User talk:Zmmz/Archive 3

PLEASE, read my talk page
The administrator I was dealing with refuses to do anything about user:Diyakos actions. Read it and get back to me with a course of action. Manik666 05:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Don`t rely on individual admins who may not care to hear your side of the story, report your concerns here.Zmmz 06:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Har Roozetan Norouz, Norouzetan Pirooz هر روزتا ن نوروز, نوروزتان پيروز. Amir85 13:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom Case
Hi, I included a diff to your Rfc in an ongoing ArbCom case that we unfortunately had to file against Aucaman; so just be aware of that please.Zmmz 22:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. -- Cool CatTalk 22:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

HAPPY NEW YEAR
 D iyako Talk + 10:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Aucaman, Diyako, Heja helweda, Muhamed
You may want to comment on it. -- Cool CatTalk 13:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

با درود، به‌ حرفهاش گوش نکن، بعضی ها میخوان از وضعیت سواستفاده‌ بکنن‌، اگه‌ درگذشته‌ اختلافاتی در بین ما بوده‌ دلیل نمیشه‌ که‌ ما باز هم وضعیت رو ادامه‌ بدیم.  D iyako Talk + 14:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Please use english on english wikipedia so we all understand whats going on. Thanks -- Cool CatTalk 14:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Octavian
It's actually convention to bold-face alternate names for the subject of the article mentioned in the opening paragraph (the way "Ashkanian" is in bold-face on Parthia). Also, Octavian is just a redirect to Augustus, so it shouldn't be linked as it just brings you back to where you started. siafu 23:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

That is exactly why linked it, because a new reader might want to know the difference between the two names, hence, the link will show the names are interchangable; but, if you want to leave it bold faced, go ahead.Zmmz 23:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Siafu did you get my email? Zmmz 00:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Aucaman
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Aucaman. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 19:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Persian Jews
Now its your turn to check the talk page.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

You'll have to revert the edits to your original 'secularism'. Moshe's already gone and broken 3RR's, and I don't want to break it myself.black thorn of brethil 03:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, this is the first time I am having a discussion with you both, but both of you need to give each other the benefit of the doubt and compromise with each other more. But, Black definitely don`t go over the 3RR, just let`s see what Moshe says, and we`ll revert it to a compromised version. ThanksZmmz 03:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * deal. black thorn of brethil 03:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

You gave in way too easily. Your sentence ought still to contain a note on the secular bent of the Parthians, as that has immediate relevance to what comes after with the Sassanids - religious intolerance, suppression, bigotry and murder. black thorn of brethil 04:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I shouldnt of called you insane and I was kinda being a dick in general. Like I said earlier I wouldn't mind including a reference to their tendency towards secularism as long as it doesn't replace the hellenistic reference.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 08:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I propose the following: "For Persian Jews, the change from Parthian to Sassanid control was negative. Heavily influenced by Hellenistic attitudes towards religious freedom (relatively secular in governance and tolerant in general), the Parthian environment protected Jewish communities and rights.  The change to Sassanid control was, for all religious minorities, manifestly negative.  The Sassanid program favored the Pahlavi language and wholly restored the old monolithic religion of the Zoroastrianism (founded upon worship of the universal God Ahura Mazda) which, under the favoring influence of the new government, attained the zeal of conservatism and all its intolerant byproducts.[3]"
 * Please amend as necessary. A few footnotes from our discussion could stand insertion.  Well? black thorn of brethil 11:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Moshe, no problem, all is good, and I think the proposals by Black are good as well, for now.Zmmz 22:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

For the most part I agree I just think we should take more of a neutral position, like not mention it being negative. Also I don't really think the Parthians' religious tolerance was Hellenistic influenced, since most Greeks weren't all that religiously tolerant, if anything the Parthians being religiously tolerant were influenced by the earlier Archemids.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 03:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

How are you guys getting along on the compromise--Moshe and Black? Zmmz 08:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Check the Sassanid section. It seems good to me.  black thorn of brethil 18:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I just read it, it looks good to me, what do you think Moshe?Zmmz 01:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Just beautiful, almost as much as you.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 10:47, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks man, just let me know if you guys need me to mediate or if you need my opinion about possible compromises.Zmmz 22:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Not necessary to scold people for red links
Making a red link is a suggestion that an article is needed. There's nothing wrong with making one. Actually, having articles on early cartographers is a good idea. Zora 00:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, stay calm please, as far as I recall, I asked people to make sure the links works first before submitting save please; I`m not sure if that is scolding. I thought red links are not encouraged in articles. Zmmz 00:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Red links are useful
They help to indicate which articles still have to written. Cheers, —Ruud 00:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I thought so, but when I was new here, someone said they are to be erased, hhmmm. Sure thing though, but listen that section about possible Turkish origin has to be taken out, because it is factually inaccurate; at the time of that particular scientist the Seljuk Turks had not invaded Persia, it is only after their invasion that Khwarizmians and Azeris became mixed, i.e. Iranian-Turks. Tell me what you think? ThanksZmmz 00:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Totally unsourced, I've never heard anyone (outside Wikipedia) claim that he was a Turk, so that defitly needs to go. Also, User:ManiF seems surprised by your recent compromise, you might wnat to inform him about that. —Ruud 00:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

