute in this matter are explained in the section Proto-Era Origin. I hope I addressed your concerns. As you are involved in certain antient article, you know that very Old Iranian and Indian materials are directly (and sometime only) related to linguistic analysis. Since there are differences between Iranian, Indic, Aryan, Persian, ...from linguistic point of view, I guess we (as editors) should follow the source very carefully.Xashaiar (talk) 19:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I did not change Iranian > Persian. The diff you have sent me says (2 intermediate versions not shown), and if you went to the history, it says :


 * Secondly, so the only difference between our revisions was Indo-Iranian, and Old Iranian? Could we just changed that wording rather than revert the entire revision? Thanks -- warrior  4321   21:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I am sorry for the mistake. The edit Iranian-> Persian was not from you. But the main issue remains. Your version with the exception of "Indo-Iranian" is ok, but what about this wording: "Ahura Mazdā (also known as Ohrmazd, Ahuramazda, Hormazd, Aramazd) is the Avestan name for a divinity, originally, of the Old Iranian religion who was later proclaimed the uncreated Creator, i.e. God, by Zoroaster. In the Avesta, Ahura Mazda is described as the highest deity of worship, along with being the first and the most frequently invoked deity in the Yasna." The "translation wisdom/wise/..." should be removed (but explained in the article), as Ahura Mazda is "principally" THE GOD and not a word any-more. Xashaiar (talk) 12:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Images
Hi, File:Mody atash behram.jpg, File:Vakil atash behram.jpg, File:Dadiseth atash behram.jpg, File:Desai atash behram.jpg, File:Anjuman atash behram.jpg, File:Banaji atash behram.jpg, and File:Wadia atash behram.jpg are missing evidence of permission. Hekerui (talk) 12:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I also fixed the license of File:Tomken Road Middle School - Talking Article.ogg to GFDL, under which the text at the time of recording was available. Best Hekerui (talk) 12:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow. Why would I need permission? The pictures were taken taken in the 1800's, no one currently holds the copyright to the images. They are in the public domain. warrior  4321   20:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. File:Mody atash behram.jpg for example states it was taken 1823, when the first photograph ever was taken 1827. The dates of the photograph pages correspond to the establishment dates of Atash Behram for each, making the dates rather dubious as production dates of the photos, so a source for verification of the date, or some evidence of permission (and if possible the author) are needed to establish public domain status. Regards Hekerui (talk) 09:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 18:25, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 19:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive - 1 week to go
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:38, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 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) 19:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 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) 04:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 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) 23:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 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) 12:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Lion and Sun
Hi, could ou please comment on lion and sun article. Your suggestion to resolve this dispute is realy appreciatedPasitigris1 (talk) 22:25, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 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) 21:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Taj Mahal
Re. this - are you a member of the wikiproject? Have you asked them? Why isn't it needed? I find it hard to conceive that one of the world's most famous buildings, built literally to represent the throne of god overlooking the garden of paradise, is not of interest to the Islamic wikiproject. --Joopercoopers (talk) 08:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)\
 * The Taj Mahal does not involve Islam in any way other than being built by a Muslim Shah and being an example of Muslim architecture. However, it is also an example of Persian and Hindu architectures. yet those aren't and should not be added there. WikiProject Islam would be better suited in Origins and architecture of the Taj Mahal, where the article talks about Muslim architecture.  warrior  4321   13:34, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree as it represents a built aspect of the history of their faith, but perhaps it might be an idea to ask the wikiproject if it's something they're interested in. --Joopercoopers (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. I believe a third opinion should be given on this discussion. Please inform me once you have asked them. warrior  4321   19:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Babakexorramdin
Thanks for your note. My gut instinct is to refuse the unblock request but I'm going to throw this over to more experienced admins for a final decision, will raise at WP:AN. Mjroots (talk) 06:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Having spotted why the request has gone unnoticed, I've responded on the editors' talk page and explained what needs to be done. Mjroots (talk) 06:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Your reversion at Talk:Cyrus the Great in the Qur'an today
Hi, you reverted my revert of a deletion at Talk:Cyrus the Great in the Qur'an today (here). I was reverting a previous deletion of material there as per WP:TPO and I wondered why you deleted that material again, since it doesn't appear to fall under any of the categories for deletion at WP:TPO. (I'm not claiming that the comments are particularly pleasant or useful comment, but it doesn't seem appropriate to delete them.)

