Wikiwand AI

User talk:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Nahavand (1730) (May 11)

Draft declined
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.
Feedback
The reviewer, BlueStaticHorse, left the following feedback:
This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:
  • provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, not just brief mentions or routine announcements;
  • are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
  • are independent: not connected to the subject, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.
Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

Next steps

  • Edit Draft:Battle of Nahavand (1730) to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
  • When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
  • If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

Scam warning

BSH (talk) - (she/her) 19:33, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Shahanshah Kiryu! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! BSH (talk) - (she/her) 19:33, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Nahavand (1730) (June 9)

Draft declined
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.
Feedback
The reviewer, CopyleftEverything, left the following feedback:
Comment: This is a very short article. It is notable entirely because of the broader Western Iran campaign of 1730, also a short article that is severely lacking in sources. I think this might meet WP:Notability currently, but overall it would do much better merged into that article, which is clearly notable. What do you think? :)

Next steps

  • Edit Draft:Battle of Nahavand (1730) to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
  • When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
  • If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

Scam warning

CopyleftEverything (talk) 19:30, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
First of all, thank you for reviewing my draft. I had hoped to have this approved but it does seem better to merge this into the Western Iran campaign of 1730, an article also lacking sources as you have mentioned. Shahanshah Kiryu (talk) 03:56, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
Hi @Shahanshah Kiryu: I am not opposed to this being an independent page! It's a good article, if very short. thak you for your work! :)
I think it could stand on its own if you would like to resubmit. But I think it would fit much better into the broader page. CopyleftEverything (talk) 04:27, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
I will try to expand the article and add more content to it to allow it to better fit WP:Notability and resubmit soon. Again, I appreciate your review @CopyleftEverything Shahanshah Kiryu (talk) 04:37, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
@CopyleftEverything Hello! I have made changes to my draft, the Battle of Nahavand (1730) and resubmitted it. Could you review it if you have the time? Appreciate it. Shahanshah Kiryu (talk) 17:37, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Battle of Nahavand (1730) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Battle of Nahavand (1730). Thanks! CopyleftEverything (talk) 01:52, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Nahavand (1730) has been accepted

Battle of Nahavand (1730), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Future articles

Next steps

Thanks again, and happy editing!

CopyleftEverything (talk) 20:36, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Selim beg per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Selim beg. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request through the unblock wizard or through your talk page.  Izno (talk) 03:36, 15 July 2026 (UTC)
cross icon
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

Request reason:

This account does not belong to User:Selim beg. I am a different individual and I'd like to know how I can provide evidence for this. To affirm the evidence presented in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Selim beg I had originally given Selim beg the source to make an edit in the Siege of Baghdad 1733 page due to me not being able to at the time. However I was not aware that Selim Beg's main account was banned, and that he had sockpuppets. I was only informed of this after the edit was done. After his edit was reverted, I edited in from the same source (that I had provided him). To affirm the name similarity, Kiryu is my go-to nickname across social media usually paired with Shahanshah, it has no political meaning and it is meant to be aesthetic. I will point out his - editing the same page with the same source with a similar name does not make the two accounts the same person, the evidence is insignificant and doesnt prove anything, our topics are also different as I am mainly focused on Nader Shah and Selim beg does not research this era. In the end, I should have waited until I could have made the edit myself and not taken the risk.

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. 331dot (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

icon
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

Request reason:

The following request was written through the unblock wizard.
Can you explain, in your own words, what you were blocked for?
I was falsely blocked due to a misunderstanding which led to me being mistaken for a sockpuppet.
If unblocked, what edits would you make and what (if applicable) would you do differently?
I would continue to do my usual edits about history, however I will take the necessary precautions to avoid being mistaken for a sockpuppet again (such as changing my name).
Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?
The person that I was mistaked for and I have completely different interests in what we edit, I edit the era of Nader Shah Afshar and the history of that range mainly however the individual I was mistaken for edits and researches about a different era.
Shahanshah Kiryu (talk) 12:08, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You said "I had originally given Selim beg the source to make an edit", meaning you coordinated editing with them. If you coordinate with a blocked user, you will be blocked yourself, because we don't know who is sitting at the computer/holding the device operating an account. Furthermore, "editing the same page with the same source with a similar name" is indeed sufficient to block for sockpuppetry, see WP:MEAT. I think your only pathway forward here is the standard offer. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 19:29, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Renamer note: Your account has been renamed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:38, 17 July 2026 (UTC)
icon
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