al-Karkhi
What do you think of the actions of user ManiF on this article al-Karkhi ? Jidan 05:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hi Zmmz. I will not block them now as they haven't vandalised since the last warning - I will however do my best to keep an eye on them. Cheers TigerShark 00:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Al-Karaji
You seem to have inserted an unneeded and misleading heading (the section is almost entirely non-biographical), reinstated duplicate wikilinks, removed facts, reinstated incorrected capitalisation, etc. Why? --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 10:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I`m sorry? Erased what facts? Are you sure it was me? I was the one who wrote the entire article, but some came in and erased a lot of stuff, so I don`t bother with it anymore. Also, I did erase some stuff, but they were rewritten, because they were originally copied and pasted from answers.com. You cannot do that in Wiki, if you want, I leave the Wiki manual link on your talk page---please review it. By the way, if as you acknowledge, a theory is now discarded, why do you still insert in in the article?Zmmz 21:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Ibn Khaldun
Dear Zmmz, I replaced the paragraph by the exact quotes of Ibn Khaldun about Persians, which all of them are full of praise for the Persian civilization. I have the book Muqaddimah and I have also submitted all of Ibn Khaldun's comments about Persians on the Talk page. You may add some of them to the article. There are many other quotes by him in praising Persians which can be included in that section. Here are some of his comments about Persians. If you like I can scan those pages and send it to you. All of the quotes are taken from Muqaddimah, Translated by Franz Rosenthal, Princeton University Press, 1981.


 * 1) Where are the sciences of the Persians that Umar ordered to be wiped out at the time of the conquest?.Muqaddimah, p.39, third paragraph.
 * 2) But in the provinces of the non-Arab Iraq and beyond to the East, no trace or source of (Arabic language) has remained. Even scientific books have come to be written in the Presian language, which is also used for teaching Arabic in class.Muqaddimah, p.295, last paragraph.
 * 3) As far as our historical information goes, these sciences (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music, physics, metaphysics, and astrology) were most extensively cultivated by the two great pre-Islamic nations, the Persians and the Greeks (Rûm)...The Chaldeans and, before them, the Syrians, as well as their contemporaries, the Copts, were much concerned with sorcery and astrology and related subjects of powerful (charms) and talismans. The Persian and Greek nations learned these things from them. Muqaddimah, p.372, paragraphs 6 and last.
 * 4) Among the Persians, the intellectual sciences played a large and important role, since the Persian dynasties were powerful and ruled without interruption. The intellectual sciences are said to have come to the Greeks from the Persians, when Alexander killed Darius and gained control of the Achaemenid empire. At that time, he appropriated the books and sciences of the Persians. However, when the Muslims conquered Persia and came upon an indescribably large number of books and scientific papers, Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas wrote to 'Umar bin al-Khattab, asking him for permission to take them and distribute them as booty among the Muslims. On that occasion, 'Umar wrote him: Throw them into the water. If what they contain is right guidance, God has given us better guidance. If it is error, God has protected us against it. Thus, the Muslims threw them into the water or into the fire, and the sciences of the Persians were lost and did not reach us.Muqaddimah, p.373, 2nd paragraph.
 * 5) Thus, the founders of grammar were Sibawayh and, after him, al-Farisi and az-Zajjaj. All of them were of non-Arab (Persian) descent. They were brought up in the Arabic language and acquired the knowledge of it through their upbringing and through contact with Arabs. They invented the rules of (grammar) and made it into a discipline (in its own right) for later (generations to use). Most of the hadith scholars who preserved traditions for the Muslims also were Persians, or Persian in language and upbringing, because the discipline was widely cultivated in the Iraq and the regions beyond. Furthermore, all the scholars who worked in the science of the principles of jurisprudence were Persians. The same applies to speculative theologians and to most Quran commentators. Only the Persians engaged in the task of preserving knowledge and writing systematic scholarly works. Thus, the truth of the following statement by the Prophet becomes apparent: If scholarship hung suspended in the highest parts of heaven, the Persians would attain it. Muqaddimah, p.429-430.
 * 6) Therefore, it is necessary to have reference to ordained political norms, which are accepted by the mass and to whose laws it submits. The Persians and other nations had such norms. The dynasty that does not have a policy based on such (norms) cannot fully succeed in establishing the supremacy of its rule.Muqaddimah, p.154, 3rd Paragraph.
 * 7) The first type of rational politics may concern itself with the general interest, and with the ruler's interest in connection with the administration of his realm, in particular. This was the politics of the Persians. Muqaddimah, p.257, 4th Paragraph.
 * 8) The Persians made no one king except members of the royal house. Further, they chose him from among those who possessed virtue, religion, education, liberality, bravery, and nobility. Then, they stipulated in addition that he should be just. Muqaddimah, p.234.
 * 9) One compare here the story that al-Mas'udi tells in the connection with the history of the Persians. In the days of King Bahram bin Bahram, the Mobedhan, the chief religious dignitary among the Persians, expressed to the King his disapproval of the latter's injustice and indifference to the consequences that his injustice must bring upon the dynasty...(Mobedhan tells a story about a pair of male and female owls, where female owl asked as a pre-condition for marriage the gift of twenty villages ruined in the days of Bahram). The King was stirred out of his negligence by that story....After consultation with the Mobedhan, the King ordered the farms to be taken away from the intimates of the ruler and be restored to their owners...As a result, his days were prosperous, and his realm was well organized.Muqaddimah, p.238-239.
 * 10) Poetry is not restricted exclusively to the Arabic language. It exists in every language. There were poets among the Persians and among the Greeks.Muqaddimah, p.456, Last Paragraph.Heja Helweda 02:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Cataphract
"Peoples and states deploying cataphracts at some time in their history included (in this order) tribal groups, the Parthian dynasty, Iranian Sarmatians, Seleucids, Sassanid Persia, Armenians and the Byzantine Empire, Pergamenes, the Roman Empire, "

