User talk:Wikaviani

Hi Wikaviani, you seem like a very respectful and responsible editor with a lot of experince here. I see you're debating in good faith and appreciate it. I was wondering if you and I could co-operate on making the case for (and then properly splitting into) two separate articles, regardless of the outcome of the existing move request.

We'd have a better argument for two different products if we can build on the the Farsi-language videos that are in the links: just based on watching these, it is obvious to me that the the traditional doogh being prepared in the videos is a product that is much closer to buttermilk than it is to yoghurt-water.

That is to say, a good argument might be that

• doogh is a an Iranian fermented dairy drink traditionally made from the byproduct of churning butter, and is also made in its modern form by diluting yoghurt with water and adding salt
• whereas ayran is a fermented dairy drink made by diluting yoghurt with water and adding salt.

Can I expect that you'd be able to help me with this since you are able to speak the Farsi language? Wikabulary (talk) 00:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for posting here. I will be glad to help if i can, but please keep in mind that videos (youtube, dailymotion, etc ...) are not reliable sources.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Wikaviani!

1. Agreed that youtube might be a poor source but RS content can exist on it, right? (e.g., a new york times or CNN news clip). It seems that the video citation in this article for 'doogh' is from an Afghan news channel. There is a citation on wiktionary attesting 'doogh' from like 800 years ago as well (as a dairy drink made by butter churning)^[1]. Seems like modern 'doogh' refers to a yoghurt based drink, but to prevent a merge of the upcoming articles, we'd have to separate 'doogh' sources from 'ayran' sources to a degree, and this traditional prep method would be a good start to this.

2. What is the next step? Where/how do we start a split (I am a novice user)? Do we need to start a request in the talk section or just make a separate ayran/doogh article?Wikabulary (talk) 23:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

1. Wikipedia uses reliable published sources, thus, a video, even from a well-known media outlet would not be considered as a good source, unless a published version of it exists.

2. You can create an article about Ayran, like about any other topic that is supported by reliable published sources, no need to to make a request, but if your article is deleted, then the burden will be on you to convince fellow Wikipedians that your article about Ayran is legit and relevant.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:49, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikaviani, note that particular editor has been here since 5 December 2020. Also note how said "new editor" appears to know a lot about Wikipedia policies(see:Talk:Doogh). Note their first edit, a "new user's" first edit is to post a request move on an article talk page? Rather intricate for a "new user". --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:45, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your insight. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:22, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

	Merry Christmas Wikaviani
	Hi Wikaviani, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,    –Davey2010Talk 20:12, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks Davey2010, i wish you and yours a merry Christmas and a great new year too ! Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:23, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

M.Bitton (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thank you very much M.Bitton, likewise ! Cheers !---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Wikaviani, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Wario-Man (talk) 13:39, 25 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Many thanks Wario-Man, i wish you and yours a merry Christmas and a happy new year ! Take care. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

JBL (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thank you very much JBL, i wish you and yours a merry Christmas and a great new year ! Cheers !---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:34, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

If angels sung a Savior’s birth, On that auspicious morn, We well may imitate their mirth, Now He again is born! If stars in heav'n shone bright as day To light the manger throne, We should rejoice as well as they That love doth reign alone. All Glory be to God on high, And to the earth be peace; Goodwill henceforth from heav'n to men Begin and never cease. - "Milford" by Joseph Stephenson, text anonymous

--Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Wikaviani: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Hi CAPTAIN RAJU, thanks very much for the kind wishes, much appreciated. I wish you and yours a happy new year too. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Search for books on this site. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much Kansas Bear ! Cheers !---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:20, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I'm currently working on the article of Nabopolassar and I found this source, which goes into quite a lot of detail on Assyria's final war. I'll be using it in Nabopolassar's article and to beef up Sinsharishkun and possibly Revolt of Babylon (626 BC) (which maybe should be merged into Medo-Babylonian conquest of the Assyrian Empire since it's a different stage of the same conflict?), but I thought I'd let you know since you might want to expand Medo-Babylonian conquest of the Assyrian Empire a bit with the source. I could do it myself as well, but considering you've done most of the work there and recently got it to GA I thought you might be interested in doing it yourself (also a good way to avoid the wording in all the articles from becoming essentially the same). Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey Ichthyovenator, thank you so much for the source, i will take the time to investigate it in details in about 2 or 3 weeks, when i have the time to do that in good conditions. Besides, yeah, merging Revolt of Babylon (626 BC) into Medo-Babylonian conquest of the Assyrian Empire sounds good, as per your rationale. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani, I recently handled a sockpuppet investigations case against you (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikaviani/Archive). I do not believe that the IP editor or editors from that case are you, but after re-reading the case I believe that the evidence suggests that you might be coordinating with that person, so I would like to remind you of our policies on meatpuppetry and canvassing. If I'm wrong and you are not coordinating with this other person, then I apologize for the incorrect accusation. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi GeneralNotability, firstly, let me say that i'm not that person and no worries, i accept your apologies. I took a look at the SPI case and the thread on your talk and since you're not a Checkuser, i'll give you some perspective about all this. I'm a Frenchman (you can verify this quite easily with a checkuser) of Iranian descent, we have a proverb here, in France, (attributed to Talleyrand, if i'm not mistaken) that says "méfiez vous de la première impression car c'est souvent la bonne", that means "beware of the first impression because it is often the right one". Your first impression was the correct one, being of Iranian descent, i often edit Iran-related topics, and there is nothing surprising that other Iranian editors (Ips or registered) often edit these topics too. If i was one (or all) of the disruptive IPs, or, if they were my buddies, then why would i revert them here and here again ? and why would i file a RPP to prevent further disruption ? Why would the IP post a "warning message" on my talk accusing me of "Arab propaganda" ? Also, there was some other disruption not mentioned by Apaugasma : , , , which proves that these articles are targetted by trolls, thus, nothing surprising with the surge of disruptive editors sometimes. There are other arguments that would show you that i have nothing to do with the disruptive editors, but i don't want to disclose them on my public talk, i could clarify by email if you want. Maybe a checkuser would also be useful. Please let me know if you think i'm mistaken. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikaviani, thanks for the reply. I don't need anything private, I wanted to give you that notice in case you were associated with the person behind that IP. Between the diffs you linked and your explanations, I'm satisfied that you're not connected. Please accept my apologies for the incorrect accusation. Best, GeneralNotability (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

I wonder what you think of the changes on the page Turks in Algeria and can you look at the talk page there, whats your opinion?Loveisthebest1 (talk) 19:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ms. Sahar Khodayari (Wikaviani), Your reply made me confused. You mentioned that "your edit to the page Talk:Iranian Azerbaijanis, seem to be advertising" but I can't understand how my explanation about the current environment of my mother-town city, can be counted as an advertising item !!!??? And unfortunately it looks my comment was removed from the list, probably because of that wrong misleading (advertising issue !!!) but as you definitely know, that wasn't advertising item at all. Regards, Behnam Behnam.Zanjan (talk) 07:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

User talk:Behnam.Zanjan From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search Welcome! Hello, Behnam.Zanjan, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Talk:Iranian Azerbaijanis, seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, please see:

Policy on neutral point of view Guideline on spam Guideline on external links Guideline on conflict of interest FAQ for Organizations If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page and how to develop articles Help pages Tutorials Article wizard for creating new articles Simplified Manual of Style Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here. I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (Behnam.Zanjan (talk) 07:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! ---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 07:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, your comment on the article's talk page was not supported by any source, that's why i (and another editor) reverted it. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2021 Avignon shooting is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 Avignon shooting until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Sakiv (talk) 00:20, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@Sakiv: Thanks for the courtesy note.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, what was wrong with my edit at Mehmed the Conqueror. I added source and respected Wikipedia rules. Please guide me to correct any errors if any. --82.76.0.201 (talk)

Hi IP, thanks for posting here. As far as i can see, you reworded the article in a less neutral version (by replacing "Some sources indicate that Mehmed had a passion" with "sources indicate that Mehmed had a passion") and you removed a source too. That's why i reverted your edits. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh no, it's a misunderstanding. The source wasn't removed, it just automatically showed it was rewritten, because i rephrased the sentence so it would be together with the added content. I think it's better to add a paragraph below the one I tried to edit and to include the same idea. I just want to know if it's okay to say that some Greek sources say something about Mehmed II. I ain't implying it is a fact what the Greek sources say, but it contributes on a broader image on the subject by including the view on Mehmed from his life time. --213.233.110.242 (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

And I am really sorry, now I realized my IP changed even though I use same device. Just letting you know it's still me. --213.233.110.242 (talk) 00:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani! If you would like to participate in the third opinion process, which is optional and non-binding, please provide a short comment at [Talk:Genetic studies on Turkish people#Third opinion|this section of the talk page]] at your earliest convenience. Thanks! Firefangledfeathers (talk) 06:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers: Thanks for the notification. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:36, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Khwarazmian dynasty § Splitting proposal. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 06:45, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@Visioncurve: Thanks for the invitation, i will join the discussion with pleasure. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

A list of valid reasons to edit or remove others' posts from talk pages is given at WP:TALKO. This is not on the list. Please don't do this again.

As for the level-2 warning: I can see why you don't agree with it, but please do consider that my welcome post contained a first warning, and that the editor proceeded with another disruptive edit. I also believe they were probably acting in good faith (it's hard to interpret why they don't respond at their talk page, but maybe they just don't know that they even can do this), and if they would have followed up with more of the same, I would have tried to engage them on their talk page before going to a level-3 warning. Nevertheless, the escalating warning system exists for a reason, and I try my best to be patient with newcomers in any case. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 22:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

"A list of valid reasons to edit or remove others' posts from talk pages is given at WP:TALKO. This is not on the list. Please don't do this again." : @Apaugasma: I'm perfectly aware of that nutshell (WP:TALKO), but instead of wiki-lawyering you better read Wikipedia:Five pillars, that are the most important rules here, especially the point number 4, that says "assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming to newcomers.".

"but please do consider that my welcome post contained a first warning, and that the editor proceeded with another disruptive edit." : I know that your welcome message contained a warning and i also know what the editor did, since i was one of the two users who reverted them, the other being HistoryofIran, but in my opinion, the editor, who is a newbie, just acted in good faith and included what they thought to be Jabir's nationality in the article, they may have missed the fact that their edit was reverted by me and made another attempt which was reverted by HistoryofIran, this is not vandalsim, rather good faith editing. We're done.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://iranicaonline.org/articles/golab, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 19:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa, my bad, i thought i had reworded it. May i add the content back again with my own words ? Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

There's still a discussion underway on the article talk page so wait until you're sure there's a consensus to include— Diannaa (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Please note that i agreed with LouisAragon and the other user (Trople) is a CU confirmed sock : Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#user:Trople.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:20, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

You agreed on a wording that violates copyright. Make a suggestion for a new wording on the talk page, and see if the other user agrees. — Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm, i see. Is there any threshold about how long/how many successive words can be picked out from a source without copyright problem ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Content has to be completely written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. Please see the article talk page for an example of how to do it.— Diannaa (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks very much. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

hi. can you fix it? i explained https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Persian_Gulf#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_November_2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.158.110.122 (talk) 08:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Arabic name doesn't match English name and is not suitable as translation. Additionally it carries anti-Iran sentiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Iranian_sentiment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.185.57.87 (talk) 20:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP,

i asked an admin about that, let's wait for an answer before any move about that topic.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank for reply.85.185.56.9 (talk) 21:12, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Dear editor You have reverted my edit on Mohammad Ghori page wrt how he died. In all modern sources and including today's writers sources it calls Khokhars, Ismailis, Gakhars etc. Except one odd writer, it nowhere mentions Jats. To me it looks like Sita Ram Goel's book comes under WP:FRINGE, modern writers are clear that it were probably Ismailis, Khokhars and Gakhars etc depending upon writers who were responsible for his death. Sita Ram Goel has erred here, in the book it is not written what sources he has referred to come to the conclusion. I think it should come under WP:FRINGE and should be removed to avoid confusion in the minds of readers. RS6784talk RS6784 (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi RS6784, i think that the best thing to do is to take that source to WP:RSN in order to see what they say about its reliability. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

From what little I remember about the insertion of that particular source, I thought I had checked it. Maybe I did not. If RS6784 feels the source is weak/fringe then I have no objections to its removal(including the corresponding information). My thanks to Wikaviani for their keeping an eye on this article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your insight Kansas Bear, i self-reverted. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

It is all good, Wikaviani. Keep up the good work! --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas 2021

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:26, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU. I wish you and yours a merry Christmas too. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:29, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Greetings @ Wikaviani

Requesting your visit to article Draft:Aurats (word) relating to historical linguistics.

Sources from other languages indicate that, the usage of the word seem to have been transferred in some Asian languages through Persian language, during spread of early Islamic times, but usage in Iran reduced in later times. I am looking for and requesting support in expanding the article Draft:Aurats (word) with Persian language / Iranian sources, if the topic would interest you.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 03:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bookku

greetings and sorry for my belated response, i'm in a low wiki activity period for the time being.

However, if you need any help with some Persian language sources, i can help you with that, so please post the links of the sources here so that i can take a look at them.

Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @ Wikaviani I will keep you posted as any specific need arises further. Happy times and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 15:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Anytime. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

It seems, sooner or later, this editor wants to remove Persian ethnicity from Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi page lede. They have already removed three sources mentioning he was Persian. One those sources is a reliable quality source. Their last edit summary makes it clear that they don't like the quote from source. But from how I see It, the fact that source mentions the ethnicity of other physicians is irrelevant to its inclusion. Other sources mention that he was native of Ray, Iran or hailed from the Persian city of Ray, Iran which are not in contradiction with him being a Persian and actually further supports his ethnicity. They also used "greatness of ethnic group" in their edit summary, thus I'm sure they are going to stand against this source as much as they can. You are an experienced editor, what do you think?Premitive (talk) 12:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

High-quality reliable sources that should be used.^[1][2]

Per MOS, ethnicities should not be in the lead of articles. Simply move Persian to the body of the article and cite a reliable source. And do not use Hitti, since he states nationality. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your messages, i suggest to go by what Kansas Bear says, as it fits with our guidelines. Here is a source that should be ok.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: This misrepresent his ethnicity to those who only read the lead of the article. They might simply assume he was of Arab ethnic group.Premitive (talk) 20:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Maybe, but we editors have to go by what our guidelines say, not what we think would be better. You might want to read MOS:ETHNICITY in order to understand why Al Razi's ethnicity should be left out of the lead. If you have any question, please ask. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:54, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• "This misrepresent his ethnicity to those who only read the lead of the article. They might simply assume he was of Arab ethnic group."

Having just read the lead of the article, I did not get the impression he was of Arab ethnicity. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:47, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for reply. I still believe some people might get that impression. But if you believe it shouldn't be in the lead then I just accept it.Premitive (talk) 22:35, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: Can we include his nationality in the lead? I think first paragraph of MOS:ETHNICITY allows it. I thought Hitti is mentioning ethnicity but if it's nationality then it should be included. Some other sources Also mention that he was born in Persian city of Rayy, I think that is nationality as well.Premitive (talk) 05:44, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Are these^[3][4][5] sources reliable for his ethnicity? they seem reliable and the first one is encyclopedic and is written by George Sarton the second one is written by Arturo Castiglioni and the third one is written by Richard N. Frye.Premitive (talk) 10:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I also found this source^[6] written by Anton Sebastianpillai. The source has won a British Medical Association Medical Book Award. I'm not sure about author himself.Premitive (talk) 16:15, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Frye and Sarton are both reliable (like many others : Bosworth, Corbin, etc ...), you can add them if you want, but as we said above, we should leave his ethnicity out of the lead. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for making your talk page look like this.Premitive (talk) 23:28, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

No problem.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Would you review my edit. The source that I used was already cited in the article. It is a translation of a work by Razi from Arabic to German. Introduction in the source is written by Julius Ruska who is an orientalist and historian and has other works on Razi as well. In the introduction Julius Ruskaby reasons based on available information from primary sources (time/location/others) for descent of Razi's family. The source can be found in this link and the reasoning is in page 4.Premitive (talk) 16:18, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, but i was not able to verify the page number of the source and what it says exactly. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:15, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

By the way, de:Julius Ruska has much more info about Julius Ruska's academic background than English Wikipedia. Thanks.Premitive (talk) 17:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

hello, I added the second map of Turkmenistan because it was more detailed, the other one looked a little older. Do not worry if there is a problem. Teknoment (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, i removed the map beacause there are other maps in the article (infobox + "Geography" section). Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:36, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

please sir remove “sometimes called…” from [[Persian Gulf article beginning . Please

I do another vote maybe we can help PersianGulfWorld (talk) 05:27, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

must deleted and respect original eternal name PersianGulfWorld (talk) 05:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

A request for comments was made a few months ago, the result was to add in the introduction that this gulf is sometimes called Arabian gulf. When several editors disagree, a request for comments is made and if so, then the result is to be accepted by the community. You are free to open a new request for comments about that topic. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:01, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000^[a] at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.^[b]

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 17825 articles, as of 12:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Notes

1. [a]

   not including another ~6,000 redirects
2. [b]

   The number of weekly reviews reported in the NPP feed includes redirects, which are not included in the backlog we primarily track.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF

The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject

Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers

The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1978 Iranian politics. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 16:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

There is report at the WP:ANI regarding your recent personal attacks. Best. --Mhhossein ^talk 11:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, saw that, thanks for the notification, but it's not what i would call a "personal attack".---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Happy New Year!

Wikaviani,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Mann Mann (talk) 03:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thanks very much and likewise my friend.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:04, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello dear Wikaviani! I would like to thank you for responding to my talk topic on Wikipedia's "Persian Gulf" article.

As an answer to your question, I would like to say I didn't have any issues with the Wikipedia article, in fact, my issue is the possibility of it to change due to current warm relations between Arabian governments and the West, adding these current protests in Iran making it another golden time for them to make the changes they want disingenuously as they often did in history, without facing any consequences!
I would like to thank you again for responding to my ticket, best regards.

~A normal teen from Iran, who loves studying history and learning from it 151.242.114.173 (talk) 00:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for posting here. I keep an eye on the article and since the vast majority of sources call that body of water "Persian Gulf" and not "Arabian Gulf", the name will not change anytime soon. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:38, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

There is a anonymous user 95.115.7.9 who had republished meru prasanta and Pingala can you please go and verify the sources he put in Wikipedia article Pascal triangle Ppppphgtygd (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Ppppphgtygd, my apologies for the belated response,

i checked IP's edit and reverted it on the ground that it was unsourced.

All the best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Snell's law, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing periodical" error. References show this error when the name of the magazine or journal is not given. Please edit the article to add the name of the magazine/journal to the reference, or use a different citation template. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 07:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The move request is about the title changing of Göktürks to its original form Türks. There are people who oppose and who support as their opinion, replying to the section, I would like to have your opinion there on the talk page of Göktürks. The title of the section on its talk page is Requested move 19 April 2023 (Göktürks). --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey KB,

thanks for letting me know about that.

Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

afsharids are not Persians they are Turcoman. Nader Shah himself is Turcoman. It doesn't make sence to call it persian while the leader and founder of the empire is Turkic Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 02:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Iran is not an ethno-state, it is a nation-state.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:41, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

What does Iran have to with this I never said anything about that Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 00:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Iran like France and other countries, is a nation-state, not an ethno-state. Nader shah might have been an ethnic Turcoman, but he was a Persian citizen as well. Napoleon was Corsican, but that doesn't mean that France under his reign was a "Corsican" Empire.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I never said anything about states or iran what are you talking about my guy, Nader Şah "may" not have been Turcoman. he IS Turcoman, in one of his letters he calls the people Persian peasants. He also ruled the empire with the Töre. Afsharid Empire was a Turcoman empire. The army was all Türkmens and they spoke Turkic language among the military. Persian was considered femine at that time. And therefore it makes no sence to call it "Ottoman - Persian war" for example; it doesnt say "Ottoman - Persian war" in the times of the Safavids. Because the Safavids were not Persian. But when the Safavids vanished and the Afsharids took rule the name becomes "Ottoman - Persian war". Why is the war with Safavids called Ottoman Safavid war but with the Afsharids (which was the exactly complete same empire just different people in power) its called Ottoman Persian? Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 01:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

And how many reliable sources do you have for all the above nonsenses you wrote on my talk ? Listen, "my guy", this is not Azeri or Turkish wikipedia where you can claim that Einstein was a Turk. If you have reliable sources for your claims, go to the article talk page and achieve consensus in order to change the name of the Empire. If you don't have reliable sources, do not waste my time with your POV and do not post messages here again.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:15, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Listen my guy, this is not my point of view. These are straight un deniable facts! Nader Şah is Turcoman. Look up the origin of the name of "Afshar" its an ancient Turkic tribes name. Avşar.