I had already changed my username to Jahangusha-ye Kiryu from Shahanshah Kiryu. (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

The following request was written through the unblock wizard.
Can you explain, in your own words, what you were blocked for?
I was confused for a sockpuppet of a different individual named Selim Beg due to a name similarity and an edit.
If unblocked, what edits would you make and what (if applicable) would you do differently?
I would continue to do my normal edits however be more cautious about it so that i am not mistaken for a sockpuppet again.
Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?
My points are: I believe a name similarity and a mutual edit is not sufficient for a block. If the person who blocked me actually looked at the edits of Selim Beg and myself they would realize that our edits are too irrelevant to be the same person. I am sorry for the inconvenience and I will check before doing my edits to see if similar edits have been reverted before or got other accounts blocked for sockpuppts.
Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (talk) 14:58, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you:
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:24, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Unblock request

icon
This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

Request reason:

I'd like to make a request for my account to be unblocked. I acknowledge my mistake that I cooperated with a sockpuppet whilist making an edit. We also live in the same country which made it look even more like my account was a sockpuppet. I had no prior knowledge that their account was a sockpuppet, but it is not excusable, I should have been more careful.

I am requesting for the viewing administrator to fully look into my edits and the Selim Beg account, because I believe it will show that the accounts have different focuses.

So far and hopefully never, I have not made any mistakes that could mislead wikipedia users. I have made tons of edits on the articles of (or related to, went as far as making my own article Battle of Nahavand 1730 Nader Shah Afshar and the Afsharid Iran. I wish to continue my goal of letting Wikipedia users learn more about Nader Shah and his history.

I just wish to preserve the progress and hard work, and hopefully if I am pardoned, continue my contributions.

Once again, I am sorry. Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (talk) 23:54, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I'd like to make a request for my account to be unblocked. I acknowledge my mistake that I cooperated with a sockpuppet whilist making an edit. We also live in the same country which made it look even more like my account was a sockpuppet. I had no prior knowledge that their account was a sockpuppet, but it is not excusable, I should have been more careful. I am requesting for the viewing administrator to fully look into my edits and the Selim Beg account, because I believe it will show that the accounts have different focuses. So far and hopefully never, I have not made any mistakes that could mislead wikipedia users. I have made tons of edits on the articles of (or related to, went as far as making my own article Battle of Nahavand 1730 Nader Shah Afshar and the Afsharid Iran. I wish to continue my goal of letting Wikipedia users learn more about Nader Shah and his history. I just wish to preserve the progress and hard work, and hopefully if I am pardoned, continue my contributions. Once again, I am sorry. [[User:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu|Jahangusha-ye Kiryu]] ([[User talk:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu#top|talk]]) 23:54, 25 July 2026 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I'd like to make a request for my account to be unblocked. I acknowledge my mistake that I cooperated with a sockpuppet whilist making an edit. We also live in the same country which made it look even more like my account was a sockpuppet. I had no prior knowledge that their account was a sockpuppet, but it is not excusable, I should have been more careful. I am requesting for the viewing administrator to fully look into my edits and the Selim Beg account, because I believe it will show that the accounts have different focuses. So far and hopefully never, I have not made any mistakes that could mislead wikipedia users. I have made tons of edits on the articles of (or related to, went as far as making my own article Battle of Nahavand 1730 Nader Shah Afshar and the Afsharid Iran. I wish to continue my goal of letting Wikipedia users learn more about Nader Shah and his history. I just wish to preserve the progress and hard work, and hopefully if I am pardoned, continue my contributions. Once again, I am sorry. [[User:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu|Jahangusha-ye Kiryu]] ([[User talk:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu#top|talk]]) 23:54, 25 July 2026 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I'd like to make a request for my account to be unblocked. I acknowledge my mistake that I cooperated with a sockpuppet whilist making an edit. We also live in the same country which made it look even more like my account was a sockpuppet. I had no prior knowledge that their account was a sockpuppet, but it is not excusable, I should have been more careful. I am requesting for the viewing administrator to fully look into my edits and the Selim Beg account, because I believe it will show that the accounts have different focuses. So far and hopefully never, I have not made any mistakes that could mislead wikipedia users. I have made tons of edits on the articles of (or related to, went as far as making my own article Battle of Nahavand 1730 Nader Shah Afshar and the Afsharid Iran. I wish to continue my goal of letting Wikipedia users learn more about Nader Shah and his history. I just wish to preserve the progress and hard work, and hopefully if I am pardoned, continue my contributions. Once again, I am sorry. [[User:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu|Jahangusha-ye Kiryu]] ([[User talk:Jahangusha-ye Kiryu#top|talk]]) 23:54, 25 July 2026 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Can you further clarify the circumstances in which you contacted Selim Beg? How did this occur? signed, Rosguill talk 17:35, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