Sorry, what I meant was that it wasn't necessarily completely sequential chronologically, since many of these deployers overlapped historically. I'm also certain that, contrary to the latest edit, Pergamon and the pre-Theodosian Roman Empire came before and not after the Byzantine Empire. Indeed the Pergamene state was formed shortly after the Seleucid Empire was forged and was roughly contemporaneous with it. It might also be of benefit to explicitly state that the Parthians and the Iranian Sarmatians were the first ones to include cataphracts in their armies. Khepidjemwa&#39;atnefru 23:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I think, then, stating the following may be more appropriate....“more or less in order of use”. Also, feel free to move them around, and provide one source for your usage. ThanksZmmz 00:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Anon @ Iran
Check out what they did to the Pashtuns page - they removed every reference to the word "Iranian" that they could find! --Khoikhoi 05:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Iran
Every reference was not removed, just derogatory remarks such "Iranian stock". Khoikhoi agreed with me about one month ago that it was derogatory and should be changed to Pashtuns are descendants of eastern Iranians, but he now has changed his mind! It is good to mention the eastern Iranian roots, but do not make the article about how everything is from "Iranian" this and "Iranian" that!! That is all I am saying. Thank you.

How is being of "Iranian stock", which is a factual statement, derogatory? I looked at the article; you actually erased every single word that was Iran or Iranian.Zmmz 06:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Please see discussion between Khoikhoi and Souther Comfort on April 1st They may edit it now but take a look at Khoikhoi's discussion page, they discuss the "Iranian Stock" derogatory comment. Very interesting and works toward my point that there is an agenda on Wikipedia that is not healthy. They knew that that using the word "stock" couldn't be backed up at that time, but did not change it. Furthermore, when someone went on to take it off, they were the first to issue "warnings" and put the "Iranian Stock" comment back on. Real sneaky if you ask many of us such Haider, Zak etc.. Is this the way Wikipedia works? I hope not.

Also, not all the references to Iran were removed, I checked myself, and I was not the one who removed all the Iranian references either. I share a computer with some colleagues sometimes, and a couple of them removed the term as they stated it was a complete joke that a couple of people were running rampantly through all sorts of ethnic articles and placing "Iranian" this and "Iranian" that wherever they could with very minimal evidence in most cases. That is a joke if you ask me!

Like I said before, it is one thing to reference the partial descendatns to eastern Iranian / Persian peoples, but another to call a whole group "stock". That is completely inappropriate and should not be tolerated. I will address the barrage of inappropriately placed Iranian comments throughout Wikipedia pages with the Wikipedia org later.

Your message on my talk page
Is that message intended to constitute "evidence of trying to resolve the problem" before you launch another Arbcom case?

I don't think that it was particularily helpful. There's nothing wrong with having a POV on WP. It is considered wrong to try to enshrine it at the expense of all other POVs.

Nor am I doing "original research". None of the positions of which you accuse me are all that off-beat. Standard conference fare.

It might help if we both read the Garthwaite book I mentioned and then argued about the book. If you're at U of C (you mentioned talking to Donner) Regenstein will probably have it. I'll have to save up for it. Zora 22:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Pashtun page
Hello. Well I'm the guy who inserted the Eastern Iranian phrase in the first place when I started adding and drastically changing the article and I have left that for the info. box which explains related people and the rest of the article delves into the Iranian peoples links regarding the Pashtuns. Yes, I've been reading some books and articles and the Pashtuns, first and foremost share ties with their immediate neighbors, whom I've also listed in addition to the Iranian peoples. Their lineage (whether entire or partial) from an Iranic people is not in question, but not necessary for the opening as many ethnic groups are not given this rendition (see English people etc.). See discussion page on Pashtuns as well for my rationale. Tombseye 20:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I`m sorry, how is it not necessary to state in the intro of an article the lineage of the certain ethnic group that the article is about, in an encylopedia of all places? The infobox mention is rather irrelevant, and not a good excuse to erase this fact from the intro.Zmmz 21:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Because it doesn't have to be emphasized, it's already mentioned 20 times throughout the entire article. --Khoikhoi 21:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

No, it has to be emphasized in the intro. The origin of the ethnicity needs to be stated in the intro in the article about that ethnicity.Zmmz 21:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Why? They're not famous for being Iranian, are they? It's already in the infobox. --Khoikhoi 22:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, I`m sorry, it is not about being famous, it is about the factual origin of an entire ethnicity; the origin, not the current status.Zmmz 22:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Fine, fine. I'll revert. Just keep an eye on that page and make sure the anon doesn't revert back. *Sigh* --Khoikhoi 22:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks Khoikhoi; I know you are tired.Zmmz 22:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm very tired, and now we have Zanyar at Talk:Iranian peoples saying that the "Kurds do not resemble Iranians". BTW he is most likely Diyako/Xebat's sockpuppet. --Khoikhoi 22:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * At least we have some good news. :) --Khoikhoi 22:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I hope after that, there be more constructive discussions, and the disruptiveness ceases for a while.Zmmz 22:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree. --Khoikhoi 22:19, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Spelling nitpick
Um, it's grammar, not grammer. Zora 23:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me?Zmmz 00:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Gulf
I didn't actually revert anything. I just worked on syntax. As it happens those two sentences were added by me. It's been six months, and they have been altered, gutted, restored, tweaked, argued about, etc. But basically, those two sentences are recognizable as I added them and I continue to defend them when someone has a problem! Marskell 21:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, and jeepers you have a long talk page! Maybe an archive is in order :) Marskell 21:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:A Relief of a Persian King Battling a Demon.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:A Relief of a Persian King Battling a Demon.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Tomb of rumi at konya turkey.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tomb of rumi at konya turkey.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Stamp three.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Stamp three.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 06:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Persia-_Sassanian_Cavalry.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persia-_Sassanian_Cavalry.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 11:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Iranian peoples Image
Hi, what is wrong with the other images [Iranian farmers and women] please, and how can the possible problem be fixed? Thank youZmmz 07:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand, I only looked at that one image, do you want me to look through the rest? - cohesion 17:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Huh??
Why do you keep removing this? It's a comment insulting Iranians. &mdash;Khoikhoi 01:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I have not done so.Zmmz 01:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you added "The Iranians are just as scary as the Hindutva folk" and I added on to make the full quote "The Iranians are just as scary as the Hindutva folk. If they get the bomb too, that's an axis of potential insanity right across central Asia" - you keep removing the 2nd part. --&mdash;Khoikhoi 01:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