And your use of terminology is wrong, its Azerbaijani not Azeri. Azerbaijan is not an ethno state. Its also not a claim of Nader Şah being Turcoman. Its not nonsense either the page information is pure nonsense! Tell me; why is the wars with the Safavids called Ottoman Safavid wars but when Nader Şah takes rule it becomes Ottoman Persian war? While its the complete same empire? (I am talking about the 1730 - 1735 war) and the ones after that when the Safavids fall in 1739 and Afsharids take rule its still called Ottoman Persian war while the rule has changed. Explain me this if you can. Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 01:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I told you to not post here again, one more irrelevant message like the above ones, and we will meet at ANI. Done with you.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I dont know what all that stuff means what is ANI? And what is consensus or the other talk page Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 01:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

ANI = Administrator noticeboard. Consensus means ... CONSENSUS, check the meaning of the word in a dictionary and DO NOT POST HERE AGAIN.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Okay thans, but can you explain what the administartion thing is and how I go to other talk page to discuss? Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 01:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Reliable sources determine what we call wars/battles/raids, etc. Not some editor's personal opinion.

• "Nadir-Quli- Khan (1688–1747) did not deliver the badly needed help and made a separate peace with the Ottomans, regaining Azerbaijan and ending the Ottoman-Persian War of 1730–1736" --The Peace of Passarowitz, 1718 , Charles W. Ingrao, ‎Nikola Samardžić, ‎Jovan Pesalj, Page 136

• "The Ottoman-Persian Wars of 1578–1590 were the result of Persian border violations and a succession crisis following the death of Shah.." --War and Religion: An Encyclopedia of Faith and Conflict, Jeffrey M. Shaw, ‎Timothy J. Demy, page 629.

• "Sultan Mahmud and Shah Tahmasp II sign the treaty of Ahmed Pasha between Persia and the Ottoman Empire, which ended the 1730–35 war." --Iran: Stuck in Transition, Anoushiravan Ehteshami

• "Another flow of Armenians to Smyrna and the neighboring regions took place in 1730–40, as a result of the Ottoman–Persian wars and then mistreatment by Nadir Shah." --Genocide in the Ottoman Empire: Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks, 1913-1923, George N. Shirinian, 229.

• "Ottoman–Persian war (1578–90) 193, 257, 391" --Agents of Empire: Knights, Corsairs, Jesuits and Spies in the Sixteenth-Century Mediterranean World, Noel Malcolm, page 596

• "Shortly after this a new Ottoman - Persian war erupted." --An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, 1300-1914, Halil İnalcık, ‎Donald Quataert, page 248

• "Ottoman - Persian war, 411" --The New Cambridge Modern History: Volume 1, G.R. Potter, page 470.

• "Ottoman–Persian war 276" --Useful Enemies: Islam and The Ottoman Empire in Western Political Thought, 1450-1750, Noel Malcolm, 480

• "Ottoman-Persian War of 1743–47 disrupted this trade." --The Familiarity of Strangers: The Sephardic Diaspora, Livorno, and Cross-Cultural Trade in the Early Modern Period, Francesca Trivellato, page 114.

• "renewed Ottoman- Persian war 1624-25 --The Cambridge Illustrated Atlas of Warfare, Jeremy Black, page 171 --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

? Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 01:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Its not my personel opinion as I told you and explained you before. And I asked you to tell me why the Ottoman Safavid war randomly got its name changed to Ottoman Persian war. Yet you did not answer and choose to ignore my statements. Suluk Çor Kağan (talk) 01:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the 3RR nom. I was trying to figure out what the "post on user's talk" meant for an IP when I saw you'd completed the same nomination. Nothing else, just a 'thanks and good day'. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 01:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. Many thanks to you for you intervention. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi. How do you do? Would you please verify and ? --Mann Mann (talk) 04:22, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran and LouisAragon: You might be interested. --Mann Mann (talk) 05:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mann Mann: Hi, thanks for notifying me. I'll take a look at it later. It is probably the result of this Reddit thread . --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: Seems she is not Kurdish and she identifies herself as Persian/Iranian on her instagram. The Kurdish background is just based on the city where she was born. 99.99% BLP violation in my book. Plus there is zero mention of "Kurd/Kurdish" in citations 1, 2, 3 (current revision). --Mann Mann (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

That's because the two cited sources for that were removed . Though I fail to see how two random newsites/blogs are reliable. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Those removed citations are not reliable sources for BLP. Anyway, I just wanted to notify you guys since you are active on Iranian topics. Moghbeli is not my concern. I read some news about her and visited her WP article and ... I think you better take this to the article talk page. Regards. --Mann Mann (talk) 18:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi to both of you, sorry for the late response, i was not any close to a computer all day long. I'm doing well, thank you, good to hear from you Mann Mann. The "sources" used to justify her supposed Kurdish background sound not reliable, I agree with HistoryofIran's last edit. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: That BNN link is an unreliable source too. It does not have any references to support its claims. Its author is not an expert in the biography field (he has educational background in English language and literature). Where did he get this "Kurdish parents from Mahabad" info from?! Subpar journalism and a mix of facts and myths. A basic search shows that Moghbeli herself has never identified herself or her family as Kurd/Kurdish. I notified WP:WPBIO about it: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Possible BLP violation on Jasmin Moghbeli. And this user added her name to just after this. That article has become a mess since 24 August. It is really ridiculous. I'm done. Just wanted to share my last comment about this case. --Mann Mann (talk) 06:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

I Removed unsourced material. Please add a reference if you want to keep the information in question 86.5.202.27 (talk) 02:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

No problem, his ethnic background is quite well-sourced, i'll add refs. Just to let you know about the correct process of editing here, when you are reverted, you shall not revert back but take your concerns to the talk, as per WP:BRD, instead.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:@HistoryofIran:@LouisAragon: Hi to all of you guys, hope you are all doing well. I'm pinging you here instead of at the relevant talk pages in order to avoid numerous pings. I recently found some Turco-Persian battles added recently, namely Campaign of Trabzon (1505), Battle of Erzincan (1507), Campaign of Trabzon (1510), Campaign of Trabzon (1510), Capture of Bayburt (1514), Siege of Kemah, Battle of Tekiryaylağı, Siege of Harput (1516), Battle of Koçhisar and Capture of Mosul (1517). All these articles are characterized by two things: almost exclusively Turkish sources and hardly any page numbers for the sources cited. I know they passed the submission process, but honestly, I'm wondering how they did so and if deletion proposals should be made for at least some of them (which ones ?). Thoughts ? ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:24, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani, thanks for notifying me about this. Looks it was created by the same group of new users who only create articles with Turkic "victories" and poor (often unverifiable) citations. I will take a look at them later. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:29, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Yeah, exactly, all these articles were created by two (relatively) new editors, Kabz15 and KaradumanMareşal.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

You mentioned that it might not be productive, while the edit you returned was not productive, the information was very irrelevant, it was a Persian name.For example, tell us why we should include the Albanian name of a food, which, like many other languages, is derived from the English name next to its English name on its information page?! 5.74.120.85 (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

There...is no mention of the Albanian name on Khoresh? —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 22:33, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Please take this thread to the article's talk page. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:20, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello!
I don't know if Kansas Bear is moderator, or editor in Wikipedia; after my edit on Omar Khayyam's article, he changed the title of one of the sources I had added to what he thought was correct, based on Google Scholar, and on my talk page accused me of "So you want to ignore what is stated for the article title, because the dust jacket says what you want?" I went to his talk page and provided him with the eBook title page (Figure 1), but again, he ignored it, relying on virtual sources—cited below under Kansas Bear; I replied again, with the same "Tone," and virtual sources stating what I wrote—cited below under Fari Dark, to prove a point that they are not reliable and, he deleted our conversation, telling me to "troll somewhere else." Can you spare a moment to review the source and ensure its correctness?
Thank you for your time!
Kansas Bear

• World Cat
• Google Scholar
• Bloomsbury Publishing

Fari Dark

• WorldCat, with OCLC number.
• Library of Congress, with LCCN number.
• Bloomsbury Collections, with a table of contents.

Fari Dark (talk) 11:38, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

As far as i can see, Kansas Bear never said that that source is unreliable (they even linked it to the article), they just asked you to stop changing the name of Omar to Umar, which sounds perfectly legit to me. The common name of this scholar is Omar Khayyam.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I never said Kansas Bear stated the "source," is unreliable. The argument is about the title of the source "An Anthology of Philosophy in Persia. Volume 1: From Zoroaster to ʿUmar Khayyām," and not "Omar Khayyam." Thank you. Fari Dark (talk) 14:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, we cannot change the common name of that scholar just because that book cover calls him Umar instead of Omar. On Wikipedia, we go by what the mainstream of published reliable sources say. Please drop it and move forward. Thanks.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:00, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

some user had recently added the image of Pascal triangle in pingala article and a statement can you verify it whether it is right or wrong. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 09:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I removed the unsourced content from the article. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:40, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani!

This edit violates Wikipedia:Plagiarism (see the "No in-text attribution, no quotation marks, text closely paraphrased, inline citation only" part).

When literally copying from a source (which is often to be preferred over close paraphrasing), an inline citation is not enough: at the very least the text needs to be put between quotation marks (" "), but usually in-text attribution ("Peter Adamson writes that") is also a good idea (note that all the green-lighted examples in WP:PLAGFORMS have either in-text attribution or refer to text summarized in an editor's own words). With closely paraphrasing (which is what happened here) on the other hand, quotation marks are inappropriate but in-text attribution is absolutely required (cf. Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing).

Please either add in-text attribution or summarize the content in your own words. Since in-text attribution may create a false impression that the content is considered to be biased or to be an opinion rather than a fact (cf. WP:YESPOV & WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV) it's probably best to restate the content entirely in your own words.

Thanks for taking this into consideration, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 11:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Apaugasma,

thanks for the reminder, however, i think that WP:PLAGIARISM does not apply here, since the sentence i added was short, simple and even slightly changed. Anyway, i rewrote it.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Whether something is too close paraphrasing or not may of course be a matter of debate, but I think that in this case most editors would agree that it was far too close.