@Rosguill: I contacted Selim Beg via Discord on April 12 of this year, I shared the source to show him because I found it interesting, Selim Beg asked if I had edited this into Wikipedia yet (he asked because I mentioned wanting to edit in Wikipedia before) and I replied that I didnt know how to edit in Wikipedia. Selim Beg offered to do the edit and add the source for me which I accepted, however I was not aware that Selim Beg's main account was banned and that he had multiple blocked sockpuppets. Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (talk) 17:50, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

What was the nature of this Discord group? signed, Rosguill talk 17:53, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

@Rosguill: The discord group is for our small friend group with no set topic, simply intended as a place for us to hang out in. Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (talk) 17:59, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Izno, do you have any thoughts? signed, Rosguill talk 18:11, 7 August 2026 (UTC)
@Rosguill not really a fan of it being a "small friend group" but also not really a fan of guilt by association after an apology for the error...... I don't know. Izno (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2026 (UTC)
What if we applied an unblock condition that for purposes of evaluating consensus and edit warring, Jahangusha-ye Kiryu and Selim Beg are treated as if they were the same person? That would negate any attempt at unfair collusion while still letting them edit. signed, Rosguill talk 00:53, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
Well, one of those names is a block away from being WP:3X and the other is not, so I'm not really worried about collusion per se. :') Izno (talk) 01:48, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
Ah, I missed that they were currently blocked. Well, I'll throw it back to you have the final word on the basis of the technical evidence. signed, Rosguill talk 02:16, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
@Izno, thoughts? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:27, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
Not sure what other thoughts of mine are required. I don't think there's anything else to say on the point. I do see no prior public CU review so perhaps that is the next step, if this is being seriously considered for an unblock. Izno (talk) 00:47, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
Do you have any objections to seriously considering the unblock? voorts (talk/contributions) 00:55, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
not really a fan of it being a "small friend group" but also not really a fan of guilt by association after an apology for the error...... I don't know. Izno (talk) 01:10, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

{{checkuser needed}} for analysis of the technical evidence. Email is fine too if necessary. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:12, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

@Voorts I'd like to clarify that that I have made edits on two devices, a personal computer and a mobile device and both were logged in on this account. If this is good to know for the Checkuser? Jahangusha-ye Kiryu (talk) 01:30, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
There is no need to say that. PhilKnight (talk) 04:24, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
I don't think CheckUser is especially needed - this isn't a CheckUser block and the result last time was only  Possible. Anyway, I did a quick check and didn't see any other accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 04:28, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks