User talk:LouisAragon

OUPThis user has access to Oxford University Press through The Wikipedia Library.

Azerbaijan

Currently, you are deleting the list of resources, and linkes and evidences provided to you. I offered the list of of ancient scholars such Strabo etc.

Your refuse to admit the facts so you must explain in details why. The original presented theory on the etymology of Azerbaijan is incomplete. Substantial change from Atropatene to Azerbaijan through indicated path is impossible, unless there is some form of dyslexia. Therefore, I provided all possible variants based on historical evidences with respect the etymology, to provide the reader with option to choose and investigate, if such is required. Freedom of choice source of further discussion rather disruptive deletion of information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejlabnet (talk • contribs) 19:21, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Sooreta

I would like to suggest that the Assyrian poet from Kirkuk, Iraq, Sargon Boulus, to be added to the list of famous Assyrians. Here is his Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_Boulus Thank you. October 16, 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sooreta (talk • contribs) 19:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Rosie Malek-Yonan

I am Rosie Malek-Yonan the person this aronticle is about. I know my identity better than anyone else. I am an Assyrian and that is not up for debate or change. I am not Iranian. Nothing about me is Iranian. It is not up to you, Wikipedia and other editors to make that decision or distinction about me. I have notified Wikipedia in the past and this vandalism of my identity has got to stop. I am not going to get into a long winded debate about this issue. I have stated the same on the talk page of the article and last week emailed Wikipedia directly about this. No Wikipedia editor has a right to change my identity from Assyrian to what they think may be appropriate. RMY (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

 There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.    Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMY (talk • contribs) 18:18, 6 May 2015 (UTC) 

Yaghnobi

That's the classification used in the Routledge volume. Trying to bring some sanity to our classification articles. We have a specific field for ancestral forms.

BTW, other than Persian, do we have other direct descendents of Middle or Old Iranian languages? Wakhi from Khotanese/Tumsheqese, maybe, or Sangsari from Khwarezmian? Does Ossete hold up as a direct descendent of Scythian? — kwami (talk) 18:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

A problem with the Safavid map

Take a look here [6]. Looks like our friend is keeping up his reversion and now even denying that the western Georgian kingdoms were vassal states of the Safavid dynasty. If we use that logic he uses, then the majority of the maps on this site should get changed. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 10:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, the problem is fixed. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 12:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I left a message about it on your page. LouisAragon (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Dear LouisAragon, I award you the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your efforts in reverting vandalism on articles related to WikiProject South Asia! You are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk 20:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Dear User:LouisAragon, thanks for reverting edits made by 173.181.109.243 (talk · contribs). I've noticed this kind of thing a lot on Wikipedia. I recently tried to do the same with 69.124.40.225 (talk · contribs) but was reverted again by that user. I appreciate you monitoring these articles for nationalism, etc. With regards, Anupam^Talk 20:30, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Ay götüm. Sebebineydiki (talk) 05:57, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Ethnic cleansing

Hello LouisAragon. As it is the 21st of May, I just wanted to take a look at this page. I did open the article entitled "Ethnic cleansing of Circassians", then, oh, I check the first word in bold and it reads "Muhajirism". I thought I got into the wrong place since the word "muhajirism" is not something specific to the Circassian exodus. Later I saw that "-5,270". I do not think that it was a deliberate mistake of yours. I could not read the entire current article, but do you know what happened here? I know that it is not you who changed it, but I thought you could help me understand what is going on because you are among the editors of that page.

Besides, after 1864, the vast majority of Circassians migrated to the Ottoman Turkey and the rest to the Balkans and to some Middle Eastern countries such as Jordan, Syria, and Israel. Iran is not actually one of them if we are referring to the 1860s. Back in the Safavid era, yes, there were Circassian inhabitants (soldiers, mostly concubines, and other slaves) in Persia. There still exist some Circassians in Iran. However, it is not because those people migrated to Persia "following the Caucasian War that ended in 1864". Most of them are "former" inhabitants and they are not usually Abaza, Abkhaz, Adyghe (Abzakh, Adamiy, Besleney, Bzhedug, Hatuqwai, Kabarday, Makhosh, Mamkhegh, Natukhai, Shapsug, Temirgoy, Yegerquay, Zhaney, etc.), and Ubykh. On the contrary, those in Iran consist of Northeast Caucasian peoples such as Vainakhs, Ossetians, Karachays, Daghestanians, and Balkars. Yet, among the concubines were Adyghe-speaking ones such as the Abzakh and Kabardian, that is why both Abbas II (1642–1666) and Suleiman I (1666–1694) have Adyghe mothers. Moreover, These mothers (Agha and Nekakhet Khanums) came from princely Adyghe families. Maybe you know that Agha Khanum's brother was the Governor of Sakki, Shamhal Karamusal Sultan.

Please check this out: Muhajirism was the massive emigration of Muslim indigenous peoples of the Caucasus into the Ottoman Empire and to a lesser extent Persia following the Caucasian War. The article is called "Ethnic cleansing of Circassians", but this sentence talks about all Caucasians (even South Caucasians such as Azerbaijani and Muslim Georgians). Those who speak Azerbaijani Turkish and South Caucasian languages are not included even in the broadest definition of Circassians. We know that the broadest definition in the Ottoman Empire and Iran consider North Caucasians to be Circassians. The southerns are excluded. This is another problem of the article. "To a lesser extent Persia" would be correct if the article were about the "muhajirism" only. For Ethnic Cleansing of Circassians, it is definitely wrong. If you do not mind, please check the Turkish version Çerkes Sürgünü. You will see what I mean.

Again, it says that among the ones that moved to Iran it included peoples from territories formerly under Iranian control, such as the Laks, Circassians (presumably only Kabardin, as they fell into the maximum extent of the Persian Safavid, Afsharid, and Qajar Empire), but also Azerbaijani, Shia Lezgins, and Muslim Georgians. Azerbaijani and Georgians? Right, but it is the wrong article. Notwithstanding, as I said, it seems that the article fails to distinguish between the formerly-settled Adyghes and the non-Circassian newcomers. It also confuses the consequences of the Russo-Persian War (1826-1828) with those of the Russian conquest of the Caucasus (1817–1864). The Russian conquest is the one which led to the "ethnic cleansing". "Emigration of Muslim indigenous peoples of the Caucasus" is another thing. So, dear LouisAragon, I hope you can do something about these issues. I will do my best if you need my help. Thank you in advanced.Listofpeople (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Listofpeople. Thanks for bringing this up. The thing with the article is, it refers to the whole muhajirism of Muslims from the Caucasus, but zooms in precisely on the Circassians. Therefore, we noted the South Caucasian and non-Circassian North Caucasian emigration also briefly. Also the thing with the Russian conquest of the Caucasus, it was a direct following of their expansion into Persian and Turkish territory in the Caucasus. Prior to the 19th century, Russians didn't have really any strong political presence in the Caucasus at all, save for some Cossack lines, but those were far from the Turkish-Iranian border.

The consequences of the Russo-Persian War (1826-29) were huge for both Imperial Russia, Persia and the Caucasus. After that war 90% of the Caucasus was finally all came under their hegemony. The outcome/aftermath of that war and the Russo-Persian/Russo-Turkish Wars before that, are directly linked with the Russian conquest of the Caucasus. In fact, when they appointed Mushthaid (Mir-Fatah-Agha) as leader of the Muslim Ulama over the region just right after the Russo-Persian War of 1826-28, the region was still maintained stable for decades. When he was told to go back by Paskevich' successors, the whole problem in the Caucasus got worse, including the rise of figures such as Imam Shamil and others. The Russian conquest itself was made possible after those Russo-Persian Wars and Russo-Turkish Wars. (to a lesser extent).

If there are any more things you'd like to discuss, feel free to do so.

Regards LouisAragon (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I see the new version. I might be a bit choosy, but it seems a way better now. I am serious, thank you for your contributions. Of course, the issue at stake has a "background". Among others, Mir-Fatah's support may be influential as well. I see the relevance, but you also say that it is to a small extent. Perhaps out of overestimation, most of the article's sections were revolving around the repetition of the words "Qajar", "Mir-Fattah", "Tabriz", and "Persian", only. In addition, I doubt the article is really "within the scope of WikiProject Iran". I believe you see what I mean. Russo–Turkish Wars? Well, you are definitely right. Regarding the ethnic cleansing of Circassians, it can be argued that the relevance of even the Crimean War is much significant than that of the Russo–Persian War in the early 19th century. Anyway, if you are still interested in editing the article, please do so. Although it is relatively much better, it can be improved. It has been a nice conversation. Sure, I would like to discuss many other things when we both have time. All the best!Listofpeople (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but we still have quite a long way to go. I'm currently working together on it with another user. Quite major layout and information changes to come to cover all aspects, views (about the cleansing), periods, resettlement, and so on. Three major conflicts played around, after, during or before that time, and those were indeed the Crimean War, Russo-Persian War of the 19th cent, and some Russo-Turkish Wars. All of them are bonded in some way to the ethnic cleansing, but in various degrees of importance. It will still take some time before we're fully done. Bests to you too. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Re:Thanks for the barnstar

Dear User:LouisAragon, there does seem to be a lot of vandalism on South Asian-related articles but I'm glad that you're up for the challenge of addressing it! I'm glad you liked the barnstar! All the best, Anupam^Talk 02:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for fixing the Western Asia and Middle East pages, as well as the orthographic map. :) Negahbaan (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Whoops

Sorry, it looks like my last edit was done with one of yours in between, so the summary doesn't anymore completely match the effects. In any case, please participate in the discussion on the talkpage. This pretty well-sourced material was originally deleted without any proper justification earlier this month, and I restored most of it for the sake of accessibility without having to go back over 500 edits ago. Yes, on second inspection there was redundantly restored sections in the lede- the purpose of my last edit was to delete these--Yalens (talk) 23:20, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

No probs. I will join you on the talk page. I already left a comment. I will revert it back to the original version, until some more views etc are gathered/WP:CON is reached ok? ;-) LouisAragon (talk) 23:22, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

"POV"

Please refrain from baseless (and funny) threats. First, even US governmental source like Iran: A Country Study (Curtis & Hooglund, 2008, p. 117) states restoring traditional dress code was favored by vast majority of women. Bigots like Soroush90gh are forcing photos of irrelevant events to prove otherwise. Second, I referenced number of victims by two scholars, and you replaced it with Guardian trash. Third, there have been propaganda attempts few years ago related to plastic keys and mythical "thousands of child soldiers", which Iran denied long ago. Even dubious material shouldn't be took as fact in main article, but "95,000" isn't even dubious but pure propaganda. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 02:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Here's the quote from mentioned book (p. 117)

Following the Revolution, the new republican government called for the participation of women in an “Islamic society,” because such a society would not be “morally corrupt” like the deposed monarchy. Observance of hejab would assure respect for women. Hejab eventually was defined as clothing that concealed the shape of a woman’s figure, such as loose outer garments, and covered her hair and skin, leaving only her face and hands exposed. The requirement to observe hejab in public was controversial among the minority of secularized women who never had worn a chador. However, for the majority of women who always had worn the chador, hejab served to legitimate their presence in the public sphere, especially in work outside the home.

It's publication by US Library of Congress, Federal Research Division. As I said - minority view of irrelevant event. I hope it helps, if need more sources just say. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 02:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

173 IP

I see you've been following up this lad - and been doing a good job so far. The user appears to be making several unsourced edits pushing a certain POV and political interest, resulting in degradation of the quality of dozens of articles covering that topic area. The problem is, their edits have not stopped. I've reverted all the recent changes for now but am not sure for how long I will be able to monitor the IP. If you have free time - I don't :( - it would be wise to bring up these tedentious edits to some admin's notice. Regards, Mar4d (talk) 15:56, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Fake sources by Pan-Turkists

Hey! This is a pure bullshit: [7]. They claim that Scythians were Mongoloid/Turk. These sock puppets added that BS to Sarmatians too. See this diff. See? They just want to reject Iranian origin. Feel free to remove them, because it's a self-published website and the text is not same as the sources. Sources are fake. --188.158.105.72 (talk) 04:41, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm just responding since I got pinged. I don't know if I agree with the conclusion at SPI based on behavioral evidence, but I only took a short look. I know you had a rocky past, especially last month. If an admin blocked on those grounds, well, I'd suggest that some leniency might be merited given you'd put forth some effort towards productive editing, but then again I'm not familiar enough with the subject area of your edits to say just how productive you've been. I'm also concerned with the pushing for various actions on ANI. In short, while I would suggest someone experienced in SPI or ARBIPA-covered articles take a second look at the behavioral evidence, I'm not personally going to advocate for more. I'm sorry. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 16:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I can say with full conviction that LouisAragon and Scythian77 are not sock accounts of Behnam or any other user, based on my interactions with them and their editing. I think the blocking admin has jumped the gun over this one. I can say for sure that Scythian77 is not a sock, because I have interacted with that user long before and he/she's been editing here since 2008. In the absence of checkuser and behavioural evidence, these blocks are not appropriate. It may also be of interest to you that the IP who made the socking allegations at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beh-nam is Islamabad-based Afghan editor User:Lagoo sab who edits from PTCL 39, 119 and 182 IP ranges and uses similar language (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive, Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Lagoo sab etc.). Mar4d (talk) 07:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

LouisAragon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dear mods. I won't post any other evidence here as everything regarding that is already put in the requests above. All evidence and truth aside, this request is about my new way of editing here which I have in mind. I will make a new start, or better said a new improved approach from now on while editing here for the cause of Wikipedia, and make sure now no one will be able to assume or even think in the slightest that I'm a sockpuppet or whatever. Even if a person (x, or y, or z) just wants to get rid of me by lurking for sanctions (as which happened with me this time). First of all, I will edit my user page that will show certain personal info so moderators and other people will know who I am. Second, even for common facts (even things like a carrot is orange, for example), I will from now on provide sources and references and especially on the so called sensitive topics (there are so many indeed) to prevent lurkers or other people from ever doing this joke against me ever again. I believe this should do the trick just perfectly correct and should prevent it from happening ever again. This whole thing costed me alot of time you know and I have to prove I'm not guilty for something I haven't got anything to do with in the slightest. I hope my plea this time is according protocol. Thanks alot, and I'm awaiting your response. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I am going to extend a gigantic amount of rope and accept this. Note, however: anything that even looks like sockpuppetry will be immediately met with a reblock. In addition, attacks on other editors, questioning their motives, etc will also be met with similar action. This is a community, and you agreed to its rules, policies, and guidelines the panda ₯’ 00:01, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks. Yes, I understand that. However I also hope moderators will be more cautious as well with this policy that just throws everyone in the same group without properly investigating the case before actually seeing who's guily and who not so to say. Regards. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Unblocked

The Arbitration Committee Ban Appeals Subcommittee has granted your appeal as you have agreed to the following terms:

1. Disclose all your accounts. You have done that and these are listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LouisAragon/Archive. As part of your appeal we have acknowledged that you are not related to User:Beh-nam.

2. Agree to a one-account restriction.

3. Acknowledge that any further sockpuppetry will lead to an extended block, and

4. Devote yourself to editing.

Dougweller (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of the Ban Appeals Subcommittee

Hello :)

Check my talk page :D. I forgot how to ping so... xD --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:53, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Now I remember why I didn't make a list of the articles I created. The reason was because I was constantly targeted by sock-puppets who would look at my latest edits and attack those articles I was editing. Hell, there was even a time where they would attack my user page [8]. It would been a hell for me if they knew about all the articles I created. I don't if these sock-puppets are still watching me, we'll soon see. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Teresia Sampsonia Khan at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

About the economical data

I edit a lot of economic data in various pages and cite sources to them. Please point out which page you were referring to thank you. - Ryopus (talk) 01:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: Roman–Persian relations

Hello, I was updating article classifications when I found this article given an A-classification. I'm concerned because I can't find any record that WikiProject Military History performed a review on it, & that after a review of the article, I don't think it qualifies. (While it is well-written, well-organized, & has good diagrams, there simply aren't enough citations; for that reason, I wouldn't give it a B-classification.) Can you help me find that review, or explain why it deserves an A-classification? -- llywrch (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello llywrch. As of recently I updated the article's content and to my astonishment, it was never given an assessment for the Wikiprojects (in fact, the correct Wikiprojects namely that of Rome/Classical Greece, Iran, etc weren't even added) I just quickly added the correct WP groups and added an assessment to have it at listed and for it to have a higher priority, whilst my intention was to later ask someone to give it a rating. I'm gonna admit I've been very busy as of lately, and therefore I had forgotten this "promise" to myself.

So by this, could I perhaps ask you to give it a rating for the WP projects it's been assessed to? Would be nice. If not, I can ask people from the WP groups to give it a rating next time I have time.

If anything else I can help you with, let me know.

Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 22:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

So you have no problem I regrade this article from an "A" for WikiProject Military History? -- llywrch (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello llywrch, no, I have no objections against that. Regards. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. -- llywrch (talk) 20:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you do me a favor?

Hello there! I'm slowly returning, so how do I appeal for the removal of the topic-ban I received :)? By the way, I will be searching my archives for Iranian-Circassian related information soon. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:01, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

User:HistoryofIran, mate, it's in one of those ANI sections...not sure where. I'll take def a look for you when I get on the PC (which is after dinner most likely). :Will ping you. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

User:HistoryofIran, I think this is where you should look at: [9]. Other than that, I suggest you contact some of the more/most capable moderators here for further info, but I think you should be able to appeal for an unblock through that link. Let me know if you need anything else bro. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thanks mate! appreciate it :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:24, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

RE:Rome

Hallo Louis, in 1688 Rome was - as always in the previous centuries - the capital of the Papal States, so that it was not formally subjected to any foreign power. Pope was in that year Innocent XI Odescalchi, who would die one year later. But what has this to do with ban policies? :-) Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 07:04, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Alex2006, Haha, I accidentally linked the wrong link to you referring to which article I needed that information. The right article is this one [10] I'm gonna put it for GA relatively soon (after some minor fixes regarding the references etc.) and the name of the entity Rome was part of in 1688 is one of the facts I still need to add. The woman in question in the article died in 1688 in Roma and worked some 40 years before her death in the Santa Maria della Scala convent there, hence my question ;)

Bests and thanks for your helpful response! - LouisAragon (talk) 16:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Louis, sorry for the delay! I see that the coords are there, very good! best, Alex2006 (talk) 05:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Alex, yes the coords are there now, thanks for your message! - LouisAragon (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, LouisAragon. You have new messages at 1bandsaw's talk page.
Message added 15:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Incorrect statement

"Iran, which borders Armenia to the south, is home to an estimated 70,000-90,000 ethnic Armenians" I believe there was a misunderstanding that the source i meant, Actually i have seen 70,000 somewhere as well since the numbers have diminished due to immigration of christian population to Europe and USA. I believe the number given above seems more up to date So i will add it as the low estimate but thanks for noticing! Agulani (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Agulani, that media report is from many years ago, and it doesnt conform WP:RS as it doesnt cite where it got its source/reference from. That what is mentioned, is even historically totally bogus, as a signficant part of Iranian Armenians descent from refugees from the Ottoman Empire. We can't add that. - LouisAragon (talk) 13:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Coordinates?

Though i have added the co-ordinates, I wish to tell you how to add them:
The template needed is {{Coordinates}}.
For example of 1° 2' 3 " N and 4° 5' 6" E, use the code as: {{Coordinates|1|2|3|N|4|5|6|E}}
Hope you understood!
Cheers! aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:11, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Acagastya, thanks alot!! I'm sure I'll be able now to place the coordinates myself in the future. Again, my humble thanks. Really appreciate this. ;) - LouisAragon (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Your welcome! By the way, I also want to tell you that if you need to learn something which is used in (some other article), you can see the code, and learn from that too. And by this, I have noticed, it is long lasting! I had learnt many things of HTML and WikiMarkup by this method!
Happy Editing!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Acagastya I will for sure remind it! I hoped someone like you would help me with this stuff, and it seems it was my lucky day. Haha. Thanks again - LouisAragon (talk) 16:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

In need of help

Hey there! can you please take a look on this :)? [11]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:44, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Culture of Georgia (country) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• (in Georgia)"|title= Religion past and present |first=Hans Dieter |last=Betz |publisher=Brill (originally from the [[University of Michigan]] |year=2008 |page=361 }}</ref> until the course of

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Abbas II of Persia

I did a little tweak on this article; however there are 3 new sources that I am unable to read/verify: Sistani, Munshi, and Javakhishvili. source #'s (11,12,13). I fixed what I could on them, such as expanding the Munshi citation and the Javakhishvili citation; however the Sistani needs to be figured out and I cannot read Arabic and I am loathe to guess on which book is being referred to by the original editor. The book that I believe it to be is lccn 2006331515/ ISBN 9-6444-5568-1. Also that new paragraph with those sources could use a rewrite and, if you are able or if you know of someone that can fix that paragraph with the information in those sources that would be awesome. If not, when I get back to my library I will try to do that. But, I will not be efficient in any translation. Thanks speednat (talk) 06:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

speednat, thanks for your message. I will start fixing that page when I will continue on the history of west asia related page (e.g Safavids, Ottomans, etc) which will be in some of these days. (I'm pretty busy atm unfortunately). PS; I can't read Arabic either, but I think we could get access to some of the (perhaps adjusted) translations through the internet, no? Otherwise I'll ask some other people later on about it :) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 22:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Improve these articles if you're interested

Hi. These articles require more attention and content improvement. Because you're active on Iranian-related topics, would you participate?

• Roxolani – A Sarmatian tribe, this one is priority, short and poor article, not well-referenced.
• Dahae – more details if you find good sources.
• Parni – more details if you find good sources.

Thanks. --Zyma (talk) 13:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Zyma; I'll add them to my watchlist. Can't guarantee I will start working on all of them anytime soon, but at least the first one (Roxolani) will get my priority for now out of all these articles as its of pretty low quality. Bests and regards - LouisAragon (talk) 22:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm back

Just wanted to notice that I am back (was busy with exams and stuff). About the thing we discussed back then while emailing to each other, just write some article as suggestions and I'll take a look. I should have told you that I would be inactive for some time, but stupidly I didn't, but it won't happen again. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

HistoryofIran, hey mate, that's no problem. I know how it is to be occupied with that stuff, haha. Yeah about some article suggestions, what do you think about Persian Iberia? or Persian Georgia? Referring to the rule of the Sassanid/Achaemenid era's. They have articles for the Byzantine/Roman rule over those area's, but no Iranian-related ones as of yet. Or perhaps some articles about the Safavid viziers that haven't been completed? In general, I favour any article/subject that's related to the Caucasus or Anatolia, or the Safavids/Sassanians/Achaemenids/Parthians. If you have suggestions yourself as well, let me know. Btw, did you read one of my last mails? I wrote about whether you had some fitting images for the Roman-Persian Wars articles. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

- I've actually thought of it before, but sadly I don't have many sources about the latter. I have seen many books about the Sasanians and their history with Georgia, but sadly I didn't have access to them, and couldn't find a place/file where I could view it either.

- Yeah sure, I'll create more articles about the Safavid viziers.

- Unfortunately , I don't have any images for the Roman-Persian Wars. By the way, sometime ago I created a map of Caucasus and its surroundings during the medieval (Islamic) period, in case you haven't seen it before [12]. Who knows, you might find it useful. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

HistoryofIran, hey, I think I once found a good source about it, will link you it when I get on the PC. Maybe we could work something out with it. Nice map btw! I'm sure I can find a fitting place for it.

Btw, did you check my mail? :)

- LouisAragon (talk) 16:46, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Just arrived home and it's quite late, but I'll read your email now and if I have time I'll answer you right now :). If not, then it will be early tomorrow. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:48, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Just read it, tomorrow it is then :), meanwhile I can quickly start the creation of one of the vizier articles and then go to bed and finish it tomorrow. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)--HistoryofIran (talk) 00:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

HistoryofIran, great! The sooner that map I linked you through the email will be fixed the better. Tiresome bogus is, yeah, tiresome. I also see that you have started with the Zangana-vizier article, great. Will join you whenever I have time. I also realized today I need to make an article about the peace treaty resulting of the Russo-Persian War (1722-1723), as well as some significant expansion of the article itself. Anything else you would like me to work on whenever possible? Anything that needs an expansion badly?

- LouisAragon (talk) 12:43, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Anything else you would like me to work on whenever possible? Anything that needs an expansion badly?. Hmm... I actually don't know, we'll see. By the way, I have written back to you in the mail, but I think I've messed my archives up a little, so I don't think I got everything you sent me. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:36, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I've sent a new message to your email. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Btw, take a look here [13]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Just in case you didn't see it, since it may look like an old message I posted sometime ago because I recently posted two messages on your talk page: I've sent a new message to your email :-), it's about the Qajars. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

User:HistoryofIran, I sent you a reply! - LouisAragon (talk) 19:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Check your email again ;-). Btw there may be some typos since I forgot to correct some of them xD. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

RE: Persian language clarification?

Hello Louis,

You are correct. Bache (بچه) (or, how the Afghans pronounce it, bacha) in this sense means child's play (not the same meaning as its English equivalent, obviously). Bache can mean child or boy, depending on the context, in both Afghan Persian (Dari) or Iranian Persian. Pesar (پسر) is the proper term for boy in both dialects (pesar also means "son").

Thank you. :) Negahbaan (talk) 04:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey Negahbaan, thanks for your reponse! I completely agree with your explanation (you explained it better). I've corrected it as you can see, but you never know when some stance-pushers might return. Could you keep an eye on it as well? [[14]] :) - LouisAragon (talk) 12:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Louis,

Of course, I can get to that. I have some sources I'll need to look into but there is a good amount that can be written amount. I'll get to this soon. Do you have any specific concerns?

Penguins53 (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2015 (UTC)Penguins53

Penguins53, well I was initially just suggesting if you could add an already existing article about it to the section if it exists, but if it doesn't, sure it doesn't hurt to create one :) If you want/could create an article about the events related to the infamous exodus from Urmia, and the related campaigns of Agha Petros there, that would be great! I will make sure I can add a valuable contribution to it whenever needed :) - LouisAragon (talk) 12:37, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Morteza-Qoli Bayat

He is Iranian Azerbaijani?if he was born in Iranian Azerbaijan, Not doubt. but he is Arakis.--Good luck--Samək^Talk 14:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Teresia Sampsonia

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Teresia Sampsonia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 08:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Teresia Sampsonia

The article Teresia Sampsonia you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Teresia Sampsonia for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 09:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Referencing

Hi! I have a small request to make: when you introduce new references to articles, like the Second Persian invasion of Greece, that already have an established referencing pattern, please follow that (i.e. add the book in the sources section, and use harvard citation etc. to reference the page(s) and link to it). It may not appear that important when you add "only" two citations like that in an article, but over time others come along doing the same and the referencing becomes a mess. Other than that, thanks for your contributions! Constantine ✍ 10:38, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Constantine, I totally get what you mean and I agree with you. I indeed assumed that it wouldn't make much of a difference by adding just a few like that, but then I just realized, "you can't think for other people on the internet". Haha. Consider it fixes whenever I get on Wikipedia on the PC. Bests and thanks. If there's anything else, whether now or in the future (doesn't matter about what), please let me know. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your MANY contributions to the Qajar empire article. Artin Mehraban (talk) 15:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I want to thank you for your numerous edits in Iranian history articles. Though you and I have our different opinions you still deserve this award. Best wishes Artin Mehraban (talk) 03:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Armenia

Hallo Louis
I reported to ANI Melb1110 here. Maybe you want to drop a comment there too. Cheers, [[ (talk) 05:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Alex2006, excuse me for my belated response. I haven't been much active the last few days. Are you still experiencing issues with this user as of yet? If yes, please let me know and I'll make sure I'll leave a comment in time this time. - LouisAragon (talk) 08:09, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Louis, thanks for the message, which I read only today (for some reasons the ping did nont work). No need for comments on Armenia anymore, this user has been topic banned for a month (and blocked). I always hope that during the time of the ban he can start to understand what we wrote. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 04:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey Alex2006, thanks for the heads up. Yeah I hope so as well. Anyway, that's not our concern anymore, at least for now. ;-) Bests and enjoy the summer - LouisAragon (talk) 12:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Enjoying? Today we have 35 C. here in Zurich, and temperature is still going up...not the best weather to edit wikipedia! :-) Cheers Alex2006 (talk) 12:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Haha, I hoped you'd say, "thanks I'll be fine here at the Italian Coast" or something alike! Were having roughly the same temperatures here as well man in the Netherlands, a huge pain. Hot and humid, awful combo. But ofc we can't complain here especially considering it's always raining here. Don't forget to drink well! :P Bests man - LouisAragon (talk) 17:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Armenia 2

"Hey LouisAragon, Thanks for the accurate information and targeting me".

Which Caucasus country is your background, I am very curious. By the way, no matter what, Armenia will always be geographically part of Europe, no matter how its changed. Armenia has been the most advanced country in the Caucasus for centuries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MELB1110 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

One of these days the United Nations subregions will also correct their definitions and there will no longer be needed another source.

Unlike others, my background is fully Armenian, the way you have dealt with my discussions and changes has been very aggressive and unprofessional as though you are targeting Armenia as Asian or eastern, have you even been there, I am assuming not. Our ethnogenesis is in the Caucasus, this is long ago, so it takes a lot of research to figure that out.

Armenia has always been historically advanced and one of the first European states, well before most others, sadly some people don't know this.

This is upsetting, if only you did some more research that put us in Europe. But I will keep up the work, no matter what.

You claim to have Persian and Russian ancestry, surely you should understand that Armenia is in Europe, the source I provided was not just political it was geographical.

Anyways, I will get going my friendly neighbour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MELB1110 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Storming of Lankaran/GA1

Hi there. Thanks for significantly improving Storming of Lankaran. Unfortunately I had to fail it per the reasons outlined on the review page, but I'll be happy to review again once those issues have been dealt with. Best regards and good luck! Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 17:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear Jonas, thanks a lot for having taken the time to review the article! :) Yes I was already kinda afraid the citations would prove to be overkill, but I wanted to try something unconventional this time. Haha. Thanks a lot once again, and I will most certainly let you know when I have correctly adjusted the article. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 18:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I would be happy to help out with the article, but going on vacation soon, so wouldn't be able to do so before mid July. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 14:36, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I see, well I wish you a great holiday first of all! If you still have the same opinion upon your return, i would obviously still appreciate your invitation for help on the article so it can get GA status. Anyways, that's for later. ; ) Take care for now, and once again, I wish you a happy holiday! Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 11:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Well...

I have been inactive for almost 3 three weeks, and already most of my maps have been changed into more innacurrate ones.. just my luck lol. Btw, my internet is much better now, although I'm returning home in few days anyway. If there is any problem/you need help with something, I'm happy to help. --HistoryofIran (talk) 05:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

User:HistoryofIran, hey man! How are you doing in the US? Enjoying holidays? :)

Nice you're returning soon, was already missing you here

Haha, which map(s) do you mean?

- LouisAragon (talk) 12:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Some maps of Iranian dynasties, although that problem is now solved - it was mainly Artin Mehraban, who seemed to love exaggerating the extent of Iranian dynasties, that did it. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Ah maps in that regard... Yeah, that doesn't amaze me. Haha - LouisAragon (talk) 21:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Iranian cuisine

Hi LouisAragon! I saw that you reverted the entirety of my changes (all four of them) to Iranian cuisine without much explanation. I understand you prefer the old version so perhaps you can address the problems I was trying to fix?

• The opening paragraph is one sentence long.
• "Azerbaijanis are the second largest ethnicity in Iran and Iranian cuisine also shares cultural aspects from shared empires and conquerings of and by the Achaemenids, Sassanians, Seljuks, Safavids, Afsharids, Ottomans and Qajars." This is a very long sentence and is a bit disjointed. ie. What does the first part have to do with the second? It's not clear. I assume what the writer is trying to indicate is that second largest ethnicity is a significant part of Iranian cuisine as are various other peoples who conquered or were conquered by people in the region.
• There is nothing in the opening paragraphs about traditions or festivals. Yet the article goes into some detail about Nawrooz and its culinary traditions as well as some other traditions.
• I try to excise statements about something being "unique" because they tend to be meaningless apart from trying to praise something. Which cuisines aren't unnique?

Thanks. Let me know if you have any questions or want to move discussion to the article talk page. NotAnOmbudsman (talk) 18:36, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

NotAnOmbudsman,

- That long sentence implies that the fact that Turkish/Iranian/Caucasian/Azerbaijani have so much in common is due to the fact that those listed empires (amongst others) united all those countries and territories, as well as that Azerbaijanis are the 2nd largest ethnicity in Iran, comprising the largest community of Azerbaijanis in the world, far outnumbering those in the neighbouring Republic of Azerbaijan. Not mentioning the fact that those nations/regions share the most with each other in cultural/historical/religious ways.

- Of course the lede includes nothing about culture, as this article is specifically and only about the various culinary recipes and eaten foods.

The article is just fine like this. Thanks for your message of course however. :)

- LouisAragon (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

map

Heloo!

All numbers are based on the source.

I did not add anything of myself.

Please submit your source. This map is more complete than the previous.

If your source was credible image will change.

--Insveb (talk) 14:18, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

First of all, there is no presence of "Hindo/Hindus" in Iran, so please remove that. It is neither confirmed in your so called source. Second, the largest non-Muslim minority in the nation are Bahai's, who number 350,000, but are not officially recognized by Iran and face persecution.

After Baha'is, Christians are by far the largest minority religion adherent, mainly Armenians and Assyrians, numbering some 300,000-370,000 Christians. They are recognized by the Iranian government for over a century.

After that, it's Mandeans (between 10,000 and 60,000), Jews, Yazidis, Yarsanis (between 1 and 3 million mainly living in Western Iran, Northern Iraq, and some scattered places in Eastern Turkey), Yezidis, Zoroastrians (~28,000), etc that make up the remaining very small part. And that's where it ends.

- LouisAragon (talk) 14:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

References

map

Thanks a lot Louis!

there is much more useful reference.

I try to change it. Thanks again --Insveb (talk) 14:45, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

refrence

Rrefrence that i use:

http://oprev.sidebotham.net/wp-content/back_issues/2ndQtr06.htm

You can leave a percentage of religions in iran ? As I edit.

--Insveb (talk) 14:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, good you link me that source. It's a very bad and non-reliable one as i 100% expected it. Yeah I left you some numbers already as you can see above. ;) - LouisAragon (talk) 15:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd go with 90% Shia, 8% Sunni, 1% Christian, 1% Mandeism, Yarsanism, Judaism, and Zoroastrianism. Of course in reality these numbers are very different but let's not make it too political while discussing this ;) - LouisAragon (talk) 15:32, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, good. tnx

it means that Muslims are 98% and non-muslims 2%?

non-muslims: christians 50% Mandeism, Yarsanism, Judaism, and Zoroastrianism 50%

Where is bahaie?

--Insveb (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Let's make it Christians 35,5% of that 2%, Bahai also 35,5%, and the rest (Mandeism, Yarsanism, Yezidism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism) 25%. Ok? :) - LouisAragon (talk) 15:49, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

AWESOME!

I will remake it soon :) --Insveb (talk) 15:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Good to hear mate! :) I'm glad we could fix this fast. I hope, like millions of others, that in the future Iran will become secular like how it used to be, so we will have actual honest estimations and publications by the gov as well. I'm 10000% sure the actual Muslim population lies faaaar under 98%, and the irreligion and Christian number actually lies much higher. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I hope too. you dont think that 95% muslim and 5% non-muslim is more close to reality?

--Insveb (talk) 16:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I think 50% Muslim and 50% non-Muslim (non practising) is even closer, haha. But unfortunately, we can't state that for now.

Btw, the CIA World Factbook states 16% for Azerbaijanis, while most other sources state 24%+ which is far closer to the reality. But I guess you only wanna use the Factbook for ethnicities? - LouisAragon (talk) 16:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I am from a azerbaijani family but I don't want creat on my comments.yes, This is the most reliable source. --Insveb (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

OH,I lose psd file project Unfortunately!!

But good news is that i can stil edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insveb (talk • contribs) 16:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh damn, that sucks. Hope you can still finish it. Btw, I wouldn't say the Factbook is the most reliable or factual one, especially considering that almost every source in the world mentions Azeris comprise 24%+ but oh well. We don't have many other reliable sources that include all other ethnicities for now ;) And besides you already have added to the map that it's directly taken from the Factbook, so it's not misleading. Btw could you also add ethnic Armenian, Georgian and Circassian enclaves? Isfahan (New Julfa), Rasht, Gilan, Tabriz, Fereydan, Aspas, Fereydunshahr, Rasht, etc? Would be very cool! :) - LouisAragon (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I should edit on image file. but thats ok, I stil can edit something.

I've already done.I added before georgian and armenian in isfahan and azerbaijan.

--Insveb (talk) 16:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

i'm done!

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnicities_and_religions_in_Iran.png

--Insveb (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Insveb, Hey! That looks much better! Still has some stuff and minor tweaking to do. F.e, Qajars, Afshars, Baharlu, Ayromlu, Qarapapaqs need to be added to the infobox under Azerbaijanis as they're subgroups of them. Also, Turkmens don't include Qajars. Qashqai are usually sourced as "Tribal Turkic communities" Also, you definetely need to remove Brahui completely from the map as it's only spoken by a very very little small expatriate community. Not native. Furthermore, could you add "Circassian" to Aspas, Fars and Rasht and shade it do that it becomes well visible on the map? The same for the Georgian and Armenian communities. Oh and it has to be made more clear I think that the area between Balochistan and Iran is completely uninhabited like this map had done. It's important for people to know. [15]

Also Talysh are barely visible on the map. Some larger shaded area would make it even better. Furthermore, needs to be added to the infobox table that the "others" mainly include Armenians, Georgians, Assyrians, Circassians and Jews. Could you do all this? That would be so awesome! :) Check the map I linked above as well as this one [16]. Except for the ungrounded added bogus of Pashto and Brahui, it's pretty complete. Your map still really needs some major tweaking according the points I mentioned as well as other things. ;) Let's not add it before it's completely done ok? I was actually thinking we could just leave it at the old map that is already added to the article, really. This one [17] What do you think? Iran is way too multi-ethnic etc to have a nice coherent and visible map for people. That old map is the best that just shows the major ethnicities as well as uninhabited areas, which are the most important things. Do you agree? - LouisAragon (talk) 18:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments!

I dont have psd. file but i try my best.

This map is more detailed and give more information about ethnic and religious in iran to viewer.

--Insveb (talk) 18:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm done. it's complate now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnicities_and_religions_in_Iran.png

--Insveb (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Insveb, hey mate, again a step better! Few more things. Southwestern Sistan and Baluchistan and southeastern Hormozgan is not populated by ethnic Baluch. Furthermore, the presence of Arabs in Southern proper Iran stretches up too far to te North. This needs to be reduced to a good degree and re-added with Persian. Also, could you add a Circassian enclave to Aspas, Fars and the word Circassian on Rasht as well? In the tags behind Qashqai in the infobox it needs to say "and other tribal Turkic communities". Also, in the southeast there's still a little bit of the word Brahui left that needs to be removed. Also, minor spelling things. Mazanis needs to be changed to Mazandaranis for example. And the infobox next to Azeris needs to say between the accolades; (includes Qajars, Ayromlu, Baharlu, Afshars, Qarapapaqs, and Shahsevan)

Otherwise people might think that 16% is only made up by those clans ;)

Great job otherwise! If there is other stuff that needs a fix, I'll let you know as well ;)

- LouisAragon (talk) 14:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Media (region) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Atropatene

Речь о возвращенной вами карте-фальсификации в статье Atropatene, мой английский не на столько хорош чтоб свободно на нём говорить, вы говорите по-русски? --Rs4815 (talk) 14:41, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Agreed

May I be so bold as to ask that you nominate it for deletion? I don't have much experience with that sort of thing, and my previous attempt at nominating an unsourced non-notable article for deletion didn't go so well (meaning: I didn't know what I was doing). I'm confident this time though, as I said in the category's talk page, there is no basis for that user's incorrect definition of a well-established term. Even if it doesn't get deleted, maybe we can at least correct the definition and then fix the same mistake with the wikimedia commons images. Morinae (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

That's great, the Mughal weapons category renders the "Indo-Persian" thing redundant anyway. It took a while to clean up the wikimedia commons categories as well, but you might want to take a look at it. Morinae (talk) 13:00, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Derbent

Hello Louis, your edits in the Derbent page are a welcoming contribution. I dont want to step on anyone's toes. I changed the layout of the article to make it more readable (without removing any content). I also added a few new chapters, I think it will improve the article quality. Mursel (talk) 21:15, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Mursel, hello! No problem at all! Yes the article still needed quite a bit of categorisation in subsections etc, but I haven't had found myself able yet in terms of time to do so. Thanks for fixing that as well as for leaving a note here on my page. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

QAJAR MAP

Louis Aragon we need to talk about the Qajar map. I really wanted to drop the subject but its been bugging me. CAIS is not my main source THERE IS A WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE ABOUT THAT TREATY (Qajars having control over herat before 1857) WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE: Treaty of Paris (1857). check the reflist for that article!! If iran had control over herat, then that means the current map on the qajar dynasty page is wrong!!! THERES A WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE!! (sorry i was slightly enraged) But seriously there's WIKIPEDIA evidence. Take that into consideration please. I really dont like it when historical inaccuracies are left unnatended, to remain innacurate for eternity. I hope we can come to agreement. History of Persia (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, you have to understand that the Qajars never had rule over Herat. They attacked it which was repelled, until they entered it for a very brief time some time later, after which the Afghans and British kicked them again out immediately. It was just an attempt to regain it as it was "once" under Safavid rule, but they failed. They, the Qajars, never established rule over it. Only claiming. The current map does thus show that neatly both on the map and the legend correctly. It precisely shows that they launched an attack on Herat, which is simply what happened as they tried to take it, which is thus more than sufficient enough for the map. It's seriously perfectly described. Other users agree with me about all this. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 03:46, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Can you explain this map from 1808 to me: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Persia1808.JPG . it shows herat as a part of Persia. and the map also shows this:

• Herat
• 1856: Iran
• 1863: Afghanistan.

So the map users agree on, seems to say the qajars used to own herat. History of Persia (talk) 21:33, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Those maps were based on claims of the Qajars themselves. It even includes Dagestan/Northen Azerbaijan which was by then occupied by the Russians during the 1804-1813 Russo-Persian War. De facto they didn't have rule over it at the time of making the map. Once again, I explained you, the current Qajar map is based on de facto/actual happenings, and is very precise about everything, not based on claimings about anything. The map shows clearly that they launched an attack on it, which is all that's needed to show, as that's all that happened. No Qajar ruler established rule over Herat. - LouisAragon (talk) 00:46, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Allright :) good talk History of Persia (talk) 23:59, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Mkhitar Heratsi

I think you know, that there was state Iran in 12th century. Saying Heratsi was born in Iran means "there was an Iran" when he was born. Apparently there wasn't. Strabo was not born in Turkey, Avicenna was not born in Uzbekistan. We can write that the modern-day city of Khoy is in Iran, but simply saying Heratsi was born in Iran is totally wrong. Furthermore, he was neither an Iranian scientist, nor an Iranian physician, nor had anything Iranian. So I reverted your edit. Of course I will revert it back if you show a single source calling him an Iranian physician :)Хаченци (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

What a nonsensical bogus you state once again. Iran has been known as Iran since the Sassanid era, while Turkey and Uzbekistan got created literally in the 20th century. Waste of my time. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Once again? I can't remember I have ever talked about this before. Furthermore, we're not writing the names of historical regions, but the states, where the people were born. Khoy is historically an Iranian city, I never argued on it. And what? It has been also part of Armenia in antiquity. And what? Nizami was not born in Azerbaijan, he was born in a city, which today is part of Azerbaijan. It does not make him Azerbaijani poet. The same way Heratsi is not an Iranian physician. So please stop talking nonsense. A physician, who was of Armenian ancestry, who worked most of his life in Armenian kingdom of Cilicia, who hasn't written anything in Persian, can hardly be called an Iranian physician, just because the city he was born is in Iran. Хаченци (talk) 20:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

P.S. I've nothing against the version "PLACE OF BIRTH = Khoy, Abbasid Caliphate, modern-day Iran"Хаченци (talk) 20:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Avarayr

I can't see why the fact, that the Arshakunis have been a branch of Arsacids is important. It has played a role when in Partha also the Arsacids were ruling. In 5-th century however, there was no Parthian empire and no Parthian Arsacids. If you have a source, which explains the importance of the origin of Arshakunis in the context of Avarayr battle or in the context of the Christianization of Armenia, please add to the article. Otherwise, it makes no sense to mention it.Хаченци (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Qajar conquest of Armenia?

I can't seem to find a source that mentions the Qajar conquest of Armenia (even the Cambridge History of Iran doesn't have any information about it). Do you know any source(s) which does? --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:16, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

HistoryofIran, Armenia wasnt conquered as from it's earliest days it was fully subordinate to the Qajars. The Erivan khanate basically. It's rulers were Qajar princes too. Another sign of it's fully subordinate character was shown when in 1795 (a year prior to his formal crowning) it immediately showed its allegiance to Mohammad Khan Qajar in the pre-lude leading up to the Battle of Krtsanisi. - LouisAragon (talk) 04:33, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Gabol

kindly discuss the reason for reversal of article "Gabol". it contains wrong info regarding Gabol Baloch tribe. i have completed same article in urdu wikipedia, you can check that if u understand urdu language. But the article in english is not compatible with that in urdu. it contains wrong info regarding Gabol tribe. please discuss it on my talkpage before reverting it to the previous version. --Irfan Gabol (talk) 12:37, 31 July 2015 (UTC) Irfan Gabol.

Hi, surely I believe it has many incorrectesses, but changing a sea of unsourced info to more unsourced info, is plain wrong. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pontus (region), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zela. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

list of kings of persia vandalism

Hey Louis aragon, I've noticed alot ALOT of vandalism on the list of kings of persia article and I don't know how to get an article protected so I could really use your wikipedia expertise History of Persia (talk) 21:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC) thanks

History of Persia, hey man, sorry for the belated response (im not that active atm). This should help you out just fine I think. :) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 02:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks man :) History of Persia (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Consensu

Hi. I've opened a consensus on here (ethnicity of Al-Biruni). If you're interested, please write your comment and opinion. It's important and we need editors who are familiar with those topics (Iranian/Persian history). Thanks. Regards. --Zyma (talk) 20:01, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Qajar dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heraclius II. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Cyrus vs the Massagetae

Hi louis i wanted to ask your opinion about 2 battles between Cyrus and Queen tomyris of the massagetae tribe. The article Tomyris talks about these 2 unnamed battles, the first cyrus won, the second cyrus was supposedly killed (of course i will never believe this and i dont trust herodotus, hes known to make stuff up in his histories). Do you think seperate articles should be made about these 2 battles? and if so what should the articles be called. are there any clues to its location that will allow us to give it a name (example: battle of Cyropolis)?

I would really love to hear your opinion on this. thanks man! History of Persia (talk) 00:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

P.S. the articles about greco persian wars a bit biased, showing persians as evil. could u please help me deal with this problem? thanks man History of Persia (talk) 00:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the belated response, but I'm quite busy irl to do any major editing atm~or anything in particular except vandalism checkings. I will defo significantly widen and expand most of them though somewhere later. The Achaemenid Empire article also needs some extensive writing on the Greco-Persian Wars section.. :/ - LouisAragon (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

ok thanks. though i acctually think that the Darius I article needs expansion. go to the article: Translation of the Behistun Inscription and you'll be able to read a really really really long account of SOME of Darius's military campaigns. yet amost 50% of the really detailed info included there is nowhere to be seen in the darius article. i really think that needs to be looked at more, rather than the greco persian wars article which is already very detailed and informative. of course greek propoganda & the biased opinions of european wiki editors should be removed from that article but i think user: Dr.K is doing a good job.

anyway c-ya :)

History of Persia (talk) 00:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Armenian language

You might want to see this. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:04, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, it doesn't make any sense. I just left a reply. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 05:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Circassians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fawzia of Egypt. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Mazandaran Province

added a link pointing to Arran

Storming of Lankaran

added a link pointing to Squadrons

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Disruptive editor

We might need to keep an eye on the edits of Surena20. Surena20's edits appear to be removal of references and referenced information.[18][19] --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:44, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey Kansas Bear, yeah I noticed that. Will def keep a closer eye on it. Btw, did you by an circumstance aleady see the addition I made to that brief discussion we had on your talk page? Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 22:38, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Siege of Constantinople (626) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic groups in West Asia

Hi, The concerns related to the article were in the talk page. (not only mine but also the user: FunkMonk first expressed concern for the article). The whole article needs reshaping. And here is my post there: I hope someone would do it without biased views since West Asia (Middle East) is potentially a hot topic. Also, the changes I made are only in the direction of improvement. Hope you got my point. Stiungraysi (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Stiungraysi, yeah I just double checked a few things. We were having the same thought, sorry, but I was mistaking a few things while reading your edits back then. Its a bit late, haha. All good. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 00:41, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

The orthographic map projection CAN use for historical borders.

Hello LouisAragon. Can you tell me the exact reason that why you revert my edits about the orthographic map Achaemenid, Parthian and Sassanid orthographic maps? Ali Zifan 04:30, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ali Zifan,

Thanks for writing here. I'll summarize the points;

First of all, no ancient empire article uses such maps. Not a single one. Including all empire articles that have FA/GA statuses, such as the Byzantine Empire, etc. Only two empire articles use such world-covering maps simply for one reason, as they had overseas territories, such as the the British Empire. None of the empires you added it to had overseas territories that were far located from the empire's borders.

Second of all, such orthographic world-lage maps are highly edit war sensitive. The last thing we need are more hordes of IP hoppers, pov-pushers, and single-purpose accounts that come by to tell that their nation was not "for that large amount part of empire x/y/z", while others will come and say how their modern-day nation has so much little soil incorporated on the map. So, no.

Thirdly, the already in-use maps are so much better and in use for a long time. I mean look at the Sassanian Empire map for example; its great. Only when a map is really a significant improvement, it should be added. However, these orthographic maps absolutely don't belong on this bracked of improvement.

Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 04:38, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you give me the exact source (link) that tells that orthographic maps can not use for historical empires?? Your reasons are good but they still don't prove that orthographic maps are not used for historical empires.Also the maps that has been used for British Empire and other empires with overseas territories, is Robinson or mercator projections, not orthographic. Also these are links show that orthographic maps has been used for other articles: [20], [21], [22], [23], [24] , [25], [26] . And also for your second reason ("Second of all, such orthographic world-lage maps are highly edit war sensitive.") , modern-day nation borders can be hidden on the orthographic projection maps (as you can see on those links too).

Before making these orthographic maps, I searched about orthographic maps' usage and didn't find anything that say that I can't use this type of map for historical empires. Also for your third reason ("look at the Sassanian Empire map for example; its great. Only when a map is really a significant improvement, it should be added"), we can help to improve it on this project (which is also in Vector format). Thank you Ali Zifan 04:58, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ali,

There is no direct link that shows that such maps can't be used. Of course they can be used if a majority of people agree with it, or demand it. Yes, the British Empire one doesn't use a direct copy of yours, but you get the idea. The article's you changed are stable like this for a long time, and we already have multiple great maps for them added that are edit-war/e-nationalist proof, and show the territory much and much better. Such orthographic maps are simply not an improvement to the article's content or map-content, except if the empire has multiple overseas territories. IMHO. If you really feel like you have to per se change the maps, then bring it to the talk pages of the respective articles. But really, I don't see the point considering the current maps are much better. It's alright that you uploaded them on Wikimedia though I guess. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 05:13, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Russo-Persian War (1722–23)

Um, this is the English Wikipedia. Don't use the Dutch version of the book, especially for one written in English and translated to Dutch. Don't use Dutch dates. You added the wrong ISBN to all the refs. You used the same exact ref atleast 10 times, but didn't use a named ref to combine them into one Bgwhite (talk) 06:51, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

It was late, excuse me. Appreciate that you noted it (and fixed it) though! - LouisAragon (talk) 17:41, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Please rethink

Please rethink Dear LouisArago, Please take a look to at the Infoboxes of these two version of Iran's article on wikipedia : Current version and old version. As you can see, the flat maps were used to indicate the country's location "for a long time" but the orthographic projection has been replaced those flat maps. This fact is true for every single country that has a article on wikipedia. Orthographic projection are considered the most exact and preciese maps that can indicate any point or area on the earth. Please read these links: rice.edu and progonos.com . Actually, we can easily get that this type of maps are definitely the best choice to indicating the empires' area.

The other reason is that by looking at the area (such as iran's area) on this type of maps, pretty much, anyone can immediately recognize the exact location respects to other regions, continents, countries and places on the earth. These reason are not made up by myself. These are the reasons that have been proved and Wikipeidia is currently using it (as i said for every country's (from islands to peninsulas, from small countries to large countries) articles). I sent you some links about the area of other empires that were used orthographic projection like Aztec. I want you to open those links again. You will find out that there is no discussion about using this type of maps.

In addition, what I am talking about is, we don't have to replace these maps with current maps. All I am saying is these orthographic are for Infoboxes of the empire's article. You told me about Sassanian map's image. Yes it has details and it is good but it will be much and much better if we place this on the other part of the article which has the details about sassanids (History part of the article can be the great position for putting that image) instead of putting it in Infobox part of the article. "What should an infobox not contain? In general, data in infobox templates should not be: Lengthy. Long bodies of text, or very detailed statistics, belong in the article body." This obviuosly can be true about images that have much details.

Besides that, if you see any problems with the area or border of the empire's map, you can update it on these files. Actually you can tell me and I will do that. I've already put much time for making these orthographic maps as making them more precise as I could and i will put more time on them to make them more precise if you want. It will be certainly my proud to working with you to updating these maps.

Finally I hope you revise you opinion about this type of maps. Even we can talk with admins about this issue (for choosing the maps) if you want. But just for the notice, continuing the discussion about which maps should we choose, is not going to get us anywhere.

And also do you speak Perisan? Because I could explain you much better than writing in English! Your sincerely, Ali Zifan —Preceding undated comment added 00:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Ali Zifan, mate, I already told you my opinion, as well as what I believe almost everyone else will say. Once again, if you really think that it should be stated in the infobox, create a section on the Achaemenid Empire talk page. In my honest opinion the map is alright, but just not fit for those articles, at all. The current maps are much more appropriate. However, for example on Persian Empire, the maps you made could make a good fit there for example, as the article is meant to give an overview of the various articles, basically a "list" page. For such articles giving a view of how they were located as compared to the rest of the world is cool.

Btw, I noticed an error on your map (as well as numerous other Achaemenid maps), and that is that the Kingdom of Macedon is lacking in its territories. It should be added in order to make it historically factual. Baleh, Farsi harf mizanam, walie na gheylie "aly" ;P. Khoda hafez - LouisAragon (talk) 02:56, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Achaemenid Satrapies

Hey louis, I made a new satrapies map. I based it off the map you gave me, the behistun inscription and Herodotus (though i dont trust him that much). If there are any problems with it let me know. today i should have alot of free time today, ill be able to finish it

happy thanksgiving m8 :)

History of Persia (talk) 22:04, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Achaemenid lede

Hey! Do you think it's necessary for us to include every modern country that is within former Achaemenid borders to be in the lede? It makes sense to say "It stretched from X in the west to Y in the east", etc. But should we then included every modern polity within that description? I notice that not many other large empire wikis do such a thing in the lede either. Also, the lede is already massive, and the countries named are already in the infobox. What do you think? I ask you because you're an authority in this wiki-realm.--Tataryn (talk) 00:50, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey Tataryn, excuse me for the belated response. Well the thing is the article still needs a lot of work on it in general. I think for now its no issue having all the countries stated, especially with all the IP hoppers/etc jumping in. In the end, when the article has gotten into a better status (towards GA/FA) I most definitely agree that then we should have removed all nations from the lede by then (except Iran or something). Can you find me in this?? :-) Bests man - LouisAragon (talk) 22:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

WP:SPI

Your comments at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Pebble101 would be appreciated. - Kautilya3 (talk) 15:33, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3, unfortunately I don't believe I can assist you as Ive never had any sort of communication with the user nor the IP(s), as far as I know. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 19:00, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Louis Aragon. It will be useful if you say that on the SPI page because the editor has claimed in several edit summaries that you brought something to his/her attention. - Kautilya3 (talk) 21:36, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Adivasi

How is the Universal'sGuide to the Constitution of India a suitable reference for genetics? Anyway, that's not why I'm here. You seem to have advised an IP about material here, and the IP added material sources to gentis.ru and to a backup of the website for the McDonald's, a Scottish clan, clearly also not a suitable source for genetics. Ping if you reply please, thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 18:06, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

hey Doug, yeah that ain't a suitable reference. Can you show me where I advised the user to add that info? I don't believe I've ever mentioned such thing to anyone namely. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 18:57, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

No, it's an IP hopper = possibly Pebble101 who says they edit logged out. I think I'm wrong on the McDonald one but I don't think it's very good. Doug Weller (talk) 20:58, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Doug, I also don't believe its a proper source. In case of doubt, always better to leave something out than to leave it linger forth there. WP:RS violations are a major thing in such online encyclopedia's anyway, so yeah. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 22:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Adivasi - fringe

Hi LouisAragon. Why is this fringe? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Joshua Jonathan, mainly because the theory that Dravidians have their origin in the Ancient Near East, is a theory and not a definite established fact. It can perhaps get added to a page that discusses the archaeogenetics of the subcontinent, as a theory, but adding that to a general populations overview (e.g. Indians, Dravidians, Adivasi, etc) is simply incorrect and very biased, I believe. Anyway that's how I thought about it. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 18:54, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

But if it is a theory, it's not necessarily fringe, isn't it? Isn't this more about "proportion," that is, considering it to be undue? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I agree it isn't. But when it's posted on a general ethnic groups' article, and not a genetics-related one, it gives the impression as if it's a definite fact (or the only theory available), which makes it kinda odd and (very much) inappropriate looking to those who know it isn't a fact. Anyway, that's all. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

arab nationalist try to vandalize pages

watch the edits by this dude:arab user with a fake russian username--183.96.144.40 (talk) 20:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Seleucid Empire (Correction)

Hello. I have time to make its vector and fix it as I've already made it's orthographic projection. If it is possible, please put the links of some historical (correct) maps about Seleucid territories so I can make it as precise as it is possible, especially for the territories in the east part including Baluchistan (as you mentioned). Thank you! Ali Zifan 12:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Apology

Thanks for not reverting my edit again and I would like to apologize for acting in a condescending manner regarding the Caucasus article. :) Adorkable Corgi (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Maps

Hello LouisAragon. I updated and uploaded some maps based on your requests. Please visit my talk page. I also will be glad to know your opinion and know your review upon this image. Bests--Ali Zifan 02:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ali Zifan:, hey mate, I just replied to your responses on your talk page. :-) I will also definitely place a review on that page in the near future (just had a quick glance, looks really nice). - LouisAragon (talk) 22:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Azerbaijan article

I dont know if this helps or not but according to Iranica encyclopedia regarding the treaty of gulistan: The Persian shah was obliged to recognize the sovereignty of the tsar over Georgia, Mingrelia, Abkhazia, Ganja, Qarābāḡ, Qobba, Darband, Baku, Dāḡestān, Šakki, and other territories (Article 3). http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/golestan-treaty This shows that the Baku khanate was controlled by the Persian shah and the khan had no say. Ninetoyadome (talk) 02:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ninetoyadome:, hey, thanks for your prompt reply. :-) Yes I know that, and that is all factually true and established since very long, but unfortunately, once in a while we need to go over everything again because of some people.. Anyway; do you think you could leave a comment on the section which I linked you on your talk page? I would appreciate it. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 02:29, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Assyrian people

Reverted some fraud. Sorry, some of your edits got caught up in the revert. — kwami (talk) 06:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey Kwami, no probs, I had reverted my own edit afterwards as I added it on another article. Seems someone reverted your edit though asking for it to be done manually. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thanks for your new article Iranians in Russia. Very well written and sourced. Tris1313 (talk) 22:18, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Tris1313, thank you! I appreciate it. :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Alhazen

Would you interested in giving your opinion on some sources on the Alhazen talk page?--Kansas Bear (talk) 18:16, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, sure thing. Will do it whenever I have time. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Iranian peoples

Hi my friend, personally, i have no problem absence or being Azeris in the iranian peoples. if you delete in template, you must remove Azeris in the text.(Beginning of the article, Paragraph 3 & Row 5)-good luck--Samək^Talk 23:51, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

@Samak:, fixed it. Thanks for letting me know. - LouisAragon (talk) 03:02, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

GA

Hallo Louis
first of all I owe you an answer: I just discovered your question yesterday, during a battle against "The unstoppable" (someone who, despite his name, was finally stopped) :-). I was in vacation last month and your question went forgotten. Yes, true, Italy became a nation in 1861, but culturally it did exist since the low middle ages, so I think that writing "Iranian emigrants to Italy" is perfectly correct. About the GA nomination, I have no clue. I tried only once to nominate an article of mine (this one), and it did not pass. Then I quit. I don't know if one can nominate to good article something which has been rated start-class, but here (almost) everything is possible, so let's see what will happen. :-) Thanks and bye, Alex2006 (talk) 05:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Alessandro57:, hey man, no problem you had forgotten, it can happen. ;-) Hope you had a good holiday btw. ;-) Did you go abroad?

Alright, I will add that category. Yeah, I decided to nominate it because it looks good, solid, is well referenced, and has good useful pictures. I believe it could pass looking at other non-extremely famous architectural constructions that were awarded GA status on the collection page, so, yeah lets see what happens indeed. If I will have some time these days, I will try to improve it a bit more wherever possible. Take care. - LouisAragon (talk) 06:09, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

OK Louis, I will help you! Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 06:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Is everything good with the Chyhyryn article

I removed the Turkish name in the lead section and put it below Alexis Ivanov (talk) 03:31, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Your request

My apologies that I did not comment on that article talk page. I do not read Russian and from what I did get translated via google, I'm not sure what was supposed to be referenced. My advice, check the Russian sources to ensure they support what they reference. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:03, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello KB. Thanks much for your reply. Yeah, I double checked the source, and will attempt to explain you the thing. The reference only mentions awards and titles given to people during the wars in the Caucasus, and other regions, to various peoples (very one-line sentenced) including to some of the khans of Persia's territories (mentioned as were granted/entered Russian citizenship, as the source literally states) during the Russo-Persian Wars and other wars. It doesn't mention a single word about anything else, relevant to this matter, just about awards, ranks, and citizenship given to people.

The only other thing it mentions, somewhat relevant, is this (translated it);

Semenov YI National policy in imperial Russia. Civilised outskirts (Finland, Poland, the Baltic states, Bessarabia, Ukraine, the Caucasus, Central Asia - Caucasus as a whole. "The treaty of eternal peace and friendship signed between the Emperor of Russia and the Persian state in the Russian camp in the town of Gulistan in the river Zeyva, through appointed to both sides and of confirmed mutual agreement. (...) The treaty was concluded between His Majesty the Emperor of Russia and His Majesty the Shah of Persia. - For the peace between Russia and Persia. Regarding the policy to revise the Transcaucasian region, orders are given to Senator E.I Mechnikov, to transform the management system in the South Caucasus and the colonization of the region (between 1830 - January 20, 1831)."

Source; Russian Academy of Sciences; Center for the Study of International Relations Coordination and methodical center of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, named after NN Maclay. Tom 1. Moscow. 1997.

Which basically makes him own himself with his own reference I think. He's trying to add completely undue weight about some nonsensical pseudo-historical so-called earlier partition from Persia (instead of the always mentioned dates of 1813/1828), which it doesn't even mentions. Otherwise you simply won't add it to a general articles' overview history section. Its a very specific and irrelevant spot, but very important for WP:JDL pushers. Such cession by the khans is not mentioned in the source he gave. Simply because its not factually correct, the way its trying to present it. From a factual view, the thing is (to the disappointment and anger of Azeri nationalists), the Russians had not even reached most of the respective khan's their area's, nor could they (the Russians) in any possible way exercise any influence on them until the end of the Wars (see Treaty of Gulistan and Treaty of Turkmenchay) when the Persian king actually conceded sovereignty over them to Russia. Even if one khan signed the Treaty of Kurekchay, for example, it had de facto absolutely no use, as both empires were at war, and Russia couldn't use any bit of it. Simply and only the Gulistan and Turkmenchay treaties of 1813 and 1828 respectively ended the wars, and made Persia cede the territories of the khans to Russia, thus giving Russia control over the region. The khans had no authority nor power in this regard. If you check the terms of the Gulistan and Turkmenchay treaties, you will see that none of the khans are mentioned; only the Persian king and the Russian Tsar.

Let me know what your ideas are. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 00:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

If your translation is correct, then you have an argument which appears to be source misrepresentation. If I were you, I would find some editors that could read Russian and have them say whether the "source" in question actually supports said sentence. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent

Excellent work on the article. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 20:16, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 2 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Baku Governorate page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Koh-i-Noor

The Persian spelling of the diamond of the diamond is missing? You think is better to have it? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 14:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Of course not. Its not in Iranian possession. - LouisAragon (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

The word is Persian though? I want to do the same thing the German Wikipedia the Persian Wikipedia is even better because it included the Hindi language, I was thinking something small like this (Persian: کوه نور, Hindi: कोहिनूर) Alexis Ivanov (talk) 23:40, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd keep the lede just only to mention the English name, while you can add to the lede something like, the word "koh-I-noor" (Persian: etc etc...) is derived from the Persian words Koh (meaning mountain) and noor (ultimately from Arabic) "light". Preferably with a reference behind it if you're able to (shouldn't be that hard given the notability of it, I think?) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 05:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

The wiki page on Muslim conquests is biased & inaccurate. I will cite sources as & when time permits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alxndrdegrt (talk • contribs) 10:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

In what way is it biased ? You can't change what people have already referenced in the article into your own biased wordings? I will be guarding and patrolling the article. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 17:46, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you kidding me? What references? The background section has no references & looks like it's written by a kindergartner. There's no nuance in the language & it is a pathetic attempt at whitewashing historical events & presenting them in made up context. I am trying to bring some balance in various sections that I have knowledge of. I have directly used Timur's autobiography for quotes for example. I'll be making those changes again & this time with references. Don't make any blind reverts. User:Alxndrdegrt —Preceding undated comment added 19:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

and your attempts that are clear bias are much better? Is this a joke? You didn't try any balance, you are trying as hard to be biased. Timur's autobiography is a primary source that you are willing to misuse. I will be watching you and patrolling the article. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 23:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Rubbish. The wiki page as it stands now is heavily biased & presents hisotrical events in a worng context. I've used accurate translations of Tuzk-i-Timuri & quoted his own words. I'm watching you. User:Alxndrdegrt —Preceding undated comment added 04:38, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to History of Iran may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Indo-Scythian Kingdom

hey LouisAragon, regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lommes#Hello.21 sorry i have no time at the moment. perhaps you ask at the map workshop. :-) best,--95.91.247.82 (talk) 12:24, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Don't worry about the South Asia article-- Iran is in safe hands.

My intention there is not to add Iran (even though, it is technically a part of South Asia, atleast the Eastern part is, as it borders Pakistan + cultural ties, etc) but to make it abundantly clear that Afghanistan is a part of South Asia. This is an unassailable POV and definition and perspective. Don't fret about that page and the possibility of Iran being added to it -- and please, do not interfere with the Afghan edits. It is vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.16.191 (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi LouisAragon :)

My comments are in relation to the edit you made on the South Asia article.

Your reason for reverting my changes was: WP:SPA. The above user, 96.241.16.191, was also a single user account, yet his edits were left alone.

Please provide proof before accusing me of editing based on my personal POV. Again, I could also say the same about the edits of the user 96.241.16.191. Please read the 'talk' page of the article where I set out the reason for the edits.

The inclusion of Afghanistan as a core South Asian country is a disputed issue. This should be made clear in the article. The current article is all over the place, with Afghanistan featuring in some sections and not in others. I think it needs editing to be consistent.

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Andalal, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Avars and Avaria. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Iranian peoples: Infobox

Hi. What do you think about the new revision of that infobox? Plus I want that infobox represents all Iranian peoples, specially notable women from all Iranian ethnic groups. --Zyma (talk) 21:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@Zyma:, its nice. You picked some pretty decent people as a start. Yeah it should represent them all, I guess, though some have performed more (or virtually incomparably more) throughout history while others were very isolated and have not. Btw, I think Kosta Khetagurov, another Kurd, some Mazandarani, Nazanin Afshin-Jam, Aravane Rezai, a Mountain Jew, Rashid-al-Din Hamadani, some Scythian/Sarmatian/Alan, etc would be good additions as well if you happen to find more spots later on. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 21:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I will consider it. Regards. --Zyma (talk) 21:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@Zyma:, mate, few more suggestions; i believe that Valery Gergiev as well as Anacharsis are good additional choices as well, apart from the few I mentioned above. Given the impact of the Sarmatians and Western Scythians on Eastern Europe, I believe at least one of them should be tried to be added. Perhaps checking the Scythians/Sarmatians categories could help you in this. Also, we don't have any Talysh but I think they're too small of an ethnic group, no? Iranics are highly dissimilar and the only real thing that binds them are their languages nowadays, thus I think 35 pics at least for such an ethno-linguistic group is needed. They're not as related such as Slavs, Germanics, etc are, so it's difficult. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:43, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, I just removed unnecessary images. Because the previous revision was ridiculous somehow. You can increase it to 35 images and feel free to remove the persons you think they're not important or very influential figures. IMO, Zoroaster, Cyrus, Rumi, Ferdowsi, Khwarizmi, Biruni, Avicenna and Khayyam (and perhaps Tusi, Hafiz and Ganjavi) must be in that infobox. Because they're most notable ones. For example Zoroaster is a key figure in Iranian/Persian civilizations. Or Ferdowsi and Rumi are very famous poets. Except those mentioned names, the other images can be replaced with other persons from any ethnic groups. But just as I said before, I want more women in the infobox. From ancient, medieval and modern era. So please suggest your infobox and I will add them. Your suggestion will be better if it will be In this format:

• Row1: person1, person2, person3, person4, person5
• Row2: person6, person7, person8, person9, person10
• ...
• Row7: person31, person32, person33, person34, person35

Please participate in related section on talk page. Suggest your desired persons and feel free to edit current revision. If you think there are more notable persons, why not to replace current ones and improve infobox? Do necessary edits/changes. Good luck. --Zyma (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

"Battle of Andalal"

Would be grateful if we could get your take on the talk page of this article. Parsa1993 (talk) 18:29, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Percy Sykes

It has come to my attention that you removed Sykes from the Battle of Krtsanisi, as he was "not a historian". I think you should check his wikipedia page and see for yourself. He is often cited in historical journals and was in fact, a member of the Royal Central Asian Society in honour of his numerous literary contributions. I will leave it to you to add him again. Parsa1993 (talk) 02:40, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Email

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Kansas Bear (talk) 17:45, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Armenia in Europe

I didn't even mention the European Council, Armenia being part of Europe is due weight, and the European Union agrees with this:

"Armenia is also in the evaluations of most grographers a European state, but "at the edge" towards the East"'

"The head of the EU Delegation for Armenia and Georgia, Torben Holtze, said clearly that "as a matter of principle Armenia is a European country and like other European states it has the right to be a EU member provided it meets necessary standards and criteria"[27] --Steverci (talk) 15:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Whatever a several years old paper of the UN might say about Armenia purely for political reasons (thats what the whole paper is about) as they have to legitimate the accession of this nation, there are very very few (if any nowadays) established institutions or organization which include it in their definition of Europe, while tons of sources and institutions do include it as part of Asia, or the Middle East. We need concrete organisations, universities, authorities, that specifically mention Armenia's geographic role, etc. Therefore, such a paper linked by you is not a legimitation that proves that Armenia lies in Europe. Anyways, IF you really think people will concur with you, post it on the talk page of Armenia; we had the same discussion by a random hopper recently, who got baffled. Maybe there you can convince people.

Yeah, look at Armenian history, borders, culture, and geography. and tell us again its European. >.< - LouisAragon (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Louis, this guy (who is banned from editing articles about Armenia) did not even read the paper. At page 4 (2.1), it states that Armenia is European in each aspect, except geographically, and later asks the people to live with this aspect. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not banned anymore. --Steverci (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The Factbook is well known to contain plenty of inaccuracies, read the article about it. Anyone can edit Britannica, like Wikipedia. And some obscure books written by people without articles doesn't say anything about the weight of their claims. Armenia is the Indo-European homeland, of course it's European :) --Steverci (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Need a good laugh?

Read this nonsense. And try not to fall out of your chair! --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

LMAO! Especially this line; " I hope I am not having a convo with an government agancy." cracked me up! Yeah, this is exactly part the stuff I meant in my last mail. Thanks for sharing this good laugh, golden. - LouisAragon (talk) 00:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Armenian mythology

Hello, I wanted to inform you on a long line of problematic edits you've made.

First of all, Armenian mythology and Zoroastrianism are NOT the same thing, and Armenia was never a dominantly Zoroastrianism land.[28] They're similar, like how the Abrahamic religions are similar, but not the same thing.[29] [30] Bournoutian differentiates between the two as well.[31]. And because Armenian paganism is polytheism and not dualistic, they're also quite different. In fact Armenia was generally hostile to Zoroastrianism during the later ancient kingdom.[32] Much of it is also unknown and nothing about its origins can be presented as fact.[33]

James R. Russell is an expert on both Armenia and Zoroastrianism, and wrote a book on both. Some lines:[34]

"one can scarcely exclude the likelihood that the practice of the religion differed from place to place, or that many Armenians were never Zoroastrians at all. There were other foreigners besides Iranians — Persians and Medes, for the most part — in Armenia, such as Greeks, Syrians, and Jews, who brought their beliefs with them."

"It was the Iranians whose ties to the Armenians were closest and whose culture influenced the Armenian nation profoundly over the entire period when Zoroastrianism was the chief religion of Iran...Yet Armenia never lost its sense of separateness; the Armenians were always a distinct people."

Armenian paganism is also not Iranian in origin, and Iranian influence came much later:

"the Armenians practised a form of ancient Thraco-Phrygian paganism which had assimilated certain features of the religion of the Hurrian-Urartean autochthons. To this was added an admixture of Iranian beliefs over the centuries of Median, Persian and Parthian influence."