In going from "his philosophical ideas mostly have to be pieced together on the basis of reports found in other authors, who are often hostile to him" to "his philosophical ideas have to be pieced together on the basis of reports from other authors, who are often hostile to him", you left out the word "mostly" and replaced "found in" with "from".

As Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing puts it: "almost all of the original word choice, word order and sentence structure is retained", and (with regard to an example given there, but it's very similar here) "the structure of Wikipedia's statement is essentially the same as the original. Changing a single word and slightly reordering one phrase is not enough to constitute a paraphrase".

Basically, the idea of 'slightly changing' the content from the source will almost guarantee too close paraphrasis: it really needs to be entirely your own words. One way to make sure you're doing that is too read more of the original source (e.g. in this case, Adamson's entire article), and then to summarize yourself what you have read, recalling from memory the most important points (you can then check again for accuracy, but writing from memory is an excellent way to make sure it's your own words). Please have a read of the Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing essay, and if you still disagree, please consider asking some in-house experts (such as Diannaa or Moneytrees, no pings) what they think about it.

In the mean time, I wish you a happy holiday season! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 13:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks and likewise.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

--Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!
Весела Коледа! ~ Meri Kirihimete!

Hello, Wikaviani! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hello Wikaviani: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Hey CAPTAIN RAJU, thank you very much ! Likewise my friend !---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Wikaviani,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Mann Mann (talk) 04:10, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Mann Mann, thank you very much my friend and likewise !---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:46, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Hello. I have frequently edited the Azerbaijani cuisine article and I noticed you make edits there also. I wanted to ask for your opinion and possibly a request as an experienced Wikipedia editor. I believe this unnamed user displays very suspicious behavior that makes me believe it might be yet another sockpuppet of User:Əzərbəyəniləri.

Specifically what I find suspicious is that the new, unnamed user began editing on the same Azerbaijani cuisine page immediately after the previous sock with username OnlyCreatesNewWikiPages was banned. Furthermore, both the sock and the new unnamed user focus almost exclusively on Azerbaijani cuisine.

Also, the edit descriptions are quite similar, specifically the continuous reference to removal of "peacock terms" that both the sock and the unnamed user share. Also the heavy focus on "unsourced" content, "etymology" in the edit descriptions is also what the sock and the new unnamed user share.

In light of the above, I was wondering if you could maybe open a sockpuppet investigation? I have forgotten how to do it, I would be thankful for your assistance or even advice. - Creffel (talk) 19:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey Creffel, actually those are good points, i think there is enough material for a SPI. If you don't mind, I will handle this as soon as possible, as it's quite late here. If you prefer to do it yourself, here is the link that will allow you to do so. However, since the user is an IP, you must know that admins often decline SPI cases that contain only IP, but maybe it's worth to give it a shot. I can ping some other experienced editors to have their input. Kansas Bear, HistoryofIran gentlemen, thoughts ? Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Creffel: IP has not edited Wikipedia since January 26, thus i think that a SPI report would be irrelevant, for now. However, i'll try to keep an eye on it. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Greetings. No worries, I used the link you shared and figured out how to file the SPI. There were three unnamed sockpuppet suspects I found actually, one of them got banned, and for the time being the Azerbaijani cuisine article got EC protection, rather than endlessly chasing IP users. Regardless, thank you for your consideration. - Creffel (talk) 22:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, keep up the good work. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Please reconsider making so many cosmetic edits that make no difference to the article. So far, you've made 18 consecutive edits to Omelette, none of which are necessary or useful. You've done this on several other articles as well. Please read WP:COSMETICBOT, and note where it says: While this policy applies only to bots, human editors should also follow this guidance if making such changes in a bot-like manner. Thanks. Schazjmd (talk) 22:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: Please sign your comments with using the four tilde, that will make easier the response. Secondly, I don't think that Wikilawyering is a very constructive behavior, extra spacing are unnecessary and I don't make my edits in a bot manner, I take the time to find the specific spaces that are irrelevant, however, I will try to make several spacing fixes in one edit. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm looking for an image of an Italian ciambella to add to the ciambella page, but I only find the American ones, how can I do? JacktheBrown (talk) 17:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not very familiar with how Wiki commons works, but have you checked all the pictures at Wikipedia commons ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) What are the differences between American and Italian ciambella? --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: this article is in Italian, but you can translate it with machine translators, just understand more or less the meaning. https://www.dolcidee.it/magazine/curiosita/qual-e-la-differenza-tra-donuts-le-ciambelle. JacktheBrown (talk) 03:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't speak Italian, unfortunately, but with the help of Google translate, I understand that there are some differences between these two sweets, however, if Wikipedia commons does not have pictures of the Italian variant, I don't know what you can do to solve this issue, maybe finding some copyright free pictures of the Italian variant on the web ? Sorry than I cannot help you more for this.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Have a look. Political status of Taiwan 80.4.77.150 (talk) 18:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello Wikaviani,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Wikaviani some users insist on replacing "Monotheism" with "Dualism" in the lead on Zoroastrianism page. they want to create an edit war. can you help on reaching a consensus there? Researcher1988 (talk) 13:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for letting me know about that, will take a look at it. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

thank you. Researcher1988 (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

@Wikaviani

I think this subject has turned into a matter of Personal disputes rather than an Academic debate. again, without seeking consensus or without presenting any valuable source, they edited the page to their own satisfaction. Researcher1988 (talk) 01:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Of course, they want an edit-war, we really ahve better things to do. Just keep it civil and you will be fine. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I think its the opposite. Researcher1988 (talk) 01:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Wikaviani

hello. I created a summary of Zoroastrian studies and published it on the talk page. can you give your opinion on it? Researcher1988 (talk) 08:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Wikaviani despite all the positive and constructive edits that I have made to the Zoroastrianism page, some editors have reported me to Admins. can you help me there?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Multiple_issues_with_Researcher1988_at_Zoroastrianism Researcher1988 (talk) 13:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Wikaviani

Thank you for your support. Researcher1988 (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Wikaviani Zoroastrianism page has been infiltrated by Users who hate the religion and are damaging it totally. can't you do anything to protect the page and save it from those editors? Researcher1988 (talk) 10:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Please assume good faith and stop making personal attacks against other editors. Skyerise (talk) 10:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

In the section of Pingala of the article Indian mathematics it talks about the binomial coefficient and Pascal triangle.Can you verify whether it is reliable or not. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey, thank you for your message, I checked it and removed the content since it was sourced by 2 weak sources, one of them is a historian of Greek mathematics, the other is a 90 years old source, none of them can challenge the sources cited in the main articles in my humble opinion. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

There are a

major problem in theHistory of mathematics article For example in the Indian section of the article it is given as

In the 12th century, Bhāskara II, who lived in southern India, wrote extensively on all then known branches of mathematics. His work contains mathematical objects equivalent or approximately equivalent to infinitesimals, derivatives, the mean value theorem and the derivative of the sine function. To what extent he anticipated the invention of calculus is a controversial subject among historians of mathematics.

The reference provided doesn't really talk anything regarding calculus nor derivate. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 03:08, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

There are several refs provided, unfortunately, I don't have access to any of them. If you can read the sources and if they don't support the claims about Bhaskara II, then feel free to tag the sentence accordingly.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

In the section of Medieval knowledge of the article History of botany.The subsection of the medieval india talks about the statement like

In India, simple artificial plant classification systems of the Rigveda, Atharvaveda and Taittiriya Samhita became more botanical with the work of Parashara (c. 400 – c. 500 AD), the author of Vṛksayurveda (the science of life of trees). He made close observations of cells and leaves and divided plants into Dvimatrka (Dicotyledons) and Ekamatrka (Monocotyledons). The dicotyledons were further classified into groupings (ganas) akin to modern floral families: Samiganiya (Fabaceae), Puplikagalniya (Rutaceae), Svastikaganiya (Cruciferae), Tripuspaganiya (Cucurbitaceae), Mallikaganiya (Apocynaceae), and Kurcapuspaganiya (Asteraceae)

Can you check whether the reference is reliable or not.One of the reference which is mentioned talks some outlandish claim that ancient India knew about xylem or phloem or have a knowledge about cell wall. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 19:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, the source itself sounds quite legit but unfortunately, I don't have access to the relevant page of it.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree but as far from my knowledge the concept of classification of dicotyledons into different families is a relatively a modern concept and apart from this one reference given in the page

http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/t_es/t_es_tiwar_botany_frameset.htm

http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/t_es/t_es_tiwar_botany_frameset.h

I can't find any other peer review sources or any other alternative sources which talks about it Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, then I think the content should be tagged. I can do that, or you can do that yourself, just let me know. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:11, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

you can do it since I am a bit busy now. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 10:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I have found the original text of Vṛksayurveda (the science of life of trees) and it talks nothing about the classification of dicotyledons into different families.

https://archive.org/details/vrikshaayurvedainancientindialallanjigopal_461_w/page/118/mode/1up Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 09:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I tagged it.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

An ip user who has created an account by the username Casteiswrong is making disruptive edits on Snell's law article. Please have a look because I am busy these days. Hu741f4 (talk) 11:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your message, indeed, I reverted the disruptive edits, it will be time for filing a report if that editor keeps going on the path of edit-warring and sourced content removal. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

On your personal page, it is written that you are - apparently - "not afraid of being wrong". That is a very nice attitude, not inappropriate right now. However, to accuse me in the process of that, of "evading my block", even though I'm not in anyway related to the user you are referring to, is not a very nice attitude.

I have also noticed the discussion above with user Hu74, who has a very big mouth about going to the talk page, but when he is at the talk page refuses to engage in a discussion. And on top of that is also accusing me of what you are falsely accusing me of. What the hell is going on here? What is this weird suspicious behaviour, that goes against a few of the most important principles of this project? GoneWithThePuffery (talk) 16:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

We'll see if I'm wrong or not, but in the meantime, could you elaborate ? why do you edit Wikipedia when you're logged out while you have an account ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Are you completely stupid or what? Complaining about my reaction being "not civil", when you are accusing me (with no evidence at all) of "evading a block". Why don't you piss off. GoneWithThePuffery (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, I apology for the incorrect accusation, everybody can be wrong, but firstly, my warning was about this edit of yours, and secondly, the above comment was really unnecessary and shows that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. Do not post here again.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Due to an IP's tampering with the result in the infobox, I started checking some of the sources. I can't find anything concerning:

• Clifford Ando, 2008, Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire: The Dacian Wars

I'm hoping you can find evidence of this book.