All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, I truly apologize as I did not realize I was reverting your deletion. The reason I deleted the paragraph is because I felt it adhered to Point 2 on WP:TPO due to the comment about Islamics. Further, I found it a futile comment which would aid the construction and improvement of the article in no way. If you still feel like the comment should be left, feel free to revert it. warrior  4321   03:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem, I've done much the same myself before now by mistake (and will likely do it again in future too; such is being human).
 * There were two comments in that deletion; I'll restore the "monotheism" one and leave the "Islamists" comment on the cutting room floor. Neither are likely to lead to any improvement in the article, but I'm rather twitchy about talk page contributions being deleted (I found this one while cleaning up after a particular user who has a tendency to delete talk page material with which they disagree).
 * Many thanks and all the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 07:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Contribs    Muslim Editor     Talk  03:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Farah Khan
The citation that I added said her mother's side was Parsi, not Zoroastrian. Can you provide a citation that backs up your assertion? And can you provide me a quick education on the meanings of each? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bollyjeff (talk • contribs) 14:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And why did you remove her father's origins? I hope you are not using WP to promote your own religion to the exclusion of others.  BollyJeff  ||  talk  14:04, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed it because there was no source. Provide a citation. You cannot be of Parsi origin, that is like saying you are of Tamil origin, it does not make sense. Either fix the sentence structure or leave it as Zoroastrian origin, which is equally fine because she is a Zoroastrian. warrior  4321   15:45, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I like the way you fixed it, thanks. BollyJeff  ||  talk  23:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that we could reach a solution to this issue. warrior  4321   00:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Templates in Wikipedia listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Templates in Wikipedia. Since you had some involvement with the Templates in Wikipedia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bridgeplayer (talk) 21:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
 Coercorash Talk Contr. 02:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback2
 Coercorash Talk Contr. 04:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

RP2011 talk page message
My message was for RP2011 as it is their talk page. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 18:07, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Then why did you indent? An indent is for a reply to a comment. See WP:INDENT for more information. warrior  4321   18:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Zoroaster
Your edits to Zoroaster were destructive, not based on consensus, and not at all a case of "cleanup." -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 19:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * How so? warrior  4321   20:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Zoroaster for recent discussion.-Stevertigo (w | t | e) 20:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I know where the recent discussion is located. I'm asking -you- how my edits were destructive, as -you- made that claim. warrior  4321   20:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Reading up on the recent discussion should clear that up for you. Note also that marking your edits "cleanup" is not sufficient notation for large-scale changes to the lead. -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 20:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd rather you tell me what was destructive about it, so I can ensure that I won't make that mistake again. You don't help the project by reverting edits, not assuming good faith and telling users to go read a talk page, when they ask what they did wrong. On another note, cleanup is the proper notation to apply there. I removed whitespaces, and also did some copyediting, which are both cleanup. warrior  4321   21:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * How would you change the current version? -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 21:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The same I previously did, by moving the other variations of his name into the lead sentence. warrior  4321   21:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

See talk:Zoroaster. -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 18:11, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ahura Mazda
The article Ahura Mazda you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Ahura Mazda for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Redtigerxyz Talk 15:53, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I see. This is quite unfortunate. Let me take a look at it and get back to you. warrior  4321   21:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done with referencing, but it need needs a copyedit. Please see GA review page for more. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Persecution of Zoroastrians
I do not want to review it officially. Though I would leave a suggestions section on the talk. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

False accusation
Warrior4321, you posted a false, baseless accusation of a personal attack on my talk page. Such misbehaviour is totally unacceptable and I am disgusted that you would falsely accuse someone of breaking the rules. (Huey45 (talk) 09:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC))

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (Huey45 (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC))