You have continuously POV-pushed that Armenian paganism was Zoroastrianism and that Armenian only converted to Christianity as some sort of "defiance" to the Sassanids. Boyce is a scholar on Iranian language and Zoroastrianism, but she has no background in Armenian subjects, which is plainly obvious by her work. The Sassanids had nothing to do with Armenia's conversion to Christianity, that was Gregory the Illuminator, overwhelmingly supported as due weight. Boyce makes no mention of this, likely because she has no idea about it. Her source lacks Wikipedia:Significant coverage and is full of Wikipedia:Trivial mentions that are essentially revisionism, which is probably how you came across and decided to push for them. On the History of Armenia, I noticed that you pushed Sassanid role and moved Persian Armenia and Marzpanate Armenia up hundreds of years before they existed and ruined the continuity of the article, and also removed the role Gregory and Trdat III played in Christianizing Armenia. It seems you don't care at all for the quality of Armenian articles, you just want to push a Iranian-centric narrative on them. Unless you have any constructive objections, I'm going to remove the edits on Armenia, Armenians Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity), Armenian mythology, and other articles that portray Armenian paganism and Zoroastrianism as synonymous. --Steverci (talk) 02:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arian Zarrinkafsch (talk • contribs) 08:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC) 

Remarks to your editing

Hi, thank you for your message. I really miss the family relations of Amanullah Mirza Qajar and Feyzullah Mirza Qajar to Bahman Mirza Qajar! And please, when editing pages that I have create, like the Tabriz Khanate do not (!) re-write them completely! There was a sense and system in my links and genealogy of the Donboli rulers of this khanate!

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arian Zarrinkafsch (talk • contribs) 08:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

@Arian Zarrinkafsch:, aight, will mention those links later ofc. But what about the rest of my question i left on your page? :-) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Qudsi

Hi, LouisAragon. Qudsi lived in XIX century. So giving him before Fuzuli doesn't make sense.--Shahrux (talk) 17:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, no probs! Good you fixed it. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 17:37, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

pending changes reviewer/rollback

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Katie^talk 17:54, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

rollback

I have declined your request for rollback because you don't have a lot of anti-vandalism work. With a few weeks of consistent contributions to AIV, I'll reconsider your request. Katie^talk 17:54, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure. Bests. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Azerbaijan

the etymylogy section abused by a new user, he may be related to User:Tirgil34 and User:Egaplaicesp.--2607:F358:21:14C:CA4D:6399:D491:69BC (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Sources

https://archive.org/search.php?query=Sasanian

Found some sources in case you are interested :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:14, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, (haha :-)))) Wow, that's indeed some top notch stuff! Thanks for sharing mate! Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 02:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

A page you started (Russian Church, Qazvin) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Russian Church, Qazvin, LouisAragon!

Wikipedia editor MB298 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Good start, perhaps add one more reference.

To reply, leave a comment on MB298's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for December 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Melika Foroutan

added links pointing to ARD and The Dark Side

Mohammad Vali Khan Tonekaboni

added a link pointing to Caucasus Front

Russian Church, Qazvin

added a link pointing to Church

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Warning regarding edits to Armenia

Hi Louis, as I said, after I looked at Steverci's behaviour I'd also look at yours and I've seen some edits which concern me. In a few comments you've been incivil - you cannot use personal attacks to refer to other people [35], nor should you label others as POV pushers [36], ignorant [37], incompetent [38] (see also the last sentence at WP:AllegingIncompetence) nor as being able able to talk to normal people (which is one of the worst I've seen from you). This probably did need a source. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:16, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

And this is going the right way for no personal attacks block. Just because someone has been topic banned, does not mean you can blanket revert all of their edits and name personal attacks while you're doing it. A topic ban, imposed after the edit was made is not a justification for reverting. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:17, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

@Callanec:, sent you a reply. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:23, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

This user, LouisAragon seem to be deleting Kurdish and Armenian articles and uses abuse language toward Kurds and Armenian, such as "There is no Kurdistan". LouisAragon must be investigated and have done this many times and got away with it, while promoting Turkish and Iranian nationalism. Wiki should not allow users like LouisAragon to be so abusive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mara kara (talk • contribs) 23:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Re:Pictures

Hallo Louis, sorry, but we can't upload them, they are both copyrighted. Please read under "terms of use". Alex2006 (talk) 06:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

@Alessandro57:, hmm already was afraid of that. Another non-copyrighted picture of the same two pics would be possible to upload, right? Thanks for your prompt response Alessandro - LouisAragon (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

I am not an expert about copyright issues, you should better go to Commons and ask there. Anyway, a couple of weeks ago I needed also an image from Met Museum in New York, but I stopped after having read the museum's terms of use. Alex2006 (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Your concern

In response to your recent concern. Engage on the talk page whenever possible(over article concerns), be sure to reference everything, avoid anything that can be construed as a personal attack. If said editor is a sock and/or nationalistic POV pusher, their editing will reflect it, sooner or later. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:21, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's greetings!

Iryna Harpy (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Pictures

I know a great site where you can find many paintings etc and be able to upload them on Wikipedia without any copyright problem. I'll link it to you in a few hours. Can't do it right now cuz im on my phone. HistoryofIran (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, haha hey mate! Thanks for having reminded yourself about my concern of back then. ) Very nice of you. Btw, I managed to upload more of those pictures myself from that site I linked you, including this neat one. Now lets hope they wont get deleted for some copyright reason we missed. - LouisAragon (talk) 05:25, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Godamnnit... seems like they have made a update on the site, where the name of the site is on all the pictures unless you pay for it.. Originally you only needed to have a account to have it removed, but that seems to have changed. Btw, you still need a account to download the pictures though [39]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar

Many thanks. I really appreciate that. Best, --Kober^Talk 09:47, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

@Kober:, no thanks needed. You deserve every shout-out for your efforts. )) In case we won't happen to speak to each other these two days, I wish you now already a happy New Year in advance. ) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 17:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, LouisAragon!

Happy New Year!

LouisAragon,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Krakkos (talk) 04:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

Happy New Year

Hi Louis, happy new year. How can l make contact with you in addition to talk page? Best wishes. Catharsis of Mind (talk) 06:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Allahverdi Khan

added a link pointing to Statesman

Khoy

added a link pointing to Dvin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Armenian mythology page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit Warring on Qajar

You have violated 3RR with your edit-warring on Qajar dynasty. Rather blatantly and aggressively. You have assumed bad faith and you have acted completely uncivil. Your whole argument makes no sense. Your last absurd attempt at explaining your aggression in maintaining horrible prose on Wikipedia over sentences that are actually readable is confusing at best. You say "If you have issues regarding the sentence, then raise that up BEFORE you start warring." which is a preposterous leap in logic. Obviously I had an issue with the sentence which I brought up before YOU started warring -- that was in the initial edit! Seriously? Your unambiguous violation of 3RR occurred before I could overtly warn you, and thus no ANI on it. Improve the sentence: Read it outloud. Does it make sense? No. And don't say "It was cited the whole time, blah blah blah!" when you know it wasn't you just added that in now, it wasn't cited. JesseRafe (talk) 15:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

First of all, WP:3RR is violated through the fourth revert and not the third. Second, it was unfortunately you assuming bad faith from the start by removing the line stating "agenda-laden".[40] When I reverted you back and added the same inline ref from the body, you reverted it back again, describing content written by highly accredited historians "and just because blah blah blah said it".

If you had actual concerns regarding only the phrasing, you could've easily made up a talk page section, as its you whos contesting sourced content. Instead, you continued edit warring (with Twinkle, interestingly). Sorry, but these are not the right steps that should be taken if one has genuinely simple concerns. Lastly, you should write this on the talk page of the article itself, and preferably not here. I just did that for you. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

lol

Well, I have no idea what to create/expand xD. Since you some time ago mentioned something about expanding/creating Iranian-related articles, is there something on your mind that needs to be expanded/created :)? preferably something pre-Islamic. Btw [41] --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, heyy! Well, regarding pre-Islamic topics, the Achaemenid Empire article is in a dire need of getting in a better state. Probably the most important empire in Iranian history, yet in a very poor state. Others from the back of my head are; Kingdom of Pontus (!), which still needs an entire rewrite, as I didn't find myself having time to do so. Sasanian Lazica we still lack, as well as numerous Achaemenid satrapies. Sasanian Iberia still lacks the names of its marzbans, and I don't know exactly what starting date I should take for the province, so I took the date when it became a direct vassal kingdom. Btw, you told you might wanted to create a new map for the Achaemenid Empire article? :-) I'm merely trying to dig up all proposals we mentioned together from the back of my head. Post-Islamic there's tons to do as well, but let's keep it indeed confined to pre-Islamic as you mentioned, for now. There's so much to do regarding the Achaemenid, Parthian, and Sasanian eras, it's insane. At least the Parthian empire article is a FA article though. Let me know if you want me to propose more. :-) Bests mate - LouisAragon (talk) 09:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Nice, will try to try expand/create some Iranian-Caucasus related articles. I only have the name of one marzban of Iberia, it's like the others aren't mentioned in any other source at all. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

btw file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/kmohebi/Dokumenter/Downloads/CAUCASIAN%20SHITZ/All%20pictures%20nigga%20FIRST/tsdc262.htm file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/kmohebi/Dokumenter/Downloads/CAUCASIAN%20SHITZ/All%20pictures%20nigga%20FIRST/tsdc263.htm file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/kmohebi/Dokumenter/Downloads/CAUCASIAN%20SHITZ/All%20pictures%20nigga%20FIRST/tsdc264.htm --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

- @HistoryofIran:, Hmm that sucks... I had difficulties myself to find the actual names of the office holders myself too. If you'd like to hear my own opinion regarding this, I guess its mostly due to the fact that until 580, when the Sasanians abolished the Georgian monarchy and incorporated it as a full province, the Georgian kings were Iranian puppet rulers, and de facto were something like "Sasanian marzbans". Yeah, I saw you created an article regarding this marzban today, great stuff btw! I asked Kober about this matter some time ago as well, he told he had the names of the marzbans and would add them whenever he has time to do some actual content-related edits on Wiki, I believe.

- Great link(s) btw, thanks alot! ;) They'll be of much use! - LouisAragon (talk) 22:13, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, PS, am I right regarding the added dates on the Sasanian Iberia page? I only added the span of time to the infobox when it became a subordinate kingdom up to the Muslim invasions. However, prior to this it was for like 150 years a tributary state/vassal state as well. Those era's might have to be added as well, I believe. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:33, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

No idea, the Persian Armenia article is like that aswell. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Mostashari page

Hi, I can send you a pdf of page 144 of:

• Mostashari, Firouzeh (2006). On the Religious Frontier: Tsarist Russia and Islam in the Caucasus. I.B.Tauris. ISBN 978-1-85043-771-0.

in partial fulfillment of your request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request/Archive_27#Hearn (2009) Mostashari (2006). My reading of it is that it doesn't support the statement where cited in Treaty of Kurakchay. I can search the book for other pages that might be relevant if you want, but that might take me a while and it is not my specialty so I might be a poor judge. Please use Special:EmailUser to email me so that I can reply with the pdf as an attachment. Regards, Worldbruce (talk) 16:55, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Historical Armenian migrations

Hello LouisAragon. I noticed that you have added the following passage into a number of articles: "After the incorporation of the Erivan khanate into the Russian Empire, Muslim majority of the area gradually changed, at first the Armenians who were left captive were accouraged to return. As a result of which an estimated 57,000 Armenian refugees from Persia returned to the territory of the Erivan khanates after 1828". You are citing "The Cambridge History of Iran by William Bayne Fisher, Peter Avery, Ilya Gershevitch, Gavin Hambly, Charles Melville, Cambridge University Press, 1991 p. 339". Is it possible for you to quote the source please? The idea of "Armenian captivity" in Iran until the Russian conquest of the Caucasus does not sit well with the existence of Armenian melikdoms in the Caucasus in the pre-Russian era, not to mention the 20% of Armenian population of the Erivan Khanate. Also, the use of the word "return" with regard to the Armenian resettlement may be problematic: according to Smirnov (1934) who gives a detailed overview of the population of each village in Nakhchivan, most Armenians resettled there after 1828 were brought from Salmas, Maku and Khoi which were under Ottoman (and not Iranian) control in 1603 when Shah Abbas ordered the Armenian population deported, so the Armenians migrating from those areas could not be regarded as "returning". Parishan (talk) 02:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Teresia Sampsonia Khan

LouisAragon, you started to nomination this article for DYK in late April, but never finished the process, which required transcluding the nomination on the DYK nominations page.

We were recently given a report that listed all nominations that hadn't been properly transcluded, and this one popped up on it; you were notified about it at the time, but may not have noticed. Even though the nomination was made last April, if you're still interested in pursuing it, we'd like to give it another chance. You shouldn't do anything to the nomination now if you are interested; I'll take care of the process of re-instituting it as an active nomination. Please let me know here what you'd like to do. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:23, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset:, hello, thanks a lot for letting me know. Indeed, I had completely forgotten about it. Yes, I'm still interested in pursuing its DYK status. I just started making made some minor fixes (title, name) as since the time I nominated it, the article got improved/saw some changes as well. Do I now need to finish the rest of the steps in order to compete its nomination, e.g. reviewing someone else's DYK nomination, etc? I remember I didn't complete the nomination back then as I hadn't reviewed someone else's page. Looking forward to your response ;-) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

LouisAragon, unfortunately you didn't leave everything to me, which makes things a bit more difficult. Please do not take any more action of any kind until you hear from me here: don't edit the nomination page, don't move it again, don't do anything. I'll be back with you within 24 hours, once I've cleaned everything up. Incidentally, as this was your first DYK nomination—I can't find any others, though you can tell me if I'm wrong about there having been none—you are not required to do a quid pro quo review. If you wish to do one anyway, that's fine, but the nomination will proceed regardless. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:40, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I've just made the necessary updates; it's ready to go. I would like to suggest, however, that you submit a request at WP:GOCE/REQ for the Guild of Copy Editors to copy edit the article. I just started reading it through, and saw quite a few grammatical hitches, enough so that a reviewer will probably ask for it to be gone over. This could extend the length of the review, while waiting for the edits to be completed, so the sooner you make the request, the better. Be sure to mention that this is for a DYK nomination. (Alternatively, if you have a fellow editor who helps you out with copyediting, you can ask that friend.) Best of luck going forward! I put the nomination on the nominations page under today's date, January 16. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:06, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I have submitted the copyedit request to the Guild of Copy Editors. With any luck, they'll get to it in the next couple of weeks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Categories for Western writers

Hi, last June you created Category:Western writers about Armenia, Category:Western writers about Georgia (country), Category:Western writers about Iran, containing only Category:Foreign observers of Armenia, Category:Foreign observers of Georgia (country), and Category:Foreign observers of Iran respectively. Would you agree to quickly merging these to Category:Historians of Armenia, Category:Historians of Georgia (country), Category:Historians of Iran without needing a full discussion? – Fayenatic London 16:05, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london:, sure thing, no probs! - LouisAragon (talk) 16:13, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll do it immediately under WP:G7. – Fayenatic London 16:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Iranian Americans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ACS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Iranian Americans

I know you're from Netherlands. You need to understand U.S. policy on immigration and then you'll know that it's impossible for 1.5 million Iranians to be living in the United States. The U.S. only allows certain number of people from each country, this is a very strict policy. The nationality of every person is recorded in U.S. immigration data. Consider that Iran's population is about 80 million, Iranian families are often very small, and bad relations between the US and Iran since 1979, how can there be 1.5 million Iranians in the U.S.? The U.S. government secretly allowed 1 million Iranians without anyone knowing about it? If you look at page 18 [42], you'll further understand that Iranians are a minor group in the U.S. Indians and Pakistanis are each a major, and they're not eligible for the annual diversity immigrant visa program. The same goes for Turks.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 02:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

1) We don't interpret our sources. Numerous other articles regarding diasporean groups in the US (e.g Turkish Americans, Armenian Americans, Afghan Americans) also have non-official estimates in the infobox. If you want to adress your concerns on behalf of any of such non-official estimates in infoboxes, then please bring up your concerns regarding all of them, and not just one specific article as you're doing right now, through a RfC for example. 2) Many experts and scholars have stated (as sourced in the article's body as well, amongst others) that there are numerous reasons as for why the number of Americans of Iranian ancestry turns out to be lower on Census/ACS figures than they actually are in reality. Per the same reason that reliable non-official estimates are included in numerous other articles' infoboxes, per the same reason they can be included on this article's infobox. Either all other non-official estimations are completely/totally worthless only and specifically regarding Iranian Americans, or you're simply removing info based upon your own interpretations (the latter which I sincerely believe is the case unfortunately). - LouisAragon (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I didn't see those other articles and I will remove them from there also. What do scholars have to do with determining the number of Iranians living in the United States? This information is only available with the U.S. federal government, specifically with USCIS. These scholars that you mention cannot dispute U.S. federal government information. If you calculate the larger number of Iranians in U.S. cities, it does not add to 1.5 million but is only consistent with the c. 470,341 that ACS provides. I have a general knowledge about the groups I mentioned and I'm feeding you that info. To make it short, it's impossible for 1.5 million or even 1 million Iranians to be legally living in the U.S.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 04:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

The 500,000 Turks [43] is a realistic figure given that 1) Turks have a long history of immigrating to the US; 2) relations never been bad 3) and Turkey having the same population as Iran. That's why as a policy they are not allowed for the annual diversity immigrant visa program. Also look at Pakistani Americans (c. 364,000) , Indian Americans (3.4 million) and Chinese Americans (3.7 million).--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 04:45, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

This user

Hello LouisAragon,

Do you know if this user is allowed to edit Armenia-related articles? I see he is TBAN'ed but interested if this applies today as well. He had made some Armenia-related edits recently including some that are connected to Georgia and I found them disruptive. The admin that banned him is offline these days and as you seem to interacted with this user, maybe you could clarify his current status? Jaqeli 13:24, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

@Jaqeli:, hey, as far as I know, the TBAN is still fully in power. Btw while we're at it, don't you have an on-Wiki email, or anything alike, that I could mail to? I have some sources that I'd like to send to you. :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't really use Wiki mail. Are those Persian sources or sth? You can post them online in my sandbox if it's ok. Jaqeli 17:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

plz help us

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of state visits to Iran#improve. Thanks. Shahin (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Template:Z48

Please report this sock puppet

This user damaged many Iranian articles. now he uses multiple accounts and IPs on several articles like Ghormeh sabzi, Yaldā, Chaharshanbe Suri. You should watch his edits. Thanks.--188.159.136.119 (talk) 09:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Interesting