Thanks! --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Kansas Bear,

firstly, thank you for posting here, your message is the first friendly message on this talk page in a while. Sorry for my belated response, I needed a little Wiki break after what happened few days ago. I tried to find some informations about that source, without any success (all I found were some dodgy video clips). Then I looked to find the user who added that source and found that it was first added by Koopinator. Maybe the best thing to do is to ask them about that source. Sorry that I cannot help you. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

You are most welcome. I completely understand about needing a break now and then. I usually take the Camaro out on a drive out of Lawrence(and I thought Wichita drivers were bad!).

Your lack of results leads me to believe "Koopinator" may have miscited Ando's book. Thank you for looking into this for me! Stay safe! --Kansas Bear (talk) 12:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Ha ha, I get you ! As far as the source is concerned, I also think that if both of us failed to find any reliable information about it, then it's quite legit to think that Koopinator may have been mistaken. Take care.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The article Yajnavalkya's theory of heliocentrism has a lot of misleading information and unreliable sources.First the two references which talks about heliocentrism isn't even a scientific journal nor a peer reviewed source and secondly it talks about gravitational force between sun and earth where they provided class 11th text book as a reference. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey Myuoh kaka roi, thank you for posting here. Sorry for my late response, I am taking a wiki break, I will check that article soon. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I noticed you reverted my edit on the article Sherbet (frozen dessert). I changed the author's last name to "Gallary" which is spelled differently from "gallery". You can check the cited article yourself to verify this. Please revert your edit. If you disagree, please explain why. 66.215.184.32 (talk) 06:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

IP, true, my apologies for reverting your edit, I self-reverted. Happy editing.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi. How are you? What do you think about these edits:

• Special:Contributions/Gardûnî
• Haft-sin:
• Yaldā Night:

Seems like the same pov-pushing (addition of irrelevant languages) I have seen on Nowruz many times; e.g. the most recent one. --Mann Mann (talk) 15:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey Mann Mann,

I'm good, thank you very much, hope you are doing well too.

You're absolutely right about these changes, I'm going to remove those irrelevant languages. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Did it again. By looking at revision history, it seems the article is prone to unsourced edits and disruption just like Nowruz. Hope you have a good time. Regards. --Mann Mann (talk) 06:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about that, I think a RPP might be helpful. Since I already reverted that edit, I don't want to get stuck in an edit war with that user, thus I suggest you revert them and I file the RPP. Thoughts ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if Kurdish script is completely irrelevant there or not. Better let more experienced editors like @HistoryofIran and LouisAragon: deal with it. I was involved in Talk:Nowruz because both the topic and sources were crystal clear. But this Yaldā Night does not look like a well-written article. It needs review and verification. Its revision history is messy. Needs a stable revision. --Mann Mann (talk) 14:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)2

Hi, I don't think it should be at Nowruz, since we have Newroz as celebrated by Kurds for that. I don't know about the other ones, looks like those need more analyzing as you said. That said, these are traditions celebrated by other peoples than just Persians and Kurds, so where to draw the line I wonder. HistoryofIran (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

It has become a playground for the nationalistic quests. See the most recent one. I requested indef page protection. As I said, someone better rewrite it from the scratch. Regards. --Mann Mann (talk) 16:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Wikaviani, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 23:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC) Hey Davey, thank you very much ! Hope you and yours will have a wonderful Christmas and a healthy and happy new year. Take care over there.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 08:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Hey Wikaviani, Thank you so much, Hope you all have a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Take care, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 12:43, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

No bactria does not include the Alai Range in Kyrgyzstan 2402:E280:3D48:133:7027:EDF7:37EA:C365 (talk) 08:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

It does not include Kyrgyzistan, but it does include Tajikistan and a part of the Alai Range is in Tajikistan. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:49, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

No Bactria is South of Sogdia 2402:E280:3D48:133:4C8F:3422:7CE3:9A30 (talk) 09:51, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Well, the exact extent of ancient regions like this one is no known. Edit-warring like you do is all but a good idea.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:06, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Please further also look at the source given in it. 2402:E280:3D48:133:4C8F:3422:7CE3:9A30 (talk) 13:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, How are you?

I have been on the talk page of the Persian gulf and been reading for quit a while and also been reading and understanding how wp editing works.

On the Persian gulf page, for the RFC back in 2022 I saw your name and thats the reason for me writing here.

What I dont understand is that, first of all is the RFC really all what its showing? I tried reading it through Source and same amount of content was shown. How did that RFC come to the conclusion? I read it and it seemed to be done by a vote?

Also the facts facing the Option C were strong but Option A was chosen bc some said "I vote for A"?

I appreciate your input regarding this as I am new and this consensus and RFC does not really make any sense to me. DrTheHistorian 01:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for reaching out. A RfC (Request For Comment) is a process that aims to ask community input in order to settle a dispute. Editors can "vote" but their rationale is also important, in order to achieve consensus. Hope I've been clear, if you want more informations, you can ask or check this out. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:17, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response.

Okay so my understanding of the voting that was done was correct. That is against WP policies however.

So should I continue on the current talk on how the naming on the lead is wrong? or should I make a new talk and start there?

Also I would like your input as someone who is clearly more experienced on the policies regarding my wordings on what I have written for the talk on the topic, but I do not wish to write it here. can I send it via email to you? DrTheHistorian 20:04, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

HI, sorry for the belated rsponse, I was a bit busy with real life matters. Yes, feel free to mail me. If you want to discuss a topic, the best thing to do is to discuss it at the talk page of the relevant article. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, it is all good mate. I do not expect instant answers here. I will email you now. DrTheHistorian 18:52, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello again mate,

So how can we progress with the current talk page? the two other users seem to not add anything to the talk. they just state what I provide is not correct, which I cant see why. Since they are reliable sources. I have wrote many research articles to know how to do the proper research.

Clearly the last RfC was Flawed. It was basically based on votes, many violations in there.

I am new but I have been reading the policies, and they don't seem to set right on the RfC.

So what should we do to make a change there? DrTheHistorian 22:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

It is possible to start another RFC, but honestly, I don't think that you will like its outcome because there is not a community consensus about this, the best thing to do is to leave the alternative name in and reword the lead.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:09, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Ahh, I came late to that new discussion you wrote. Thank you for what you wrote in there regarding me.

So, I think I might be able to tackle the last RfC using the WP:AN and show it's flaws with policies, but I do not have the time at this moment.

And about the new section you opened, it seems that the other two users are more focused on personal attacks than actual discussion which is odd. DrTheHistorian(𝓣𝓪𝓵𝓴) 20:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi, WP:AN is an administrator noticeboard, you will not get help for an RFC there. RFCs must be opened on talk pages. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, How do you challenge a pervious RfC then? by opening a new one? DrTheHistorian✎ 15:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, another RFC is required to do so.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:43, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

• Fyi, DrtheHistorian is a sock (now blocked) of EnlightenmentNow1792 who participated in the last Persian Gulf RfC. DeCausa (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks for letting me know about this. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

  I'm not convinced that DrtheHistorian is EnlightenmentNow1792, based on what I've seen. I replied at my own user talk. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 09:40, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

  To be honest, I haven't dug into this case and I have no idea who's who. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

This newly created user named Orunaalkallan is sending personal attacks against me in t My talk page saying that I am a Bangladeshi agent who is spreading anti indian agenda in Wikipedia Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 17:18, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

I did not said that. You can go and see his talk page.

I explicitly said I’m not accusing you anything like that , but have seen such incidents in Wikipedia from other editors. Orunaalkallan (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

If you are not accusing them, why do you mention that baseless "there are Bangladeshis who disrupt India-related articles" ? Please don't do that again.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

what is going on this Talk:Kattan dynasty talk page and it's revision history.I am sure this isn't allowed in wikipedia Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 19:55, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. This should be taken to administrators' noticeboard. Theofunny (talk) 20:56, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

i'm sorry, i was experimenting with something to better improve grammatical errors on wikipedia Orunaalkallan (talk) 21:21, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I will use my draft space for such things , like spelling mistake corrections ect. Orunaalkallan (talk) 21:26, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

So please don't use the draft space of Kattan dynasty and familiarize yourself with Wikipedia. Also, you might have edited without logging in recently. Theofunny (talk) 21:29, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

i mean my draft space. Sure noted! Orunaalkallan (talk) 21:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

You mean SANDBOX. Honestly, your edits in draft articles seem to be BOTted. I would advise you to reconsider your editing style. Also, reaching 500 edits this way might be considered WP:GAMINGTHESYSTEM. Theofunny (talk) 21:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes my SANDBOX. I will try with my sandbox. sorry for that. Orunaalkallan (talk) 21:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Hyman Klein: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia Please test ai scripts on wikipedia articles directly. Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence Theofunny (talk) 21:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

don't* Theofunny (talk) 21:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

no , i will create a seperate wiki bot for such things in the future and approved by wikipedia legally . Orunaalkallan (talk) 21:41, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I suspect this user is part of a sock farm, deliberately boosting their edit count through contributions on Talk:Kattan dynasty to bypass ECP protection on sensitive pages, as indicated by their recent edit history.R.C^{Outlander07@talk} 05:50, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Comment I agree, sounds like a WP:SOCK and WP:GAMING case. They have admitted their mistake, thus I will not report them for now, but if you guys think they should be reported, please feel free to proceed. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:17, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

This user is involved in distributive edit war with another user @Astropulse in Kerala article while adding edits with his choice of opinion without following WP: Gallery Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 19:16, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Ill report them later today. They continuously re-adding disputed contents without consensus. Definitely something not right here. Astropulse (talk) 20:33, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#suspected sock and disruptive editor - notified admins @Myuoh kaka roi@Wikaviani@Outlander07@Theofunny Astropulse (talk) 21:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

they are banned now Astropulse (talk) 01:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for handling this. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much.R.C^{Outlander07@talk} 14:48, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Theofunny (talk) 19:56, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani, I know Julian's campaign was a total defeat for him I literally provided sources saying that, My sources were clear and talked about how arabs seeked for a revenge against shapur according to my sources and al tabri also, Arabs didn't fight with julian until the end of it's campaign they just were organized and asked for permission from julian to fight shapur, They Fought shapur and defeated him, which later the romans captured ctesiphon, after a small while shapur gathered his army, killed julian and pushed back the romans, We are talking here About arabs revenge against shapur Not Julian's full campaign and shapur didn't stop killing arabs after the Arabs revenge, after shapur and romans peace, he sought to peace with arabs and made some other tribes to come back to their lands, I don't understand what's here Is all about "JULIAN'S CAMPAIGN" All my 4 or 5 sources were focused on talking about how arabs Took back their revenge By Attacking shapur and defeated his army (After taking Julian's permission).. Best wishes R3YBOl (talk) 20:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to see Western academic sources for your above claims. I was not able to find any, if you have such sources, please disclose them. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:54, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Dear Wikaviani,

thank you for your feedback. I understand your concern about using western sources and I'd like to clarify the basis for the information I have provided, the events I have discussed, particularly the Arab revenge against shapur II during Julian's campaign, are documented in classical arab sources, with al tabri's history of the prophet and kings volume 5,page 59-60(translated) being a primary reference. while this is an Arabic source it is widely recognized and referenced in Western academic Literature.