You cannot edit my sections though.Zmmz 01:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Can you add it then? --&mdash;Khoikhoi 01:20, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Persepolis - The Sculptures 3.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persepolis - The Sculptures 3.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc (?) 20:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, how can I add a source?Zmmz 20:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * To add a source, just click on the edit tab on an image description page (the page linked to in the header of this message) and add a tag as specified above (e.g. ). The rest of the instructions are in the message above. Thanks. Wikiacc (?) 21:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Tochal Mountain.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tochal Mountain.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc (?) 21:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: evidence of compromise
Hey Zmmz, I have resonded on that guys talk page as you have requested. I basically said you shouldn't be blocked and it was kinda strange that you were picked on since out of all the editors with a similar POV, youi are easily the most courteus and reasonable.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 11:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem man, I would hate to see you not be able to edit anymore, I like how even with your POV you still don't come across as dogmatic.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Xebat
You can if you wish (I'm sure this diffs on his talk page, as well as most of the rest of that page, should be a good starting point), but frankly, I don't think it's worth the time or effort. Xebat is a vandal, and he does very little to try to hide this point. Far apart from the complex edit wars of Aucaman, Xebat is pretty easy to deal with (as evidenced by his current block). In the event he shows up again, I imagine he'll simply throw around a few more curses until he gets blocked for even longer. --InShaneee 00:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, but I just do not want to exclude anyone, even those whom I agreed with in POV. Nevertheless, my fear is User:Xebat will come back with another username, like he did before, but this time more cautious in disrupting articles; nevertheless, still tangent to edit-warring, and occasional incivilities. I won’t be around then, and [if] someone else decides to report him, it may take months, even so needlessly wasting the time of ArbCom members. If you feel appropriate, since, you blocked him, you provide the evidence. I don’t have too much time anymore. By the way, maybe--you were right--maybe it was worth it to stick around and see this thing to the end; even if, it came at the expense of myself being banned. Believe it or not, I care about Wiki; I have learned so much from browsing around here, that otherwise, would not have, since buying an encyclopedia is not really feasible for some people. Zmmz 01:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll consider it, but more importantly, I really do hope you reconsider leaving. No one's getting blocked here; the whole point of this RfA is to try to get this debate back under control. In other words, to make life EASIER for the editors. We're working for you guys! And we really need experienced, driven editors here. Just think about it. --InShaneee 04:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, if I am topically banned, then I don`t have much else to contribute, but I will of-course keep reading the articles. But, if I am partially banned, then most likely, I will stay for a few more month. You are doing a good job, by the way; these guys need at least one or two stern admins to keep them in place.Zmmz 05:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Iranian peoples
The image.. I think selection can be much better. Also the name of it.."Uzbeks"? that should be fixed also. -- - K a s h  Talk 16:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Since when are Turks an Iranian people ? While you're at it, why dont you put up pictures of a Han Chinese woman and a Cherokee man and pass them off as "Iranian" :p ? Their inclusion makes just as much sense :) - Kilhan 19:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * LOL are you for real ? Your very own source clearly states that she is Osmanli(aka Anatolian/Rumelian Turk - the dominant ethnic group in Turkey). Guess where the majority of your so called "iranian turks" live. Anyway, join the discussion at Talk:Iranian peoples. Your own compatriots have even agreed to take it off. You even just admitted that she is a TURK lol. Well thats exactly why she shouldnt be there, genious !:). And Another thing, you cannot just pluck images out the internet and label them as "Public property for non-commercial use ". There's a reason why we have so many different image tags. This sort of copyright abuse can get you banned -Kilhan 23:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

The owner of the site admitted that he uses the picture for all Turkish or Turkic related people. The rights to that picture was given to me.Zmmz 23:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well d'oh, thats why she shouldnt be there. Because she's Turkic, T-U-R-K-I-C. She shouldnt be on your little composite image the same the reason maria sharapova or nelson mandela shouldnt. They are not Iranian peoples. -Kilhan 23:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

First of all, please remain civil, and calm. Secondly, as I stated, the author indicated she can be used as an Iranian-Turk, since he himself uses her picture in a broadened sense. Thank youZmmz 23:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * She obviously doesnt belong there. Whatever it is, come onto Talk:Iranian peoples so that other editors can pipe in their opinions on the issue-Kilhan 23:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

There is no issue. I don`t see anyone discussing the picture, and with all due respect, I just indicated to you, that the author indicated she can be used as an Iranian-Turk. I don`t see any problems here. Zmmz 23:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