I just wanted to say that it was an interesting read, the article about Teresia Sampsonia. I had never heard of her before. Good article.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@BabbaQ:, thank you. :-) I hope it'll pass GA nomination after the incoming efforts by the guild of copy-edits, and some other minor tweaks that I'm gonna make myself. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 23:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

wut

Why make [44], when there's [45] --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:40, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, lel, well you have a good point there. I made that one as, when both cats are actually filled, we can make some proper distinction between them as a family doesn't necessarily need to be part of nobility, or vice versa (see also; Category:Russian families, Category:Russian noble families, etc). - LouisAragon (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

LouisAragon; That's kinda impossible to do, since we don't have enough information about those Iranian families. You could say that all the Iranian families listed in the category were technically noble families. Besides, even Category:Greek families don't use that, and the articles of some Russians who are listed in the Category:Russian families are called for 'nobleman', which seems kinda confusing. Besides, when I wrote the Urdubadi family, I didn't write 'Iranian noble-family' for special reason, I could as well have written 'Iranian family'. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, Yeah, I already thought you'd say that. :-) Though both approaches can work, I concur with you based on what you mentioned. We can de-populate the category if you want or ask someone to delete it. Not much effort. Btw, just sent you a mail regarding something else. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

[46] omg --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, LMFAO. Faith in humanity lost once again, lel. Check your mail btw, sent something. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Will do, just need to update it. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, aight. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Keyboard warrior alert [47] btw will look at the infobox today. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

EDIT: [48] Sigh. By the way, I'm going out and be home by night, where I will check the infobox. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind, seems like the infobox on the article is the best one for now, if we only had more information about him (such as when he died etc) another infobox would be more suitable, but not in this case. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Darugha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mongol language. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Please write your comment

Need your opinion here: Talk:Tajikistan#Anonymous_editor_.28IP.29_and_Russian_language. --Zyma (talk) 13:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Darius I

Hello, I noticed your revert on Darius I and believe that User:Odaiup is no other than another sockpuppet of that troublemaker who rampaged on Darius I's article around mid December: remember User:Zarahus99, Zarao etc whose in turn were socks of User:Jinnhoppan, who in turn has possibly something to do with a sockmaster User:Mughal Lohar. The last edit is suspiciously similar to the edits performed in December by the aforementioned socks. If you know how to, is it possible to revive an archived SPI discussion, in this case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jinnhoppan/Archive? Khruner (talk) 09:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

@Khruner:, hey, thanks, feel free to leave a comment if you want; [49]. Whenever you have the definite feeling that you have stumbled across another one of him, don't hesitate at all to form a new SPI case. You can always ping me (or I think Thomas W. as well) if you need assistance. :-) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 21:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I've learn something today! Nothing to add but hoping for a semi-protection of the article just in case the SPI has resulted positive. I wonder why this person has not been added to the long term abuse list yet, since if he is the same as Mughal Lohar, then he is active since 2011. Khruner (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, exactly. If it doesn't get semi-protected we should manually ask for it I think. I will see if I can form a LTA-list sometime later myself when I have time. Good one! :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 23:54, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (Andrey Glebov) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Andrey Glebov, LouisAragon!

Wikipedia editor Garagepunk66 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I enjoyed the new article on Andrey Glebov. Thanks.

To reply, leave a comment on Garagepunk66's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Era style

No, we don't use any particular style for all articles in any geographical or historical era, it's all governed by WP:ERA and that was a BCE article. Doug Weller talk 10:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

LouisAragon, it was an article with both era styles when User:Sullivan9211 (in good faith I believe) changed it into a full-BC article. In such cases, I usually search for the original era style in old versions of the article and restore it: the earliest era style used for Xerxes I was BCE so I felt it was the legitimate style. At least is what I got from the WP:ERA guideline; Doug Weller can correct me if I am wrong. Khruner (talk) 12:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

That's generally true. But if an article was, say, created in 2006 as one era style, and changed in 2008 to the other, I'd say that it was stable at the later style and shouldn't be reverted to the earlier. Doug Weller talk 17:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller:, ideally, it should though I think, for overal coherence. It doesn't make much sense, imho, when all other articles of the same topic (Achaemenids in this case) and of the same geographic area (Ancient Near East) use BC/AD and only one (from what it seems, Darius I is the only article that does so?) to deviate from this style. Anyhow, you were obviously right to mention this up. Btw, I believe per WP:ERA, one can ask for a change of style on the talk page of the article in question, right? Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you can start a discussion giving reasons specific to that article - not comparisons with others. And a lot of Ancient Egyptian articles use BCE, and I suspect those of a number of other ANE articles. Doug Weller talk 07:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Teresia Sampsonia DYK nomination has been approved

LouisAragon, I wanted to give you a heads up: your DYK nomination has been approved, and is set to be the lead hook (with picture) of the set that is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's front page on February 17, from 00:00 to 12:00 UTC. While there are sometimes glitches in the process, they are uncommon, so the odds are quite good that it will run at that currently scheduled time. If something does come up, I'll try to let you know. Congratulations! (I think you'll be very happy with the results of the copyedit I mentioned last month; Miniapolis did an excellent job.) BlueMoonset (talk) 00:46, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Teresia Sampsonia

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bijan Beg Saakadze, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saakadze. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Are all sockpuppets f-ing morons?

"Kansas Bear what's wrong with writing from U of Manchester,it is a university with huge academic facilities, not like a small village in iran, are you jealous or something bro"

LMAO. This so-called university student(ie. Yakbul's sockpuppet) that is too ignorant to read my screen name KANSAS Bear!!?? Maybe this moron should be blocked simply for being too stupid!

Well, I'm off to wash my 2011 Camaro, do they even have Camaros in Iran? LMAO! --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:30, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, sorry, I didnt have time yesterday to write a proper response. Indeed, just WTF haha. In the end, morons will always remain morons, we should never forget that. And there are way too many of 'em in this small world (remember our dialogue?). That's my credo. Bests and thanks for giving me another good laugh. Appreciate it. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:24, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

What the...

Alarm alarm ! [50] --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, *SIGH*. Thanks much for having already taken action. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:17, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Check your mail m8 --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, just did and replied. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:08, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Ditto. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Seems like this user is denying clear simple sources right in front of him [51], can you take a 'look' on this? [52]. Btw [53].--HistoryofIran (talk) 21:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Mate, need help with this annoying pan-nationalistic vandal [54][55]. He is banned in Wikipedia, but continues his annoying disruptive editing in Wikimedia Commons. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

RE:Regarding the Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni

Hallo Louis, well, thanks! Don't worry, I will take care of it! For some strange reason, the edits of the reviewer don't appear in my watch list, thanks for telling me that he wrote. ;-) Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 05:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

be careful

Hi, Against vandalism the iranian articles be resistant.--Samək^Talk 08:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

@Samak:, I will, thanks for giving me a heads up, mate. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni

The article Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

RE:Regarding the Palazzo Rusticucci-Accoramboni

Well, the credit is more yours than mine. I would have never had the guts to propose such an article as GA... ;-) Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 18:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

@Alessandro57: You're always welcome mate. No thanks needed. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:31, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Ali Zifan 02:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Palais-Royal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Debaucheries. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Palace of the Shirvanshahs

[56] --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:13, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Christmas

Looks like we won't be getting anything from Santa this year. UCaetano (talk) 22:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Norse mythology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hagopdjan de Deritchan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philippe d'Orléans. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Origin of the Balkan name

it is explained with sources below check this Seriousgigi (talk) 21:16, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello

Hello LouisAragon, long time no see! Can you please take a look at these recent edits? I don't know what else to say to that IP user that warns people as if s/he is an admin. :) I have also made a few changes on this article, I think you might be interested in improving that.

Other than that, what do you think about the picture of dancers wearing traditional costume? I know that picture is quite representative and OK for the infobox according to current Wikipedia guidelines as well, but I still want to hear what you think about that as you are one of the active users on the article.

Here are some examples for appropriate lead images.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysians&diff=prev&oldid=699109923 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysians&diff=prev&oldid=698787083

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malays_(ethnic_group) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_people

In the case of those dancers with their flag and traditional dress, they are pure of their own kind and it's thus even way more appropriate to use them since they are from a homogenous and relatively small ethnic group comparing to Japanese, for instance.

Thank you in advanced. :) Listofpeople (talk) 08:03, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

Im new to this whole " editing " on wikipaedia & I wouldnt be editing if I wouldnt have read the strange claim on the Iranian cuisine page about Iranian food culture being influenced by Turkic and Azerbaijani culture . This is absolutely not true, if anyone Azeri culture is the one influenced by Iranian /Persian food culture since there werent a country called Azerbaijan 100 yrs ago. And the polov that is cooked in Azerbaijan is obviously as a result of Iranian culture , since the term polo is an Indo-european word with roots in sanskrit .

Also there is no need to mark all neighboring countries , all countries have neighbors which they've been ex-changing cultural ties with, this article is about Iranian cuisine , so it should be pointed out that Iranian ppl as an Indo-european ppl have an IE food culture , just like the rice and stew culture that is common among us and Indian ppl.

The usage of rice goes way back then the safavid era, rice has been produced in northen Persia & India since ancient times, safavids and other Turkic rulers in Iran were heavely influenced by Persian culture , not the other way around . Even today Turkic ppl in central Asia dont have anything similar to Persian kitchen culture. Turkic food is mostly based on fried meat . I will make some changes on this article, since its sbout Iranian cuisine and not Azerbaijani or Turkic cuisine. They have each their own pages. AryaIran (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2016 (UTC)AryaIranAryaIran (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Capture of Irevan

Hello. Before capture of Irevan azeris lived in Irevan. If you mean this battle is between russian and persian side and only the spellings in these languages should be given then you can also remove armenian spelling.--Shahrux (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Look at here:[57]. Three years after the capture 63.9% of people were of azeri origin. --Shahrux (talk) 10:17, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Vandal/sockmaster

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nizam_al-Mulk&action=history We got a dim-witted vandal/sockmaster here. Well technically he is not a sockmaster, but uses his IP as a second account for his disruptive editing. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:52, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thoracic diaphragm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central tendon. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Wonders never cease

Dear LouisAragon,

Would you please take a look at this article and its talk page where I have just left some words? I am sure you will easily realise the issues with that article. Not only the title of the article, but also its content is very misleading. Worse than that, it has been this way for 12 YEARS. Unfortunately I took notice of this very recently, and I feel very sorry about this. I obviously do not know how the process of move works, and as to the improval of its content, I need some other people's help.

Thank you in advanced, Listofpeople (talk) 02:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

An Hindu pov-pusher

Hi Louis,

Can you please check Yazdanism and other lranian religions? An indian D4iNa4 (talk · contribs) tries to disrupt articles through clear source falsifications and synth. Can you please check my last contributions and the sources? 46.221.194.168 (talk) 22:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

PS: l am not sure but this user likely to be the same ip vandal who systematically disrupts the India-Iran relations by adding indus valley civilizations and other stuff to the article. Maybe @HistoryofIran: may comment on this too...46.221.194.168 (talk) 23:59, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stepanos V of Salmast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles II. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Russo-Turkish War (1787-92)

I am currently looking to expand and improve this article, in no small part to removing Baddeley, a journalist and not a reliable source.

I found this book, which gives the impression that Sheikh Mansur's rebellion was in and of itself a separate conflict from the Russo-Turkish War (1787-92). In this book page22, states the Russian High Command had made no plans for the Caucasus during the 1787 war. In your opinion, of what you know and/or can find, should Mansur's rebellion and the Russian response(s) be separate from the 1787 war or included? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

This book page 99 states operations in the Caucasus front was ruled out. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:47, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, excuse me for my belated response. I wanted to check a few things myself first as well, in order to give you a proper response. I completely concur with the things you mention. First of all, Baddely should indeed not be used per the fact that hes a journalist. Second, regarding the Russo-Turkish War you mention, Russia indeed fought against the native North Caucasians literally always in separate battles and operations. Except if, lets say, they were directly involved in the wars with Iran or Turkey against Russia, as subjects of the former two. However this was definetely not the case with the insurrection by Mansur and co. at the time. Mansur led a separate battle/insurrection against the Russians, and Turkey (nor Iran) wasn't involved in it either. I'd like to further aid you with improving this article whenever I have some more time, if you would like so as well, of course. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:42, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I pretty much came to the same conclusions. Tucker's "A Global Chronology of conflict" is quite clear that the 1787 war was completely unrelated to Mansur's "rebellion". I have rewritten the article with a brief overall summary using Tucker. Any assistance would be appreciated. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Persian Armenia ---> Sasanian Armenia?

Do you think it would be a good idea to change the name of Persian Armenia to Sasanian Armenia? 'Persian Armenia' sounds a bit wrong, since (as you know) this was not the first nor the last time Armenia was under Persian rule. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:48, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I would agree. Sasanian gives a specific time period. Sorry for interrupting HoI. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, I totally concur, per what you and Kansas Bear both state. Sasanian Armenia would be indeed the most appropriate name. So yeah, definitely a good idea to change it. :-) @Kansas Bear:, excuse me for ignorance, but what did you mean with "interrupting Hol"? What does "Hol" stand for? - LouisAragon (talk) 19:25, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

History.of.Iran. HoI. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:28, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Ahhhhhhh ok. Haha. Never used/saw that abbreviation before, hence I didn't know. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Safavid dynasty family tree

Alamshah and Halima are the same person why is there a division between her sons Ismail I and Ali Mirza Safavi in the family tree page Alexis Ivanov (talk) 06:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

@Alexis Ivanov:, if the sources back up that it's the same person, then it's probably an error on the article. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Are there sources not actually backing it up. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 20:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Also Princess Bagrationi is not the mother of Despina Khatun wife of Uzun Hassan, I am not very good at editing the family tree so your help is appreciated, also Shaykh Jafar brother of Shaykh Ibrahim who had rivalry with his nephew Shaykh Junayd should be mentioned in the family tree and a crucial member of the family who led the Safavid order to certain extent. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 21:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me, completely forgot to leave a reply; I will definetely try fixing it whenever I have time, and yes, I do concur, Shaykh Junayd should be included as well on the list. Thanks for bringing this all up to my attention. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Confused

I understand you're a nationalistic Persian but Muhammed Bukhari was an ethnic Uzbek, he was born in Uzbekistan, not Iran. Shfmaria (talk) 20:01, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Actually there are 3 sources that you have ignored. And if you continue with the false edit summaries, I will be more than happy to notify an administrator of your difficulties. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

hello!

Ill talk about "...iranian dynasties..." look it was only claim.okey ghaznavid,seljuks..... were cultural persianised but ottomans never using persian.please dont add this. Dengesizzz (talk) 17:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

In response to what I believe is a sockpuppet(Dengesizzz):

• "The Ottomans patronized Persian literature for five and a half centuries.[...] Unlike Iran they[Ottomans] gradually shed some of their Persianate qualities: they were the first of the gunpowder empires to give up Persian as the court language, using instead Turkish - that is, the vernacular of the western Turks..." -- Canfield, Turko-Persia in Historical Perspective, page 19.

Judging from the lack of knowledge concerning Seljuks, Sultanate of Rum, Ghaznavids, etc, Dengesizzz would be better served by reading published academic works and not continuing their anti-Persian rhetoric.

LouisAragon see here. Previous editor with similar name simply "zz" instead of "zzz" at the end of their name. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Academic???Which universty?When?Tehran universty or other Iranian universty?can you give to Oxford referance?i can give this and believe me only "Bogazici" is better than all iranian universities.AND you was block me.Its mynew account.... Dengesizzz (talk) 18:09, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

They was using persian on court language.:DDD sorry i laughed. Dengesizzz (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Ok, sockpuppet.

• Turko-Persia in Historical Perspective, Robert L. Canfield, Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Here let me show you where Cambridge is located.

• "Tehran universty or other Iranian universty?can you give to Oxford referance?i can give this and believe me only "Bogazici" is better than all iranian universities.."

So much for, "not continuing their anti-Persian rhetoric". Assuming you can read.... my user name is KANSAS Bear. Can you figure out where I am located or would you rather waste time with more anti-Persian rhetoric directed at a person located in the United States?

(start sarcasm)Since ethnicity is SO important to so-called neutral editors such as your self,(end sarcasm), I am of Scottish, Irish, English, French and German ancestry.

• "AND you was block me.."

I can not block anyone, I am not an Admin. Have you taken your meds, you are sounding a little paranoid today.

• "They was using persian on court language.:DDD sorry i laughed."

The response of the ignorant. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

My apologies to LouisAragon for cluttering up his talk page, but I did not want to lose this source;

• Stanford J. Shaw, Ezel Kural Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey: Volume 1, page 41, "This did not prevent Mehmet from moving to eliminate from the Ottoman court the Byzantine and Christian influences that had led Bayezit to abandon the gazi tradition. They Byzantine women and advisers were driven out of the palace. Greek was replaced by Turkish and Persian as languages of administration."

Clearly someone was speaking Persian. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:59, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, no problem my friend, consider it your own. Thanks for linking the source. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Manuel I Komnenos

added a link pointing to Entente

Mikhail Lermontov

added a link pointing to Melancholic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Re:Hey

Hallo Louis thanks for your message! Nice weather? Here it has been raining since one month, practically we have a monsoon... Luckily I was out of country a couple a weeks, and in wikipause. :-( What you are writing does not surprise me, actually this is the 'cursus' that most of these kind of users follow. Too bad, since i am an optimist, and basically I think that everyone could learn how to contribute here...but some people is really diehard ;-) . Take care, Alex2006 (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

fake map (iran & afghanistan)

a pov user falsified the content of Turkmen Sahra (a pov and fake map) and Afghan Turkestan,looks like an agenda.89.165.69.47 (talk) 10:27, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Reverts

@LouisAragon: WP:EVADE says: Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a block, without giving any further reason and without regard to the three-revert rule. This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a blocked editor (obviously helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand). So why you have reverted his edits here ► [58] -12,632 bytes are a lot and if his edits were damaging they could be reverted even before his block. But they are not and he contributed many in the article and I do not agree with your blind reverts.--g. balaxaZe★ 11:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Giorgi Balakhadze:, ehm no. You're unfortunately mistaking a few things. We don't accept anything from socks who have been socking since 2010. These additions I reverted didn't fall under obvious helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand, from the WP you cited. They were all just typical Satt2 edis. This "users'" editorial pattern has always been marked by the same ramblings he tried to reinstate on Georgia-related articles with every sock of him. You can't just literally reinstate the material a blocked sock has added, especially if someone has already removed it. If you have any concerns regarding what should be added, then please write it yourself in your own words, or make a talk page section. Furthermore, even more funnily, that material presented by the two early modern travellers (Jean Chardin/Jacques de Vitry) is rejected by historians, scholars and academics alike, and I thoroughly stipulated that on the talk page, yet you blatantly reinstated Satt2's addition regarding that as well. - LouisAragon (talk) 13:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

• • I've read all text and I've found some materials very useful we should consider importance of knowledge and not of policies that are not always right. Your reverted edits in some cases were much more bad in providing information and sources. And you've reverted not only his but my and other users edits as well.--g. balaxaZe★ 13:43, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Administrators noticeboard notification

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. g. balaxaZe★ 14:54, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Imperial Russian Navy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vessels. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

EMr KnG sockpuppets

It would appear that EMr KnG/Dengesizz(z) is now using the name NoScopeRage. Just as HistoryofTurks(another EMr KnG sock) posted on Nedim Ardoga talk page, canvassing that editor do the same removal they did on List of Iranian dynasties and countries, so to has NoScopeRage canvassed Nedim and KazekageTR to change referenced figures on the Battle of Keresztes. I have notified Casliber of this canvassing, but I seriously doubt he will do anything.