For example, Shahid's Byzantium and the arabs in fourth century (pp. 82-86,110ff), a western scholarly work, provides an in-depth analysis of the arab role in Julian's campaign and highlights their desire for vengeance against shapur II Shahid especially draws from al Tabri's account to discuss how the arabs were motivated by past grievances and how their movement was pivotal in the conflict.. Additionally Nöldeke's translation notes discuss the broader context of these events, indicating the Arab dimension in the campaign. Nöldeke, a key western scholar, concurs with Al-Tabri's portrayal of the arabs role and motivations.

Al tabri's passage (Which I referenced before in the page) specifically mentions that the arabs gathered in a large numbers to fight shapur II, motivated by revenge for the killings of arabs, which gives a context to their participation in the campaign. This narrative is supported by western scholars, who consider this aspect for history. Beside that if you ask for secondary sources I think you did also remove some Secondary sources I added from the director "Ali jawad" talks about the same arab revenge topic and the exaggerations of persian sources of shapur's brutal action against arabs. I hope this clarifies the sources I have used and their academic context. and if I was reasonable I would respectfully request that the information I added be restored in the article of "Shapur II's Arab campaign", as it's grounded in reliable and recognized sources. Best regards. R3YBOl (talk) 09:16, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Could you provide a quote for your Shahid source ? could you provide book tilte, page numbers and a quote for the Nöldeke source ? Also, for your information, we don't use primary when reliable secondary sources are available, and al-Tabari is a primary source.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Glad to be in touch with you again @Wikaviani!.. well firstly You're right about that al tabri is a primary source. But when you check in al tabri's book volume 5,page 59 (Translated) You can see down in the page the footnotes and interpretation (e.g Shahid's analysis of arabs Revenge against shapur and participation with julian). Second, If we talk about actual secondary sources book you have the book of Jawad Ali. In his book "Comprehensive history of arabs before islam" in page 293 or 294, volume 4. Jawad ali's books are well-known and widely respected secondary source and it's also a scholarly and credible work that draws from primary source (like Al Tabri) and provides analysis. In jawad ali book it comes and talked about arabs opportunity revenge against shapur in page 293-294,volume 4. and Since jawad ali confirms al tabri's account, it adds a stronger foundation to the information, and I an confident it supports our agreement. if you're open to it. I'd really appreciate your approval to restore my sourced texts and I would make some simple changes as remove all other sources and only use Al tabri as primary source and jawad ali as secondary source citations since it meets and it's fine with Wikipedia standards if you do that method. I believe this would make our point clearer and more backed up reputable work. I'm happy to adjust anything if needed to meet our standards. By combining Al-Tabri (Primary source) and Jawad Ali (Secondary source), I follow Wikipedia's "variability" and "reliable sources" rules. The secondary source provides context and conformation, reinforcing the reliability of the primary source, Since Jawad ali analysis supports Al-Tabri's account. It not only adheres to the variability requirement but also aligns with Wikipedia's best practices for using credible sources. If you really strongly agree now and we can move on, Just notify me to Re-Write back my texts again and make small changes (Such as only using al tabri and jawad ali, remove anything extra), Best. R3YBOl (talk) 06:04, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

This takes you to the direct page of jawad ali Analysis "https://shamela.ws/book/7299/1390#p1" R3YBOl (talk) 08:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

I asked you to provide Western academic sources and you cite Jawad Ali ? an Iraqi historian ? Anyway, I don't speak Arabic but Google translate allowed me to grasp some informations from Ali's book. Firstly, he is just citing al-Tabari in that page you linked above, secondly, he does not say that the Arabs won, rather, he says that they captured Ctesiphon but lost it when Sahpur gathered his forces. Last but not least, as I told you, those events were part of Julian's campaign aginst the Sasanians, which ended up in a heavy defeat for the Romans and their allies (Arabs or others), thus your edits at Shapur II's Arab campaign were irrelevant and you should not add them back. In clear, what you did, was cherrypiking what the source says about Julian's campaign, where the Sasanian forces were in a difficult position, and you added that to the outcome of Shapur II's campaign against the Arabs, a campaign that took place 35 years earlier. Since you misrepresent what the sources say and failed to support your edits with some Western academic sources, I think we're done here. This talk page is stalked by several veteran editors, I would be happy to have their opinion, especially if they disagree with my response. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Well I have said everything I have and Revealed all the information I know, I have Shared everything I know and I am going to leave it at that Thank you. R3YBOl (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani, It's been a while since we last talked. Do you remember the Iraqi historian I once cited—back when you reverted my edits and we discussed his reliability? It turns out he's an academic, which makes him a reliable source under Wikipedia’s standards. I understand that you prefer Western academic sources, but as far as I know, Wikipedia policy doesn’t require a source to be Western—only that it be reliable and preferably academic or scholarly. So I believe using this historian is still within policy. Looking back at my previous edits in the Shapur II's Arab campaign article, I realize I added a lot of questionable material, including citing a primary source and misrepresenting the events. I admit that was a mistake and disruptive. What I referred to as a “campaign” wasn’t actually one—Shapur's actual Arab campaign and the 363 capture of Ctesiphon are two separate events. I’m thinking of starting a talk page section on that article soon to discuss how we might include the material more appropriately—perhaps briefly in an "Aftermath" section. If you disagree with anything or have suggestions, feel free to let me know. R3YBOl (talk) 18:09, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I already explained you above that Jawad Ali is not saying what you want to add to that article (see WP:OR). Also, even if he did support what you say about a so-called "Arab revenge", adding that content would be a serious breach in WP:NPOV (a policy that is non-negociable) and WP:WEIGHT. Last but not least, edits of yours like this one and your insistance to even the score between Arabs and Persians at Shapur II's Arab campaign despite what reliable sources say shows that you are not here to build an encyclopedia and as such, I ask you to stay off my talk page.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:30, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

If you want to join the discussion on the result, I'd be happy to provide a recap of the conversation if you don't wish to read everything Grechkovsky (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't need a recap as I checked the talk page, thank you. What I see, is an editor (you) who blatantly removes the outcome without any consensus on the talk page. Please don't do that again.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi again, Your changes in the page of Babak Khorramdin Revolt in the branch section of Al mu'tasim's first campaign I have cited two sources one says 60,000 to 100,000 and other says 60,000. and here you can translate what the source says "https://shamela.ws/book/29560/970#p9" You can directly translate it and it says "His affair continued to grow until Al-Mu'tasim took over, and the Khurramites' affair in the mountains became strong, and many people from Hamadan, Isfahan, Masabadhan and elsewhere converted to their religion. They gathered and camped in the districts of Hamadan, so Al-Mu'tasim sent armies against them, the last of which was Ishaq bin Ibrahim, the governor of Baghdad, and he appointed him over the mountains, so he defeated them, and killed sixty thousand of them in the district of Hamadan, and it was said:one hundred thousand, and the rest of them fled to the land of the Romans." If you see it reasonable Notify me to fix it myself R3YBOl (talk) 10:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

My point was to show you that there are 2 different numbers and I guess you didn't notice this. so I already translated for you what does the link say. R3YBOl (talk) 10:26, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

My bad, thanks for letting me know about that.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:38, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Your thoughts? There is a source in the body of the article, but I'm unsure of its reliability.

In searching for a better source should I be looking for an author in the field of history? Religious studies? Sociocultural/anthropology?

Sources I've found.

• Courts, Pluralism and Law in the Everyday Food, Clothing and Days of Rest, Cinzia Piciocchi(Comparative Constitutional Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Trento, Italy), 2023.
• Sexuality in Muslim Contexts Restrictions and Resistance, ed. Anissa Helie, Homa Hoodfar(social anthropologist), 2012.
• Intellectual Interactions in the Islamic World The Ismaili Thread, ed. Orkhan Mir-Kasimova(Senior Research Associate at The Institute of Ismaili Studies in London), page 480, 2019.
• Islamicate Textiles: Fashion, Fabric, and Ritual, Faegheh Shirazi(Professor in the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at The University of Texas), page 60, 2023 --Kansas Bear 16:39, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, given the links between Nowruz and Zoroastrianism, I think the best sources might be historian of religions. I think this edit of Prosnu was POV editing, since the source number 40 says "According to the preamble of the resolution on the International Day (document A/64/L.30/Rev.2), Nowruz, which means new day, is celebrated on 21 March, the day of the vernal equinox, by more than 300 million people worldwide as the beginning of the new year. It has been celebrated for over 3,000 years in the Balkans, the Black Sea Basin, the Caucasus, Central Asia, the Middle East and other regions." thus the removal of Balkans and the Black sea and changing Caucasus into parts of the Caucasus is unwarranted. I have no access to the 3 other sources that are cited here. I don't know where the source you mentioned above is (21) but when I click on your link, I find a website where Wikipedia is cited, thus this sounds like a case of WP:CIRCULAR. Please let me know if you think I'm missing something. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:48, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok. That source is "currently" #109 Rostami, Hoda (17 March 2007). "Yek Jahan Noruz". Saman (Publication of Iranian National Tax Administration). No. 23. So that is source is not reliable since it cites Wikipedia, which I missed!(oops!) So, the Intellectual Interactions in the Islamic World The Ismaili Thread, ed. Orkhan Mir-Kasimova(Senior Research Associate at The Institute of Ismaili Studies in London), page 480, should be sufficient. Hopefully I will be able to address your concerns on Talk:Odaenathus' Sasanian Campaigns after I get home from work. Stay safe! --Kansas Bear 16:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that source is ok. Thanks very much for your comments at Talk:Odaenathus' Sasanian Campaigns. Take care.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:36, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

The book, "The Oxford Handbook of the Hellenistic and Roman Near East", page 365-366, gives quite a different impression of this campaign.