Your userpage is in a category
Hello, Warrior4321. Your userpage User:Warrior4321/articles/Dastur has a category, and so appears in Category:Religion in India. It is suggested that you edit the userpage to prevent this showing. The guideline on userpages describes how this can be done. -DePiep (talk) 08:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Persecution of Zoroastrians
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Persecution of Zoroastrians you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. The review started on the 3rd September and can be found at Talk:Persecution of Zoroastrians/GA1. Pyrotec (talk) Pyrotec (talk) 19:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Persecution of Zoroastrians
The article Persecution of Zoroastrians you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Persecution of Zoroastrians for things which need to be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 16:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright,I'll get on it sometime close to this weekend. warrior  4321   03:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vishtaspa
The article Vishtaspa you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Vishtaspa for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter Volume V, Issue no. 2 - November 2010
This newsletter is automatically delivered by User:Od Mishehu AWB, operated by עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive a week away
<div style="background-color: #F0FFEC; border: 4px solid #107020; width:100%; -moz-border-radius: 15px; -webkit-border-radius: 15px;" > WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 23:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Sandalwood article needs attention
I was happy to see your comment in Discussion, after I'd been working on problems with the Sandalwood article, and realized changes would need explanation in Discussion. Another set of eyes, in fact a couple more sets of eyes would be welcome, since after an hour's work, I still see quite a number of unresolved issues. Best, 98.210.208.107 (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Hi Warrior! I see you editing again. Welcome back. Xashaiar (talk) 07:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Xashaiar. warrior  4321   15:23, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey
Hey warrior. Like I put in edit summary it was "stylistic" and yes I know that Persian empire is an inclusive term but in its msot common form refers to the Achaemenid empire. You want to change it back? Go ahead. As for the epithet I have seen enough sources using Cyrus the Great to use it as the primary name, the same way it should be Alexander the Great. If you like to change the Persian empire feel free to but again the text as it stands now does not violate any symantics. However as for the great epithet, granted it is an "epithet" but a great majority utilize it and I have seen in it in many literature as far back from Rawlinson, Fergusson, and as recent as Briant, Encyclopedi Iranica, and such, so I think it should stay that way. Also you cut out a source as well as the Persian version of the name of the Cyrus so that was another additional reason for the revert. Thanks! Dr. Persi (talk) 03:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I took out the link which was to Achaemenid empire as you mentioned the double link. There is adequate literature out there to support Cyrus the Great and the fact that the designation is the most commonly used. As for comparison with Darius I, the article is named Darius I not Darius the Great. Again this is really a minor stylistic issue but important nontheless. Dr. Persi (talk) 03:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello again. OK, I have been away from Wikipedia for quite some time. Back in the day it was "Darius I" for the title of the page and not Darius the Great. Frankly I think Darius I is more befitting but Darius the Great is good too, but I just saw it so I totally get what you mean. OK, this was MY BAD. You like to change it back? Go ahead, but please 1)keep the source (unless if you think it is crappy), 2) keep the Persian and romanized version of his name, and it is all yours. My bad it has been a while and like a month ago Darius's page was Darius I. Anyhow, this might explain the confusion. So ya it is up to you. You can change it back actually if you want. Cheers! Dr. Persi (talk) 03:23, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Again, your change is fine but just like Alexander, Cyrus is commonly known as Cyrus the Great. I changed that bit. Why wont you add the New Persian version of his name though? There is a considerable population that knows him by that name. I havent added his new Persian name, but I like to know why you havent. Thank. Dr. Persi (talk) 03:46, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand your change, but why did you remove Cyrus the Elder? He was known by the Greeks by that name. I removed the new Persian form as it clutters the lead. In the majority of articles that I have seen, the title is rewritten in one language (the most relevant to the subject). Any other languages should be discussed in the etymology section. But that's just my two cents - do you agree? warrior  4321   03:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Honestly because I could not fit it in there without messing up the way the sentence read and also to avoid making Cyrus the Elder sound "more common" than Cyrus the Great. I am open to ideas. You can fit it back? I understand what you say, I can tell by now that you are an educated man but believe me when I say about a good few millions do not know much about kurus but when they see the new persian version of his name they recognize him. I really like to see the new persian version back, but I leave it to you. Again, I really like to see you work out a way to add back Cyrus the Elder and the new Persian version but I am not terribly bugged either way. Thank you! [Addendum: Yes, actually why dont we add the New Persian version to the Etymology section! Good idea. I am for it. I guess all is left is for you to fit in the Elder portion.]]Dr. Persi (talk) 03:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Again sorry about all the trouble haha. I think I am gonna enjoy working with you. You look like an educated guy and you seem to know a great deal about Persian history. I am usually not used to seeing people deal with me in a civil communicative way so know that I appreciate it and again, hope you dont get the feeling that I am the ex-officio old guy tring to slow you down. I am still fast and can do an edit or two so I like to cooperate and so if you like to work together or improve things I be more than happy to butt in :). Cheers Dr. Persi (talk) 04:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I have made a change to the article to add in Cyrus the Elder - what do you think? warrior  4321   04:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Fine, but can we cut out the Greek part? I mean in the lead it is distracting. Cant we say "also known as Cyrus the Elder" was the founder of .... You know what I mean? Also for the cn tag you placed here is a source. It states that Koresh is the Hebrew name, I mean I would know I read about him in Hebrew so I know it is a fact but here is a source on that. So ya can we cut the Greek out? It totally distracts from the lead as Cyrus the Great is a Persian emperor and it would be equivalent to saying Alexandre is known by Persians as Eskandar. U know what I mean? Here is the link to the source: The Presbyterian review and religious journal Dr. Persi (talk) 04:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Persi (talk) 04:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, I made a minor change for the flow. Hope this is ok. Also let me know if the souce is up to task. Thanks. Dr. Persi (talk) 04:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I understand. I saw your edit, and it looks great. The source looks good, add it in. Please try and use the technique that I used. Thanks.  warrior  4321   04:33, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Sounds great! Done =]. [Addendum: I really do not know how to the sfn system witht this source so I left it the way I knew it would work. You can change it/teach me if you want how to do the sfn sourcing. I also added the New Persian version of the name to the Etymology section. I am pleased with the way the article looks and ya so go ahead and if you want to change things I trust you. I am going to sleep now, I have a shift tomorrow. Peace!] Dr. Persi (talk) 04:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * One last request/comment: One of the pages you wrote is actually a Good article but on your original page you listed it as "previously good." I think you should change that. I like your articles! They are actually meaningful. I spend a month or so when I had time to study about Achaemenid architecture. I would really welcome if you like to hit it up and check it out for me. You know see if you can work your magic. Achaemenid architecture is the page. See it and let me know how you think I can improve it. Cheers :) Dr. Persi (talk) 04:42, 22 July 2011 (UTC)