If I insert the picture back into the article, would you try to revert it again?Zmmz 00:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Zmmz, here is the source that he is talking about. There obviously is an issue. &mdash;Khoikhoi 01:46, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Iranianswithdifferentbackgrounds.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Iranianswithdifferentbackgrounds.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Also, you should consider archiving your talk page. Happy editing, Flying Canuck 03:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Note re: Arb request
Thanks for advising me of the ongoing Arbitration concerning User:Zora; it's good to be informed. For the time being, I'll decline getting involved, as my interaction with her was brief and superficial — I'd have little to contribute. I hope that you're able to reach a resolution, and forgive any mistake on my part at WP:AN/I. Tijuana Brass 07:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Persian local woman.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian local woman.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. AucamanTalk 02:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I am Sorry To hear About You
Do not leave; help reshape the system. If you study me carefully you will know who I am and what I am. 72.57.230.179 04:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Collage of azeris and others.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Collage of azeris and others.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. AucamanTalk 02:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


 * user:Acuman you are a snake trying to put salt in someones wounds. Your going to get what is coming to you. 72.57.230.179 04:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Oldman again.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Oldman again.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 08:06, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Azerbaijan
Hi there,

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

KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Copyright Question on William Connelly's Page
I noticed your question while leaving him a note. I manage copyrights at work. The short answer is: he must have the permission of the image's creator. The only thing that changes this is if the creator attached a "free for non-comercial use" or some other such license to the image or to the page that serves the image --CTSWyneken 21:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for finally clarifying this; so which tag should I use? The pics have been given to me by the creators of the pics, not third parties, but they are only to be used in Wikipedia. Zmmz 21:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Copyrights
Hi, just to make sure; if I am given a picture free-of-charge, to be used in Wikipedia only, and the original author has the copyright, yet, gives non-exclusive rights to, I--is this the correct tag for it?; is PermissionAndFairUse tag correct, or should I use another tag? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmmz (talk • contribs)
 * The problem is a misunderstanding about what images are acceptable. We cannot accept images that are permitted only for use at wikipedia, at all. I know that might seem weird, but if the image is given to us, only for use here, we cannot accept it. Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL and is extensively copied over the whole internet. We facilitate this copying, and if we have content that shouldn't be copied we are violating copyright. Fair use is an aspect of US copyright law that allows copyrighted images to be used in a free speech context and is quite complicated. An example of fair use would be if I was going to comment on a company logo, and say it was poorly designed. I could include a copy of that logo even though I don't have copyright to it. I could not use the logo to make a new product though. Fair use doesn't apply to most images, and I can't see how it would apply to this one. - cohesion 21:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

So exactly, what do I kind of permission do I need to get from the creators?Zmmz 21:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The copyright holders would need to re-license their works under the GFDL, or Creative Commons licenses. This is unlikely though. That is why the upload page states "Images found on websites or on an image search engine should generally not be uploaded to Wikipedia." I think you might be going into this with the assumption that any image can be used if you only tag it correctly, this is not the case. Most images online cannot be used unless they are re-licensed, which in most cases is unlikely. - cohesion 22:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I will just ask the creators of the pics to release all rights, does that work?Zmmz 22:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, if you have enough access to the copyright holders they have a variety of choices in re-licensing, see Image copyright tags, they can choose any free license, such as GFDL, or Creative Commons if they don't want to give up complete control (for example, requiring attribution is ok). If they do want to completely give up all rights the no rights reserved tag is correct, but keep in mind that means anyone can copy the image and do whatever they want with it. If they are ok with this though, be sure to remove the text about is being specific permission for you though, because this will confuse other editors later and may end up getting the images tagged for deletion. Hope that all makes sense :) - cohesion 22:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Iranian peoples pix
sure no problem. The picture of the girl is good, but has nothing to do with the section where she was placed whereas the Bactriana Complex picture does. She is part of the cultural dimension and logically she seems suitable for the culture section. In the future I'll let you know. Also, the main picture needs more diversity that doesn't include people from Iran as I explained on the discussion page. Thanks and take care. Tombseye 22:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The main picture already includes an Israeli, Afghan, a Canadian-Iranian, and a Persian. I don`t think it is prudent to get more people there, because it is only five pics; otherwise, the pic becomes too long/unusable.Zmmz 22:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but Israeli Iranians are a tiny group, whereas Kurds are the 3rd largest group and the Tajiks and Ossetians and Baluchis are major peoples. Putting up Iranian Jews is okay, but not really representative of the IRanian peoples since you have three Iranian Persians which is disproportionate. Also, in the diversity section, I would suggest no picture as that section is really about Turko-Iranians and other overlapping groups whereas Persian Jews are simply Persians of the Jewish faith. Tombseye 23:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Persian Jews are as Iranian as others, and like I said the pic has only room for 5 pics, and the two presidents are important. I just added a Tajik picture seperately, so feel free to find a pic of a Kurd and add it somewhere into the article. No one should object to that.Zmmz 23:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You're missing the point. The article now seems like it's about the Persians rather than about the Iranian peoples. And Persian Jews are still Persians thus there are too many Persians on the page now. Adding pictures for the sake of adding pictures is pointless. It has to be specific to the section too. The picture of the Mofaz is also pointless as that section is about non-Iranian peoples with close cultural ties. The collage should include the Tajik and a Kurd or we should not have the collage. We can vote on it in the discussion page if you want to, but there are too many pictures of Persians on the page already. Tombseye 00:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I asked you before, and in the discussion you said the pic is fine, submit it. It is extremely difficult to get copyright permissions from creators of the pics, and I have done so. I am not going to delete the pic. As a compromise we can replace the Gilaki woman with a Kurd, but in text only, such that the pic is only a model representing generically Iranian peoples. So, she could very well be Kurdish. In fact, the designer is inspired by Qajar era, and the Kurds. You can view his web site.Zmmz 00:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Uploads
I'm sorry, but can you please stop uploading images until you have a better understanding of our image copyright policies. Many of the images you are uploading are tagged incorrectly, Image:Wiped.jpg suggests copyright and permission yet you have tagged it as no rights reserved, likewise Image:Mrspresedident.jpg. You also seem to be uploading many copies of the same image. If you have any questions let me know, or ask on Media copyright questions but until you have a good understanding please stop uploading as all of these things will have to be corrected by volunteers. Thanks - cohesion 22:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There is a question above; let`s start from there.Zmmz 22:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