This book;

• "Rome and Persia: The Seven Hundred Year Rivalry", page xxi.
  

indicates attacks from 235-237 by Ardashir I. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Kansas Bear, Is this about the first campaign or the second ? According to Iranica, renewed attacks occured after the death of Alexander Severus, in 235. I don't have access to the sources you mentioned above. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:35, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

I will recheck when I get home from work. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:41, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Just like summer in Kansas the fun never ends. I cursory look at Caracalla's campaigns of 214–216(which I noticed you nominated for deletion), states that "Edessa, capital of the Kingdom of Osroene under Abgar IX of the Abgarid dynasty, fell in around 214 AD after a lengthy siege by Caracalla. The city was plundered and abandoned, and its ruler Abgar IX was deposed and later assassinated to Caracalla's orders.", uh....apparently not. A source used by Hollowww(Andrew G. Scott, "Change and discontinuity within the Severan dynasty: the case of Macrinus), page 27, states;

• "Abgarus (Severus Abgarus X), king of the Osroeni, had been ruling his people harshly and trying to make them more Roman, and Caracalla used the displeasure of the local population as a pretext to unseating Abgarus. Caracalla called the king to him as if as a friend but imprisoned him upon his arrival; after there was no king, Caracalla overcame the land and made the area a province. A colony was also set up at Edessa. This annexation most likely took place in 213. This move by Caracalla was certainly premeditated and fit into a plan to encroach on the border of Parthia.", and the Abgar IX article states, "In 213 Abgar IX and his son were summoned to Rome and murdered at the orders of Caracalla.", cited by Ball, Warwick (2000). Rome in the east: The Transformation of an empire, page 91. I have yet to find any mention of a "lengthy siege". --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Also, were Osroene and Adiabene, Parthian client states?

• "As well as rebuilding Edessa, Abgar the Great managed to rebuild relations with Septimius Severus to such an extent that Abgar’s state visit to Rome in 204 was the most lavish that even Rome had witnessed in 150 years." -- Ball, page 91.

Sure doesn't sound like Osroene was a Parthian client state.

I'm beginning to think we need to involve an Admin. If this is the condition of 3 articles written by Hollowww, I can only imagine the WP:OR written into the others. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for looking into this, so I was mistaken, there was a first campaign of Caracalla, not against the Parthians but against the states that were between the two empires, this is why I was mistaken and proposed the article for deletion (because I could not find any mention of fightings between the Romans and the Parthians in the sources for the dates cited in the article). By the way, Segal and Lieu, the sources cited by Hollowww to support a Parthian involvement actually don't say so ... I self-reverted the nomination for deletion. Hollowww seems to try to include Iranian Empires in the wars won by Rome, like at Roman-Palmyrene war and Caracalla's campaign of 214-216 even against what sources say, thus yeah, an admin might be useful. Please let me know if I'm missing something. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I'm not sure there was a campaign. I found no mention of a siege by Caracalla. Abgar and his son went to Rome and were imprisoned and executed(Ball, 91).

Segal makes no mention of a siege;

• "For Edessa, however, the end of independence was near. Rome could no longer be content with indirect control of Osrhoene. Abgar Severus, successor of Abgar the Great, was seized and deposed by Caracalla, probably in 214, and Edessa was declared a colonia."

Lieu makes no mention of a siege, but of a flood in 216;

• "Christianity must have been established in Edessa before the end of the 2nd century C.E., as a “church” was among the buildings destroyed in a disastrous flood in about 216."

David S. Potter, The Roman Empire at Bay, AD 180-395, page 143, makes no mention of a siege. In fact, page 144 states;

• "In 217 Caracalla was on the march once again, reaching Edessa by the end of March at the head of a large army that had consisted of detachments from all parts of the empire as well as from the eastern garrisons. His intention was to complete the work begun the previous year by advancing across Mesopotamia and into the Parthian heartland."

Goldsworthy, Adrian (2009). How Rome Fell: death of a superpower, page 74;

• "At the beginning of 217 a large army was concentrated at Edessa in preparation for a fresh invasion."

Judging from Hollowww's inability to communicate on article talk pages, asking for quotes from relevant sources would be a waste of time. In short, you should restart the Afd on Caracalla's campaigns of 214–216. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I got you, but one of the above sources says "Caracalla overcame the land and made the area a province. A colony was also set up at Edessa. This annexation most likely took place in 213. This move by Caracalla was certainly premeditated and fit into a plan to encroach on the border of Parthia." it's a bit unclear if Caracalla needed to mount a campaign in order to make that land a province or not.---- ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:21, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

No, everything Caracalla did was from Rome. Caracalla wasn't at Edessa until 217.(Goldsworthy, Potter). --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Damn, I should definitely sleep more, sorry. I will restart the AFD then.---- ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:43, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I am reaching you and others because you have been involved in § this dispute. I sincerely apologize for the issue and starting from now on, I will rewrite all the articles from scratch (or at least try). I have priorities on rewriting some articles, such as Roman–Palmyrene War of 272–273 and Odaenathus' Sasanian Campaign, while others, like Armeno-Sassanid War of 363–371, I will rewrite in User:Hollowww/Valens' Persian campaign at some point. Some other articles will be rewritten, such as the Roman–Parthian War of 194–198, while other, I think, should be deleted, like Caracalla's campaigns of 214–216 and Maximinus' campaigns of 310. If you wish to help me, I appreciate it, contact me in any way and we will see how to manage things. Thank you again for reporting this problem to me and the community, and I will now try to solve my mistakes. Hollowww (talk) 08:56, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Hollowww, thank you for your message. Since you confess your mistakes, I am going to ask for the report to be closed. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:47, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey, not to bother you but I think @Hollowww quitted. Since we knew each other, he told me he quits wikipedia trough message. What's going on with him, did he get warned or something? HistoriaDrusiana (talk) 13:16, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Hollowww confessed their mistakes and I asked to close the report.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I meant to say that he quitted and will not rewrite all of the articles he mentioned because of this, anyways. Best --- HistoriaDrusiana (talk) 14:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Pages Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi. On lots of articles about Persian figures from the Islamic era, such as Rumi and Al-Khwarizmi, their ethnicity is removed based on a guideline that's about modern people with an official nationality, which didn't exist back then. On the other hand, not a single Arab figure's ethnicity is removed. Please see my conversation with user D.Lazard. Falka-Sol (talk) 13:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Falka-Sol thank you for posting here. WP:ETHNICITY says that ethnicity, religion and sexuality should not be in the lead of an article unless relevant to the subject's notability. If you think that there are articles where the ethnic background of someone is mentioned in the lead while it is not relevant to his/her notability, then you can be bold and remove it from the lead. Please keep in mind that al-Khwarizmi's ethnic background is detailed in the body of the article and that, in some cases, the article is so short that it does not have a body. I will not intervene in your discussion with D. Lazard (please see WP:CANVASS), but I can say that I disagree with their response about al-Khwarizmi's ethnicity, beacause reliable sources are quite unanimous about the Persian ethnicity of that scholar. Please let me know if I'm missing something and happy editing. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:ETHNICITY is about MODERN biographies. It says mention their nationality, not ethnicity. i.e. American, not White American. Falka-Sol (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:ETHNICITY is not only about modern persons, you can see that if you read it carefully : "The opening paragraph should usually provide context for that which made the person notable. In most modern-day cases, this will be the country, region, or territory where the person is currently a national or permanent resident; or, if the person is notable mainly for past events, where the person was such when they became notable." Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Whatever. I'm not going to bother with it anymore.

But there's something you probably want to know. As Touraj Daryaee explains here, there's a grand campaign in the Western universities, funded by Qatar, to Arabify everything related to this so-called Islamic golden age.

On Wikipedia at least, they seemed to have succeed. based on a guideline that's at best a loophole.

Ask Wikipedia admins to clarify the guideline in cases where there's no modern nationality to make these articles like the remaining 99% articles, because the arguments they have made to get rid of non-Arab figures' origins seems laughable to me, and totally against what that guideline wants to achieve. Naturally, in cases where there's no nationality, ethnicity works as nationality. As I said, it's laughable that some articles for some reason must not mention where this guy comes from. They have even removed it from poets articles! On these articles, at least, their "notability" excuse logically doesn't apply.

And if that didn't work, remove Arab figure's Arab origin, especially from Muhammad. I'm not going to do it myself, because I know Arab users are going to come up with some reason why their Arab origin is totally related to their notability. Falka-Sol (talk) 10:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I have read that article, as I can read speak and write in Persian, I found no mention of Touraj Daryaee claiming that Arab countries are trying to Arabize notable Iranian figures. He rather gives his opinion about the prominent American historian R. N. Frye. Am I missing something ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:55, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

He says Frye fought the Arabification. This part: این همان فرایی بود که در کتاب عصر طلایی ایران٬ در زمانی که اعراب میلیون ها دلار خرج می‌کردند که تمدن اسلامی را کاملا عربی نشان دهند و حضور دیگران را کمرنگ کنند٬ اهمیت ایرانیان برای شکل‌گیری تمدن اسلامی و اهمیت زبان فارسی برای تمدن آسیا را گوشزد کرد. Falka-Sol (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I see, in any case, Wikipedia does not describe Persian/Iranian figures as Arabs. Any reader who reads not only the lead section, but also the body of an article, will find some information about the ethnic background of the subject.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I came here for this topic, and its already being discussed.