Thought I should make you aware of the latest EMr KnG sockpuppet and their machinations. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:02, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:; Sigh. What I really dislike about Wikipedia is this insane reek of sockpuppetry and socking literally everywhere. Literally the majority of users we encounters are socks, or are sockmaster themselves. Anyway, thanks much for the heads up, I will keep an eye on the matter. Btw, good work on the Sultanate of Rum page, once again. That article is such a friggin' prime example of sock infested articles, that its even hopelessly pathetic on so many fronts. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:33, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Armenian Monastic Ensembles of Iran

You have added text here [59] without a reference. The article is now under GA review. Can you kindly help in fixing a reference to the text that you have added so that GA can be approved. Other wise it has to be deleted. Thanks. --Nvvchar. 06:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

@Nvvchar:, hello! Thanks much for letting me know; I just adjusted that info a bit, left out the unnecessary segments, and re-added it with sources. Congrats with having another GA article on your already extant list! :-) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 00:26, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Sock IPs

LouisAragon, in Talk:Abkhazia who are you accusing the IPs of being socks of? In general, it is difficult to pin down IPs as socks or SPAs, as IP addresses can change frequently. Given that, notes may be unhelpful. Surely the quality of the arguments stand on their own? CMD (talk) 23:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: hey, good to hear from you again! :-) I can "smell" socks from miles away usually, as they say. I'm virtually entirely sure that they're both operated by "ZviadPochkhua", based on the facts that; ZviadPochkhua has edited with another IP on the same talk page very recently,[60] that both IP's geolocate to Georgia,[61]-[62] that all of them mention the "Russian KGB" (very "peculiar" stuff to mention)[63][64][65], that all of them sign their comments the same way ("--", [66][67][68]), that they all use the same type of edit summaries[69][70][71], and lastly; given that they all have the same proficiency in English. Oh, yeah, before I forget; ZviadPochkhua even signed the comment made by his first IP as well.[72].

This all in an extremely short period of time, on the same talk page, regarding the same matter, and all having the exact same stance. If I would have presented this material on, lets say, a SPI page, it would have most likely resulted in blocks straight away, per WP:DUCK, WP:SOCK, or even WP:MEAT. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 03:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, makes sense. It is a new user so perhaps they're just not logging on a lot. By the way, if you're feeling isolated spreading Russian propaganda with me, take comfort that Cluebot is also Russian! Who knew? CMD (talk) 07:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: LOL. Dem Rashianz r everywhere, I see. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 7 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Wenceslaus II of Bohemia page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Najafqoli Khan Cherkes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aka. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello again!

Hello LouisAragon. Long time no talk!;). First, I would thank you for your contributions in different articles especially those ones that are relate to Iran! So, I message you to also ask your opinion about making an animated (GIF) about Achaemenid Empire based on its timeline and important events like conquers and notable wins or losses, and important battles. Something like this file that already is part of the article but with some differences. First, as I said, the file that I plan to create will be animated (probably at most 10 slides). Second I would show each event's year and the king who is ruling the territory at top of the gif file in each slide. I also want to label important cities in a map (like Persepolis, Babylon, Pasargadae and etc.) to help better detail. Totally, Here are some gif examples in the articles around Wikipedia (but the file that I plan to create won't be that much same with these (like I said I want to label the important cities also)):

Ancient Rome, Territories of Dynasties in China, History of Colombia, North America territorial evolution, Canada provinces evolution, Balkan territory changes (which is not really good in graphics, but it is still in many articles), and etc.

Also the raw file that I would to use is this.

I've recently search a lot about the sources that have an abstract and good timelines, and in my opinion these are the best ones: [73], [74], and [75]. So finally, I would like to know your view about these sources and do you think which one would be the best one. I personally prefer to create the file (GIF) base on all 3 sources but I just wanted to know your opinion. Please respond, and thank you and sorry for my English:)! Ali Zifan 03:50, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey @Ali Zifan:, long time no talk my friend! That is a great proposal! Would be a really valuable addition. I just checked the sources, and actually, unfortunately, none are WP:RS. The first source for example is made by a team of mostly freelancers and simply interested people without any degree (e.g. historian) to make them an authority on this matter. The best and only thing here is to search sources written by academics/historians about every single date/event, and then modeling the map around those sources. It will take alot of effort, though, I will say. HistoryofIran wanted to do that some time ago himself, but hes too busy atm. Anyways, I'm obviously willing to help you with it if you want. :-)

Btw while were at it right now; could you perhaps fix the western borders of these two maps made by you[76]-[77] (western-most border) to our sourced main map for an overal cross-article coherence? Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 17:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Oh, dang, before I forget; could you perhaps also fix this one (I knnow you didnt make it, but its used on a FA article, and we cant spread such misinformation); the eastern border was actually the lower (left) bank of the Indus River, while here it extends far over it, which is historical bogus. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hi. I saw your edit, and I think you're right. His behavior is 100% similar to sockmaster Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Turkspasha. I submitted two SPI cases for him before. So I recommend you to submit a new case, because he usually uses multiple accounts to evade block and SPI. --Wario-Man (talk) 07:13, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey, yeah I'm sure as well that it's him. Unfortunately I don't really have time atm, so I will most likely do it later. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 07:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Good. --Wario-Man (talk) 11:54, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@Wario-Man: anddddd there it is - LouisAragon (talk) 21:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, I wrote my comment on SPI report. Could you find better evidences by using Editor Interaction Analyzer? Because it seems he learned how to evade block. --Wario-Man (talk) 06:26, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

It's not relevant

I understand the fact that you're Armenian, but what I've deleted in the Persian wiki has nothing of relevance to the Persian people, it would be a good addition to the Armenian wiki, as it is unrelated to the Persian people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zuormak (talk • contribs) 03:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Immunoglobulin A

added a link pointing to Lumen

John Baird (Canadian politician)

added a link pointing to Welfare system

Lady Sybil Grant

added a link pointing to Estates

Roman–Persian Wars

added a link pointing to Kingdom of Armenia

Safavid conquest of Shirvan

added a link pointing to Nakhchivan

Yusuf Agha (Circassian)

added a link pointing to Liaison

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

See here

Your concerns about the so-called Battle of Tabouk, were well founded. See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:53, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Check out this edit. It appears "someone" removed references that contained quotes:

• "...which notes that many of the details surrounding Muhammad's life as given in the biographies, are "problematic in certain respects, the most important of which is that they represent a tradition of living narrative that is likely to have developed orally for a considerable period before it was given even a relatively fixed written form. Ideally, one would like to be able to check such accounts against contemporary evidence... however, there is no relevant archaeological, epigraphic, or numismatic evidence dating from the time of Muhammad, nor are there any references to him in non-Muslim sources dating from the period before 632. -- Bowersock, Glen Warren, Peter Robert Lamont Brown and Oleg Grabar Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World (1999, Harvard University Press) p. 597

• "One major challenge to examining initial contacts between Byzantium and the early Muslim umma arises from the controversy surrounding the traditional Islamic account... ...sources are not contemporaneous with the events they purport to relate and sometimes were written many centuries later. These sources contain internal complexities, anachronisms, discrepancies, and contradictions. Moreover, many of them provide evidence of embellishment and invention that were introduced to serve the purposes of political or religious apologetic." -- El-Cheikh, Nadia Maria Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs (2004, Harvard University Press) p. 5.
  

What is even more telling is the editor that removed said sources was told this exact same information on the Battle of Mu'tah talk page. I am currently searching for any reliable secondary sources concerning the "Battle" of Tabouk, feel free to join in. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: danggg. >.< So lame once again. Well, the positive side of all of it is, is that it only further reinforces our findings and give further proof that the level of incompetence is over 9,000 with this one, on virtually every possible level. Yeah, naturally, will do so for sure when I find some time. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I finally made it!:)

Hello LouisAragon. After working on it for days, I finally made an animated map of Achaemanid Empire. If it was an assignment or school homework I would give up and wouldn't do it, since it would be really hard and time consuming, but because of the passion that I have in Achaemnaid history, I finally made it with my passion :). I tried to put approximately every important event (that is related to territorial change) in this animation. I also label important cities, and the king of the time in each frame. If it is possible, please review it and if it is good enough, it probably can be added it to the page (in the History section). Thank you.

Btw: I also update these two files (1 & 2) base on the main map. Also editing this file wasn't really easy since it had topographic features, but I tried my best. I hope it looks good ;). Ali Zifan 21:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

@Ali Zifan:, hey man, danggg that looks great! Thanks alot for editing those other maps as well! Only this one needs some final fixing, as the eastern border and Central Asian borders are incorrect (per our reference map). Also, uninentionally, on the same map, it almost looks like as if there's some "gap" in the Achaemenid territory in Ukraine :D. Its like that as well here. If you look at our reference map for the northern Black Sea, its running more smooth at that area I believe. Could you fix that as well? Only obviously if you can do it; if it doesn't work out well, you can leave it I guess. :-)

@LouisAragon: The gaps in that orthographic map has been caused by the borders of grey area (Ukraine borders) in the background. I will try my best to fix both maps as soon as I can.

Btw I have another event that's perhaps worth adding to your GIF map, if you're interested; During Xerxes' invasion of Greece (aka the "2nd Persian invasion of Greece"), they overran half of mainland Greece as well, all territories to the north of the Isthmus of Corinth, basically, and held it for several months until the battles of Salamis/Plataea. (Brian Todd Carey, Joshua Allfree, John Cairns. Warfare in the Ancient World Pen and Sword, 19 jan. 2006 ISBN 1848846304; Aeschylus,; Peter Burian; Alan Shapiro (17 February 2009). The Complete Aeschylus: Volume II: Persians and Other Plays. Oxford University Press. p. 18. ISBN 978-0-19-045183-7). Perhaps that would be cool to add your map as well. Also, its also perhaps interesting to cover, regarding the city of Eion, which only fell several years after the Persian defeat in Greece, and most notably Doriscus (in modern-day Bulgaria), which, seemingly according most sources, never even fell. Looking forward to your response. :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 16:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Hello again!  Done. I added the those cities and colored the areas that overranned during Second invasion of Greece. So finally, do you think the map is good to be placed? Thank you! Ali Zifan 21:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi again. I finally fixed the Ukraine part and eastern borders of this map. I am also waiting for your answer on my question about that GIF. thanks Ali Zifan 20:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

- Ali Zifan, In my humble opinion, it looks good. Only one minor thing; at 522 BC, on your gif map, it says "(...) expanded into eastern Egypt". I think you mean eastern Libya? :-) Also, I'm not entirely sure whether its correct to keep the Black Sea territories after the Greco-Persian Wars. I think it would be better to keep the border at the Bosphorus (like here) after the complete end of the Greco-Persian Wars, with just specifically highlighting/showing Doriscus and Eion as still Persian-held cities. After Plataea, despite still keeping those cities, all other effective direct rule was lost in the Balkans we can safely assert and verify. It was only Eion that was taken later on by the Greeks (in 475 BC), and notably Doriscus which was never conquered by the Greeks from the Persians. For the rest, everything else was lost.

@LouisAragon: All  Done

- Also mate, when I meant that the eastern should be corrected, I basically meant that it should be exactly put like the eastern border as on this map. If you could adress this minor thing, then we're done I believe. :-) Great work, once again! - LouisAragon (talk) 03:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon:  Done

Dear LouisAragon

Oh, it is very relieving to have you on Wikipedia! I hope you are doing well. Please check these three links out:

First, here is my answer to you: 1

Second, you need to see the disastrous version of this language article: 2 Look at the wording: "K language is closely related to A language"???? The editor who wrote this does not even know that the native name for K is A, despite this is even stated in the first sentence of the article. There was no such distinction until the 20th century when the "Soviet" linguists "created" a writing style and grammar for these oral dialects. The administrative divison names are another reason of confusion. The editors have no idea about the self-identification of these people and thus confuse them for being two different ethnic groups. This is unbelievable. We talk about an ethnic group who are known for their language games and having different "speaking styles" for children, for men, for women, and whatnotelse. They even had a special one for hunting. A few decades later, I bet some genious people will attempt to classify even those "styles" as separate languages and "divide" a single ethnic group into 1001 pieces out of ignorance. I actually had left a message on the article's talk page before making a minor edit on that page, but there is still no answer to me by others.

Third, you also need to see this other page (which is internal to the previous one): 3 I am utterly sorry to see that an administrator made this change which is a serious mistake. Language family template for a language and all those faulty content... Please tell me your opinion about this issue.

It's again one of those moments that I feel very confident in the validity of my edit, but I am extremely surprised because of others' attitude. How am I supposed to explain that my version is not POV but simply a fact? Why do I even need to explain this very fact? Unfortunately, I do not have much free time to be active at the moment. This is why I need your opinion and help. Let me know If you suggest another way out.

Sincerely, Listofpeople (talk) 10:45, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Listofpeople:, thanks alot man, I just replied on your talk page regarding my request! :-) Looking at the matter you just brought up, I'm unfortunately afraid that he can revert is as much as he want and block your way, simply because you haven't provided any sources. If you can provide any reliable sources that back up that what you have you added, which shouldn't be that hard I think (Russian sources are fine too for now) I'm 100% sure he won't revert you back. Better said; he even can't just revert you back. I completely concur with that what you added though. I hope this can help you continue; if not, don't hesitate at all to let me know. Btw, if you think that the material that you added has already been covered in any of the sources already present on the page in question, you can obviously point that out as well, and the matter should be solved too. Bests and take care - LouisAragon (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Just an FYI

• Kasif the great (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 92.22.143.227 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  

More than likely the same person. Edits in the same area(Selecuid, Achaemenid, Ptolemaic, Drogheda United F.C.) has the same edits on Battle of Mu'tah. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:50, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

The IP that posted the personal attack on your talk page:

• 72.198.49.108 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Foleo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  

Would appear to be the same person. Both Foleo and the IP are here to label editors and article biographies[78][79] as "Anti-Arabism" and "Islamophobes". --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, yeah I figured mate; this should be presented directly to one of the (competent) mods out there for a quick block based on multiple obvious disruptive (e.g. socking, spewing baseless allegations, ignoring BRD over and over, etc.) fronts. He has been blocked multiple times earlier and has received wayyyy too many warnings as well. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:52, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

-Here you are plotting against us. You will not spew pro-Zionist crusader propaganda because I will report you for disruption. You like labeling me as a vandalizer. I will tell the moderator of your disruptive behavior and block you if you do not adhere to Wikipedia policies. You got wayy to many warnings. Foleo (talk) 01:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Wow.

• "Here you are plotting against us."

Multiple personalities there? LOL

• "You will not spew pro-Zionist crusader propaganda because I will report you for disruption."

Hmm. Well, I'm not pro-anything nor do I edit in that area. Not much crusading going on here, I am agnostic. As for disruption, you seem incapable of finding the article talk page. Do you need some help?

• "I will tell the moderator of your disruptive behavior and block you if you do not adhere to Wikipedia policies."

Knock yourself out. I am not hard to find.

• "You got wayy to many warnings."

Look in the mirror or in this case your own talk page. LOL --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Freedom Wolfs

hello.this guy looks like a pov pusher.he adds history and etymology to azerbaijan articles but he censor persian root of those names and uses vague and unclear terms.Gülşənabad and Şahbuz (shah became turkic) are just two obvious cases.he does not add etymology sections to articles,he just adds the meaning of those and censor roots.see Gülşənabad.he tries to avoid using persian and represents those names as turkic or vagues terms like iranian.or "shah" became turkic in Şahbuz. plus,his cited reference "Encyclopedic dictionary of Azerbaijan toponyms." looks unverifiable.maybe fake source or non-english unreliable book.google it and you won't find anything about that so-called dictionary.the guy is not a neutral editor because he adds misleading (history) and fringe content to azerbaijaini articles.and should be reported to noticeboards.--188.158.64.222 (talk) 10:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

188.158.64.222 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), hello, yeah, the two of us are not the only ones thankfully who have noted this. He's on a one way trip, and we'll surely guide him through that, as there's absolutely no visible intention at all by said user to better his editorial conduct and to cease being disruptive on multiple fronts. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: hello again. another attempt by him. this guy plagued / plagues many articles. funny how he censors etymology of historical/current names and try to add bogus names. see his edit on Gulustan. once again, censored persian-root and created a turkic name by citing a fake source. obviously this guy is not a neutral editor and has ethnocentrist agenda.94.176.88.1 (talk) 06:16, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Maximilien de Béthune, Duke of Sully

added a link pointing to Debauchery

Prince Jesse of Kakheti

added a link pointing to Aka

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zurab I, Duke of Aragvi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bazaleti. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Georgian rulers

I did some little draft and brainstorming secession, I will copy my work to the respective article in the coming weeks. I'm also interested in documenting the Safavid governors of Kakheti (17th century). Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Alexis Ivanov, thanks much. Yeah, I'm interested in that period as well. I believe I linked you a book by Prof. Willem Floor some time ago. I don't have access to see the part about Kakheti (I believe all governors of it would be listed there), but nevertheless, its a pretty great book. There are a few other titles by Floor, e.g.[80][81] as well as other authors (I think Matthee had one as well, not sure) that could probably fulfill all our demands regarding all officeholders of the Safavid state (thus incl. Kakheti). If we had access to those sources as well, that would be great. PS: I checked your draft; looks great. Only one thing; its Tahmuras (for Teimuraz), not Tahmurath. :-) Teimuraz is the Georgian translation of the Shahnameh figure Tahmuras. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 03:40, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

LouisAragon I think you are right, Iranica uses the Th at the end, I checked the Persian Wikipedia, and they also use the th at the end, the funny part is Persians don't use th, they spell it out but they pronounce it as S. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 03:53, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

I have also been working in pre-safavid, safavids, if that even makes sense. I wanted to create a small biography and an excellent infobox. That research is still ongoing. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 04:00, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Just checked it, looks pretty neat Alexis! :-) Good job. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, :) Hey can you check my Ismail I's page edit, I wanted to showcase his appearance, his descent and people's expectation. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 08:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Alexis Ivanov, good addition. I just moved it down, as we already had a "physical appearance" section. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:57, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

E-mail

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Kansas Bear (talk) 04:59, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:LouisAragon reported by User:HyeSK (Result: ). Thank you. Class455fan1 (talk) 00:12, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Firstly, I'm only notifying you because the filer failed to do so (don't worry, I'm not reporting you!), and secondly, I reported the filer a few hours before he filed a complaint against you. I definitely think it's a boomerang. Thanks.Class455fan1 (talk) 00:12, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

User:HyeSK

You might be interested in this. --Երևանցի ^talk 09:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@Yerevantsi:, thanks. I think everything that was needed to be said has been done both on your talk page, as well as on the edit-warring noticeboard. I'll keep an eye on the matter. Oh, just checked, seems my concerns were justified; he's on a one way trip after all. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:30, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:63 in international relations has been nominated for discussion

Category:63 in international relations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:32, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

The user just reverts!...