 * They aren't trying to be bureaucratic, they are just trying to help. When you get the copyright owner to relicence these photos, I suggest he use the Creative Commons version 2.5 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ Then you can put the tag cc-by-sa-2.5 in the description on each of the image pages. And I agree, remove the reference to yourself. 67.42.61.239 02:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

One of the creators asked to use the creative commons tag himslef via email though. That should be good enough; no?Zmmz 02:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit war?
I don't know where you got the idea that I am in an edit war. I've never initiated nor participated in edit wars of any kind. The changes I and Jeff made last night were reverted by yourself and Zereshk. Look carefully through the history and you'll see I did not revert your reversions. The only reverts I ever make are against obvious vandalism. You repeatedly ask for me to discuss changes on the talkpage and yet you have not made even one comment on the suggested improvements. Perhaps you could take a look now? The reason for deleting the subheading is that the section is fragmented by so many subsections. It would be better to have a continuous prose instead. I will continue to make positive changes and if you disagree, you are welcome to propose alternatives. Please note that simply reverting to an older version is not going to improve the article. Green Giant 02:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

What you call revert, was a rvv., which put back pics you deleted. And, you insisted no poll is even neeed? You guys need to work with others, and do not erase sections/pics unless you ask others; even if, you don`t feel like talking to other people. Please don`t erase first, and wait till others voice their voices; ask first, delete later. Zmmz 02:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * What precisely is a "rvvv"? I don't remember insisting that a poll is not needed. I think you are referring to Jeff's comment that it isn't Wikipedia policy to hold straw polls for every change. I'm the one who rewrote the POV paragraph in the Post-Islamic History subsection, but I didn't simply insert my NPOV version, I left it on the talk page and got positive responses before making changes to the article. I'm also the person who fixed the article's references last week so that in the event of a featured article candidacy, the article would not fall foul of the most common objection given - inline citations. Would you rather that I simply didn't contribute to Iran? I ask this because you have so far presented considerable unwarranted hostility to anything I have done on Iran. Have a look through the current discussion page and note I have made 29 comments in 2 days outside the straw polls. Where did you get the idea that I don't like talking to other people? Any chance that you could do me the courtesy of talking to me about my suggested improvements? Green Giant 02:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The removed images from Iran
It's a legal issue - the onus is on the editors to provide the permissions or rationales. The admins job in this respect is to make sure images are not being wrongly used. If they allow the images to be used without rationales, then Wikimedia becomes legally culpable and faces the possibility of legal action by the copyright holders. Green Giant 01:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Green Giant seems to have already answered your question on why the images were removed. The liscensing on the images are correct, AFAIK. However, they are under copyright and can only be used as fair use, in which case, this does not appear to be one of them. Please read WP:FAIR for more information on fair use. And secondly, it is not incumbent on me to warn editors who are already aware of 3RR that they are impending violating the policy. I put it on the talk page as a warning to every editor of the article. Edit warring is not acceptable. And thus, to avoid having to post on every users talk page, I posted it on the talk page of the article. It was obvious by how frequently the article and the talk page were edited that my warning would not go unnoticed. Pepsidrinka 01:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I am aware of the rules, but I am not the one you need to inform though. Those are not my pictures, but I think it is appropriate that you copy and paste this on the talk pages of whom the pictures belong to, to show them courtesy, and inform them of the issues. Also, the procedure for 3RR warning is to leave it on user talk pages as well. Zmmz 01:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I disagree. It is incumbent on the people uploading the picture and/or adding it to the article to provide a fair use rationale as to why it belongs on that article, assuming the picture is under copyright. Further more, please provide me a link to where it says that it is policy for admins to warn on user talk page. As far as I know, each admin may deal with the situation his/her own way. As far as I'm concerned, in this instance, it was not necessary for me to warn either of you, as you both were aware of the policy. Forgetting how many times you revert is not acceptable. You should not edit war in the first place. 