I too find it weird that for Khawrazmi you have to go all the way down to figure out his ethnicity. His birth place was removed, recently his name has been changed to Arabic. Someone must really want to search and go down to find he was Persian, while at first glance things are very different. It just does not make sense. DrTheHistorian✎ 15:31, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree witn you for his name in the lead, that's why I corrected it. But what does really matter about this scholar ? That he was a Persian or that he worked and imrproved mathematics as one of the greatest mathematicians ever ? His ethnicity only serves nationalistic purposes and is not interesting in an encyclopedia, however, if our readers are curious and want to know more about his ethnic background, they just need to scroll a bit down and find relevant informations about that. Happy editing to both of you guys.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:24, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

It came to my attention that on the Article Seizure of Bu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs someone recently has added on the info box "Part of Unification of the UAE". I don't know how that can be part of that history, as when they became unified they didn't hold the islands. I believe that is false and should be removed. Given that you have made edits on that article before I thought I reach out and hear your opinion. DrTheHistorian✎ 18:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think that the "Part of unification of the UAE" means that those islands were ruled by the UAE, rather, the islands were in the process of being ruled by the UAE but the Iranian seizure drowned the process.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:15, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

I see that way of looking at it now. Thanks. DrTheHistorian✎ 15:51, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

You are welcome.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:38, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

{{subst:DRN-Carus' Sasanian Campaign|topic|noticeboard=Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Carus' Sasanian Campaign]]|reason=Content dispute} ~~~~ 08/06/2025 Luciuseir (talk) 19:24, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani. I perceived several many of your edits to Talk:Carus' Sasanian campaign defensive of the "Sasanian victory" conclusion, and in several instances this was based on a misinterpretation of sources. When this was shown to be incorrect, you advocated removing the field from the infobox. With this recent edit, I believe you have restored this incorrect information into List of conflicts between Romans and Persians again, relating to that conflict. As your edit summary doesn't acknowledge that you reinstated this incorrect information again, I wanted to ask if you noticed this and, if not, would be willing to correct it. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 12:17, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for reaching out. If you pay attention to the page about Carus' Sasanian campaign, you will notice that I'm not the one who described the outcome as a Sasanian victory. I only defended the outcome as user:Luciuseir, posted an offensive comment on the article's talk page, accusing me to promote misinformation in conjunction with Drmies, a veteran admin and Kansas Bear, a trusted editor. Then I thought that Luciuseir is not here to build an encyclopedia (and I still think that this editor has a POV problem when it comes to Roman wars). Then other editors stepped in and with their input, it was clear that the outcome was wrong and I said that the outcome should be reworded as "stalemate" or "inconclusive". As to Odenathus' campaign against the Sasanian forces, please take a look at the main article and its sources (especially those cited in the lead), this campaign's outcome is disputed for the least, thus, describing it at a Roman victory like you did is quite irrelevant. You must understand that when it comes to wars/camapigns, a single outcome in the infobox stating "X victory" or "Y defeat" sounds irrelevant, with the notable exceptions of clear cut outcomes like WW2. These battles' infoboxes are not, IMHO, suitable for wars/campaigns and serve nationalistic purposes. AS to your " When this was shown to be incorrect, you advocated removing the field from the infobox", that sounds like an accusation towards me allgedly trying to hide a Roman victory of a war that ended inconclusively, please note that I created two drafts recently, about two campaigns mounted by the Persian king Shapur I and that are widely described as Sasanian victories, but I left out the outcome parameter because of what I said above : , . Please let me know if you think I'm missing something or if I got you wrong. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:59, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Wikaviani.

I am a bit confused by your response so I will try to be articulate.

• I'm raising this because you participated in a discussion that determined the above campaign was inconclusive but you reintroduced "Sasanian victory" to a separate article in the above edit. I have never been involved in the dispute or expressed an opinion on the content.
• While Drmies reverted Luciuseir's original edit, they did not challenge Luciuseir's interpretation of the sources and did not restore the same incorrect information to another article weeks later.
• I'm contacting you directly—instead of outlining this at a noticeboard—because people make mistakes. I can assume good faith while acknowledging to you directly that something looks improper. In your position, I would be grateful if an editor contacted me directly about this instead of a noticeboard posting. While my intent is to be fair, I will unreservedly apologise for any offence and—if you prefer—will raise this at a noticeboard and open myself to a BOOMERANG for poor conduct.

Will you please correct the mistake re-introduced in this edit to List of conflicts between Romans and Persians regarding the outcome of "Sasanian victory" concerning Carus' Sasanian campaign? (I believe the correct outcome is "Inconclusive" for this conflict.)

If you do this I will consider this matter closed. As a volunteer, you are entitled to decline. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 16:54, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Another editor has made this change so I am satisfied. Thank you — ImaginesTigers (talk) 17:25, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@ImaginesTigers: I owe you an apology as I completely got you wrong. I missed the part of your edit that corrected the outcome of Carus' Sasanian campaign, I intended to correct your change of the outcome of the campaign mounted by Odenathus, which is disputed (rather than inconclusive by the way). So please accept my apologies. @Kansas Bear: Thanks very much for correcting my mistake. My bad, I screwed up. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:53, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Shapur I's first Roman campaign, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:58, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Wish you a great rest of your day.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:05, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Caleb Stanford was:

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Shapur I's second Roman campaign and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Caleb Stanford (talk) 21:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Caleb Stanford, thank you for your message. I must however say that I don't have a clue about why the submission was not accepted. That campaign took place 1800 years ago and is reliably sourced. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Wikaviani: The message should have linked you to WP:AUDIENCE (I do not know why it doesn't). My feedback is that the article should provide an introduction to the topic for a general audience, including relevant wikilinks to understand the subject (for example, Persian king Shapur I, what campaigns, etc.), with specific date(s) and details where appropriate to put the topic in its historical context. Currently, I cannot understand the article unless I am already knowledgeable about the Roman empire, Nisibis, persian kings, and Barbalissos and what was happening in history in this time period. Kind regards, Caleb Stanford (talk) 18:29, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Sorry I did not see that you are a long time active user on Wikipedia. I've deleted the part about Teahouse, let me know if the above makes more sense. Caleb Stanford (talk) 18:32, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Caleb Stanford and sorry for the belated response (Wiki break ...). I get your point, but with this kind of rationale ( WP:AUDIENCE ), almost all our articles about the Roman Persian wars would be irrelevant as people don't have a clue about them. The context of that campaign is in its title, it was the second time Shapur I invaded the Roman Empire. Anyway, I'll fix it if I have time. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:41, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Wikaviani! 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! Caleb Stanford (talk) 21:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Kansas Bear, first pointed out that the lede should not mention claims. I had included the fact that the Buyids claimed descent from Bahram V.

I thanked him for that, and revised it to exclude the speculative claim of Sassanid origin.

Then, he reverted me again, asking me to seek consensus a la BRD before editing the lede.

I read through the policy and found that is not a valid reason to revert someone, so I reverted again.

Then he accuseds me of violating BRD, but a cursory read of the BRD article shows that it is an optional process.

Then he leaves a warning on my account accusing me of "edit wars", and you undo my revision accusing me of "edit wars".

How am I the one waging edit wars if I have shown that I am engaging in good faith? When Kansas Bear specifically pointed out issues in my edit, I immediately revised it. Now I am being threatened with a ban? What kind of nonsense is this? Idris Shirazi (talk) 00:33, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

There is no nonsense here, you read the text about WP:BRD, but you seem to ignore WP:EW, WP:CON, WP:ONUS, WP:BURDEN and so on. Yes, if you keep edit-warring, you will be blocked, this is not a threat but what you will get if you keep going this way.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:07, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

No, that is quite literally a threat. If you give me a warning, it has to be for a good reason. You guys just seem to want an excuse to ban me from wikipedia even though I am engaging in good faith and simply out of passion for history.

Once again

Kansas Bear reverted, telling me to exclude the Buyid claim of Sassanid ancestry.

I revised it, excluding that claim: not an edit war, literally listening to his feedback

Then, he revised it again, asking me to seek consensus before editing the lede.

I took the time to review whether or not that was a valid reason to revert my edit, and after reading the BRD page I found out it was not.

Then he revised me again and left a warning on my talk page. This time threatening me and saying I should be careful to follow the BRD.

I linked the BRD page and it clearly says that is optional.

Then you revised me, and accused me of edit wars.

A threat, and complete nonsense. All this is, is two veteran wikipedia users abusing their powers on a new user. In fact, my account was even banned for a little bit yesterday, it took 20 minutes for it to come back. Idris Shirazi (talk) 21:19, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey, Kansas Bear edited the article to promote the Arabized interpretation of the Buyids, while we are in the middle of a debate

RIGHT AFTER ALMOST GETTING ME BANNED for editing without consensus

He edits with broken consensus in the middle of a debate

I expect to see you threaten him with a ban too, right? Or is there no consistency here? Idris Shirazi (talk) 22:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Please keep the discussion centralized (you are already involved in a similar thread on the article's talk page), no need to post here anymore.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

No. This thread is about getting you to admit I did not commit edit war violations. The other thread is about the Buyid dynasty. Idris Shirazi (talk) 08:39, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

When you ignore WP:BRD and keep reverting to your favourite version of an article, this is an edit war and that means that you are on the wrong way. You just need to read the first section of WP:EW to understand that you were edit-warring.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:53, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

"WP:BRD may be optional, but edit warring like you do is NOT an option, take your concerns to the talk page. Last warning."

So WP:BRD isn't optional anymore? Kansas Bear reverted me. I did not revert him. Therefore the three reverts rule applies to him, not me.

Thanks for your time bae 😍😍 Idris Shirazi (talk) 09:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Optional doesn't mean "go ahead and ignore it", you need to see WP:BRD in a context that includes others guidlines, like the ones I cited above. I suggest you do your homeworks and get familiar with our guidelines before editing.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:08, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

With this edit to Battle of Nineveh (612 BC), you introduced several Harv/sfn errors with the following four incomplete "refs":

• {{sfn|Lipschits|2005|p=18}}
• {{sfn|Frahm|2017|p=194}}
• {{sfn|Dandamayev|Grantovskiĭ|1987|pages=806-815}}
• {{sfn|Dandamayev|Medvedskaya|2006}}

Per your edit summary, these partial refs are from Medo-Babylonian conquest of the Assyrian Empire. The problem is that these "sfn" refs have no target to link to. Please add the target/complete cites to Battle of Nineveh so this article can be cleared from Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. - Shearonink (talk) 17:09, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

@Shearonink: Thanks for the courtesy note, I fixed the target links. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:59, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Shapur I's second Roman campaign, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the note. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:29, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points. The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026. The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive. Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants. Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points. Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in participating? Sign up here.
You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Wikaviani: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey, thanks very much for your message.

I wish you and yours a happy and healthy new year. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:14, 7 January 2026 (UTC)