3RR does not entitle you to 3 free reverts and what you and the other user was doing was gaming the system. Pepsidrinka 01:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Again, I am not the one you need to inform of these info. Please review this page for warning other users, it will be helpful to you,. And, about the pic, you dont have to let them know you erased them, but out of courtesy, it is a good thing if you do.Zmmz 01:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well Zmmz, thought you should know I got quite a rude message from "Pepsidrinka" regarding the Mahmoud image. One, I might add, that is completely erronius. He actually makes the claim that Wiki doesn't have the right to crop a headshot that we are using via fair use- despite the fact that it's a practice that is insanely common. His tone, also, was extremely condescending, and, I might add, rude. If this guy is an admin, I would say that his behavior is disheartening, to say the least. Nevertheless, I've turned his vandalism and rudeness into something good- I've since uploaded a Mahmoud image that's both an improvement (it's color), AND it's uncropped-fair-use, since its part of the press photos that Iran's released to the public and availiable everywhere. Turning sour apples into wine, I would say. Even so, it displeases me to a large extent that an indidvidual such as Pepsidrinka would choose to jam himself into an article and serve no purpose but to slash pieces out of it. Sigh. Never Cry Wolf 07:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Iran- Dariush.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Iran- Dariush.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 16:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

More Images
To avoid filling your talk page with about 10+ more templates of images with no sources or copyright information, I'm going to just list them here. Please review the source data for the following images:


 * Image:Tomb of ferdowsi two.jpg
 * Image:Persia two.jpg
 * Image:Iran-mazrae.jpg
 * Image:Stamp three.jpg
 * Image:Persepolis (1878), engraving by Frederick Stacpoole ARA (1813–1907).jpg
 * Image:Iran- xerexes korosh gateway.jpg
 * Image:Markaz.jpg
 * Image:Veda copy.jpg
 * Image:Pasirpashgilkafgh.jpg
 * Image:Irpashafgh.jpg
 * Image:Gulab mmm.jpg

Please review the copyright status for each of the following:


 * Image:A Relief of a Persian King Battling a Demon.jpg
 * Image:Stamp three.jpg

Please note that these pictures will be deleted if they are not sufficently updated within 7 days. Pepsidrinka 16:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Persian model4.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian model4.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 16:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I have personally contacted the creators/owners of these images and obtained permission to use the creative commons tag on them. You can email me or the owner for proof; see the pic`s info for contact detail.Zmmz 20:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Non-commercial images
Ok. You seem to have uploaded some images that have non-commercial liscenses. According to the criteria for speedy deletion, they fulfil the criteria when there is no assertion of fair use. I suggest you read Images, Image use policy, Image copyright tags, and become familar with the speedy deletion criteria for images. Pepsidrinka 15:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * And I have deleted them accordingly └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I have personally contacted the creators/owners of these images and obtained permission to use the creative commons tag on them. You can email me or the owner for proof; see the pic`s info for contact detail.Zmmz 20:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problems from IranPIX
I have listed Image:02-01-13-x-0094-iran-tehran-tochal-ski-skiing-0640.jpg and Image:01-08-14-6581-iran-tehran-azadi-shahyad-0640.jpg as copyright problems, since you state they are from IranPIX, whose website states " Pictures on this site may not be copied for commercial use or distribution, nor may these objects be modified or reposted to other sites and media. All pictures by IranPIX. © IranPIX". Unless you can provide proof that these photos have also been licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License as you tagged them, they are likely to be deleted. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The owner has given me permission to use them as creative common licensed. You can email me or him for proof.Zmmz 20:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Zmmz, just thought you might like to know that you could avoid any question of improper use by posting the permission at Successful_requests_for_permission and send a copy of the permission by email to "permissions@wikimedia.org" so they can archive it. Green Giant 22:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)