Hello LouisArgon. Just wanted to point out that there is a user who keeps reverting this image. I apply the changes based on this long time ago (as you requested), but now the user just reverts it. Ali 17:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Ali Zifan, saw it and reverted it. I made a talk page section as well. Feel free to comment there. If he reverts it just blatantly again without presenting any sources and continues to make personal attacks (like he did before), he should be reported to the admins on Wikimedia. PS: the map contains another fallacy regarding the presence of ethnic Arabs in the deep southern part of Iran adjacent to the Persian Gulf. That should be fixed as well. Their presence doesn't extend that much to the north, which is verifiable as well through the many sources available. Do you have any sources for this ready yourself or do I need to send you some? Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello again and thank you for the answer. The source I got from you was this file. The funny thing about it is that the same user (Beshogur) has edited and change that file too (south west part). Please see the File History section. Ali 23:41, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Just a heads up

My evidence concerning Foleo's violations of his block(editing while logged out) and his blatant personal attacks was flatly ignored and told to take it to ANI or file an SPI(which is a joke since they will not connect IPs with editors).[82]

So I thought I should let you know, since Foleo's personal attacks and edit warring will more than likely restart once his block expires. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Promotion of fringe pan-Arab nationalism

The article Khaz'al Khan al-Kaabi (which is the correct and most common transliteration of the name) has been one of many targets of pan-Arabist editors promoting fringe views on the Khuzestan issue and history of the region, in particular User:WikiArabianGulf and most recently User:GorgeCustersSabre. The sources available do not support the claims or regional names being pushed by these editors. For example, "Al-Ahwaz" was not the name of the "emirate", "Mohammerah" was, and it was not an independent state but a principality within Qajar Persia, and so on. These are all facts not under dispute except by those promoting fringe naming conventions like "Al-Ahwaz" and "Arabian Gulf". I expect that the above mentioned editors will continue to push their pan-Arabist and Salafist propaganda. It is a bit rich for "GorgeCustersSabre" to demand talk page discussion when he does not bother doing so (talk page doesn't look to have been active for a long time) and Wikipedia policy mandates removing or correcting false data, and Wikipedia is not a platform for their pseudohistoricy and fringe claims. Khorshid (talk) 08:19, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the article

The article Samson Makintsev is great . Thank you for it !--Alborz Fallah (talk) 12:13, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Alborz Fallah:, thank you! You're welcome! - LouisAragon (talk) 15:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

abkhazia - south ossetia - nagorna karabagh

hello im sorry my english very very bad abkhazia - south ossetia - nagorna karabagh part of umayyad caliphate-roman empire-ottoman empire-seljuk empire-russian empire-timurid empire

abkhazia - south ossetia - nagorna karabagh part achamenid empire-sasanian empire but abkhazia - south ossetia - nagorna karabagh not part of umayyad caliphate-roman empire-ottoman empire-seljuk empire-russian empire-timurid empire??? this is wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mert soysaç (talk • contribs) 10:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Just another sockpuppet of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Blahhhas. LouisAragaon, please check [83], [84], [85]. Add those targeted articles to your watchlist. --Wario-Man (talk) 10:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ludvig Fabritius, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Holy League and Kurland. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

The map

Hello LouisAragon. I think this map should be reverted to your revision, but unfortunately I can't do that, because Wikimedia Commons is unavailable from Iran and although I can use an open proxy to view pages in commons, I still can't edit the pages. Please revert that map to your revision. Thanks! -- Kouhi (talk) 15:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I just noticed I can revert the edit even when I'm behind an open proxy, which is weird because I always get "The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider" when trying to edit a page via an open proxy in Wikipedia. Thanks anyway! -- Kouhi (talk) 15:13, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kouhi:, hey, well, all good that it's solved. He should be reported next time as he's still absolutely not willing to cease his edit-warring/SPA practices. Please let me know. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 19:10, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Mu'tah

The IP you reverted is user:"Kasif the great" logged out. Typical of his disruptive editing practices. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, Meh.. I see. Btw, check this nonsense; [86][87]. To no surprise (it's pretty structural), his block log reaches well into the double digits. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Consuls

Regarding your edit summary[88] a consul such as Pompey or Lucullus was a head of government not a head of state.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:49, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

A minor fallacy in my edit summary. Thanks for pointing that out. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Dari language

Hi. [89] and [90]. And what about this source (used by him)? Even if that source is reliable, why he removes current sourced info in the lead section and adds a strange translation (شرق فارسی)?! Obviously, those changes look like pov-pushing and personal commentary. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Talk:Abkhazia.The discussion is about the topic Talk:Abkhazia. Thank you.Lurking shadow (talk) 15:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Erivan Khanate

The following line in the article is not in the book it is supposedly cited from: After the incorporation of the Erivan khanate into the Russian Empire, the Muslim majority of the area gradually turned into a minority, as the Russian government encouraged Armenian immigration into the area.

Here is the book and you can preview page 339 and it states nothing about immigration of Armenians. https://books.google.com/books?id=fY01Tc2SZVEC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

What do you think, should we remove that line?

Ninetoyadome (talk) 20:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ninetoyadome:, hey, I think that's because the volume meant here, is nr. 7 of the Cambridge History of Iran series, namely "From Nader Shah to the Islamic Republic",[91], and not 6. Whoever put that reference, I guess he/she have meant this one. Unfortunately, Google books doesn't let me view the page in question, but I'm sure someone with access to the Cambridge/JSTOR database could help us out here. This all is, of course, the WP:GF scenario. If the same page of volume 7 doesn't back up the story as well, it can be outrightly deleted imho. Or, you can just delete it straightly, as de facto, the added reference simply doesn't back the story up. Clear as that. Whichever approach you think is more appropriate here, Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 00:34, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I found the pdf of Volume 7 http://library.ut.ac.ir/documents/381543/3584938/Volume%207_%20From%20Nadir%20Shah%20to%20the%20Islamic%20Republic-Cambridge%20University%20Press%20(1991).pdf. Is this the same as the paragraph that is currently posted?

Griboedov not only extended protection to those Caucasian captives who sought to go home but actively promoted the return of even those who did not volunteer. Large numbers of Georgian and Armenian captives had lived in Iran since 1804 or as far back as 1795. Many had embraced Islam and married Persians. A few had risen to high positions at court and in the government. Persuading them to leave necessitated the invasion of Muslim households and the violation of the Persian notion of the sacredness of the home.

Ninetoyadome (talk) 05:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Ninetoyadome, yep, seems your concerns were well grounded. Can't find anything myself as well about that material in this volume either. Feel totally free to remove it and to adjust the section according the sources. I'm planning on making a proper expansion in the near future btw, as the article is still in a dire state, which is unfortunately meriting for POV-pushing and socking every now and then. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I just removed it saying the sentence was not mentioned in the source provided. Also another question about that article. I have my doubts about the flag as well. Only mention i have found about the flag is from a handful of Azerbaijani new sites. I questioned the legitimacy of the flag in the talk page but have yet to hear a rebuttal. Its been two months now. Can I remove it or should i still wait to see if someone will answer my question? Ninetoyadome (talk) 19:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, its the same thing regarding all other khanates (Karabakh Khanate, Nakhchivan Khanate) etc). All of them now have flags of unclear origin. I did find this PDF file (pp. 5-10), issued by the "Administrative Department of the Republic of Azerbaijan" that mentions and shows all the flags, but I'm 99%, just by looking briefly at it, that the entire PDF file is non-WP:RS. Imho, all of the flags should be deleted. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:37, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I went and deleted the flag from the Erivan Khanate article as no one responded to my question in the talk page regarding the authenticity. Maybe the other flags should be deleted as well. It seems to be POV pushing by the Azeri users with help from the Azeri govt. Ninetoyadome (talk) 00:26, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Khanate of Khiva

I noticed these "sources",

• http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BCdEMgFhAzg/URYO6A8B1HI/AAAAAAAADLw/-HAzla6bBMk/s1600/muslim-world-1900.jpg
  

Some random website being used for figures, I highly doubt the veracity of this site.
And,

• John Ayde, Indian Frontier Policy
  

it does not appear to be written by an historian. That along with no page number, made it rather suspicious looking.
Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

This article appears to be written using outdated and unreliable sources. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:;

- The source is definetely non-WP:RS.

- Regarding the Wiki article; its not his first time to deliver such "work", to say the least. Its anno 2016; such extremely low quality for any new article should be considered outright unacceptable, imho. Regarding the "meaning" of the article itself, I made a quick search myself as well, and there was in fact a campaign in 1873 in/against Khiva (e.g. Timothy C. Dowling, 2014.[92]) so thats at least something, lol. What should be done in your opinion with the whole matter? - LouisAragon (talk) 00:00, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

I would suggest the removal of all unreliable sources, add reliable sources where they support what is written, change/remove what is not supported by unreliable sources. Said editor is not what you would call a constructive editor, as opposed to someone that takes outdated journalist-written tripe from the 19th century and tries to pass it off as historical fact(see Russo-Turkish War 1787-92). --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:50, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Email

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Kansas Bear (talk) 04:06, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Hossein Khan Sardar problem

B, can you please take part in this discussion?
Thank you.
Rye-96 (talk) 09:53, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Trajan

I'd like your opinion regarding the degree of specificity needed for reign dates in the lead in Trajan. See User talk:Corinne#Trajan. As a copy-editor, I like consistency, but I have no wish to quarrel with anyone.  – Corinne (talk) 19:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done - LouisAragon (talk) 23:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alabanda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Xerxes. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Turkey)

Hi. I was wondering if you'd be interested in setting up Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Turkey), based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). Now it's not a contest in itself, it's designed to motivate people to inspire others to improve content and build something which demonstrates the hard work going into the country which is visible. The focus is more on quality improvements but new articles are welcome too. Eventually a Turkish National Contest could be created to fuel it, like Wikipedia:Awaken the Dragon, in which contestants can choose to keep the Amazon vouchers themselves to buy their own books for more articles or put them into book fund to help editors further improve Turkish-related topics by giving them the books they want. It will begin though as purely an improvement drive. If interested, or you think anybody else might be interested, alert them and sign up on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Turkey talk page at the bottom. Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

happy peace day

Hi dear, it's International Day of Peace and i wanted to say happy peace day to you, so you may be interested in this association to join it , as you wish . happy editing. The Stray Dog Talk Page 18:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

FYI about ANI

Just an FYI that Mara kara took you to WP:ANI. Posting here so you could respond. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I see you saw it roughly the same time I posted this and we cross-posted! TonyBallioni (talk) 00:49, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I've blocked 3 editors as socks. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KurdoKardir. Doug Weller talk 15:38, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Doug Weller, yeah, it was so obvious. Thanks for cleaning up the alley once again. ;-) - LouisAragon (talk) 00:58, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates

Unfortunately, it's not generally possible to make an image larger; a new one has to be taken, or a larger copy found. One thing I find can help is google image search, either with appropriate key words, e.g. Sampsonia van Dyck (unfortunately, no luck) or by putting a link to the image, e.g. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Lady_Shirley_by_Anthony_van_Dyck%2C_c._1622.jpg into the box, and searching by image - this can sometimes find a higher resolution copy.

When doing a search, if you click on "Search tools", one of them lets you set a minimum size. This can help.

Unfortunately, in this case, I've tried all this. No luck.

If you want, I can help you find images for subjects that interest you in a pinch. But, unfortunately, it's down to what's out there. The Sampsonia picture is publicly viewable, but in a somewhat obscure National Trust property. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden:, - thanks much for the effort. So...basically you think that it would never be possible for the painting/image to pass a FA nomination, at least based on your findings so far? - LouisAragon (talk) 01:00, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

For this copy of the image, yes. The painting would easily pass if rephotographed sufficiently well. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden:, I see. I'm sorry, but admittedly, I'm quite a "noob" regarding Wikipedia/Wikimedia image "matters", but do you perhaps have an idea how/where to get a better image of it? I think you already kinda answered that, but, just to be entirely sure, you basically mean that someone needs to upload an entirely new version of the image on the internet right?

- Oh, yeah it would be really great if you could aid/assist me with that! I have this image and this picture of a gravestone (p. 99) related to the same person (Teresia Sampsonia) that need to be uploaded, and can be uploaded, license/tag wise, but not I'm not entirely such how. For example the 2nd pic is located in a PDF file.

- Other than that, some more images related to the Russo-Persian Wars would be really neat to have (battles, individuals of the wars, etc.) or ambassadors/individuals of the Safavid dynasty (e.g. governors, officials, diplomats -- we severely lack such images on Wikipedia/Wikimedia IMHO).

- LouisAragon (talk) 01:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Kurakchay Treaty attachment

Better re-check your comment about the attachment, and maybe delete the comment if you are not absolutely sure. I have not read the whole thing, and might not be able to, but it looks like an 1805 proposed treaty to me. Bottom right is a cover letter from Tsitsianov to Chartorisky. Maybe we are looking at two different things (?).Benjamin Trovato (talk) 07:19, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Request about the User:MehrdadFR

Hello.

The User:MehrdadFR (talk) reverted your neutral edition in the article Hijab by country, because he is constantly reverting neutral and third party information and sources about the hijab in Iran, and is almost exclusively using POV (that is pro-government) language about the hijab in Iran (that may contradict academic sources which have no internet links) and is relying on sources based in Iran that naturally favor the Iranian policy on the hijab (and not on all third party and academic sources), as you can see in the Iran section of that article as well as in the Women in Iran article. He uses weasel words (that are commonly used by Iranian government sources) such as "the official reveiling in 1984" in both articles about the mandatory hijab for women. I reverted his reverts and clarified the sentences. Could you check this user and warn him about his use of POV and almost the expropriation of this subject? As I can see from this user's talk page, he also has a history of edit warring with other users in various articles, and has received warnings.

Thank you.

SednaXV (talk) 09:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@SednaXV:, hello, thanks for your message. Excuse me for my belated response. Which one of my edits do you mean precisely? I'm not really involved at all in these matters on Wiki, and I'd like to keep it that way, but I checked the issue and I believe that your concerns are well grounded. Please let me know when this will be brought to ANI (or anything alike, e.g. admin). Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 01:34, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello.

The user User:MehrdadFR insists on reverting in the Hijab by country article (as well as in the Women in Iran article), by removing neutral academic and third party information and sources about the hijab in Iran, and using only sources that are based in Iran and that favor the Iranian policy on the hijab, as well as using the language of the Iranian government on this issue. He has added the same POV in the Iranian Revolution section of the Chador article, using the same cryptic pro-government language and is using only one source, based in Iran with no internet links; with no additional neutral and third party sources. The user has no tolerance for other neutral and third party sources about this issue, and will erase them. Regards - SednaXV (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

NW Sasanian Persia - Caucasian Albania - Balasagan

I was never involved in those articles, but now I'm interested and I will look into it later. Thanks for the feedback. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 18:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Olivia Winfield

Sorry to have taken so long to respond ... I've had some other issues to attend to, mostly offline.

My issue with that user was not the socking or lack thereof ... it was the poor behavior and incivility afterwards, when requesting unblock and deciding to insult me and several other admins (who chose not to respond, bless them) in the process. That, IMO, shows they are temperamentally unsuited to editing. If it hadn't come up then, it would have come up in interactions with another user. The original reason for the block may have turned out invalid, but behavior when seeking unblock even when unjustly blocked can justify not lifting or reinstating the original block, as it did in this case. Daniel Case (talk) 06:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

@Daniel Case:, I see. That pretty much justifies it indeed. Thanks much for your response, appreciate it. And excuse me for my belated response back. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, LouisAragon. You have new messages at Wikipedia:OUP.
Message added 16:04, 4 October 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello I've left a message regarding your request for access to Oxford University Press via the The Wikipedia Library --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 16:04, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Louis Aragon! You still haven't responded to my request for more information at WP:OUP Could you please respond so I can continue processing your request for access to those database(s)? Thanks! --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 16:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is The Wikipedia Library - Oxford University Press.
Message added 03:16, 7 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Please see the e-mail for instructions on the next step in creating your account for Oxford University Press! --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 03:16, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@Cameron11598:, thanks, just done! - LouisAragon (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response just waiting for a few others then I'll be able to submit a batch of accounts for creation --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 03:14, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is The Wikipedia Library - Oxford University Press Scholarships Stream.
Message added 06:25, 11 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Access has been added to Scholarships, however Journals will take another 2-4 weeks. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 06:25, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Cameron11598:, thanks much for the done effort so far! Appreciate it! Aight, I will see your next message coming around that time then. :-) Bests and take care - LouisAragon (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Ugent: User:MehrdadFR

Urgent.

Hello Louis Aragon.

The User:MehrdadFR seems to have a political agenda because he is putting information that is supporting the Islamic Republic of Iran POV, and is deleting other NPOV information and references from academic sources about contemporary (and controversial) subjects about Iran such as the hijab, chador, womens' rights etc. The problem is that this user has hijacked these issues, when the articles, content and references should be NPOV and sober.

Could you do something about this user?

Thank you.

Artoxx (talk) 15:20, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism

Removing a language on the basis of a small number of speakers from an appropriate template is vandalism and will not be tolerated. What kind of a reasoning is this? Was that template created in accordance to iranian government implemented laws or what is noted on Wikipedia? Please refrain from removing based on flawed "reasoning". It is indigenous to Iran as such it will go in the appropriate template. If it was spoken in another country, it would go in another template. If you wish for endangered languages to be removed from templates, you might want to propose a new policy rather than making up your own. I really think this is a bizarre "argument" to begin with.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 07:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Firstly, you blatantly ignored WP:BRD. Second, this language, spoken in literally two villages in an 80 million large nation, has absolutely no recorded significance. Not historically, not nowadays. It has recently been "discovered", and not much is known about it, which the author explicitly mentions as well. A quick search in Google Scholars confirms this, as there's literally only one source that mentions it; the very same source upon which you based your entire article on. Google Books doesn't even give a single hit, and there's no mention on Glottolog or Ethnologue about it either. These reasons already completely back up the rationale that it simply should not be added. Its pure undue weight, which you're trying to give significance just because you think it should be. Furthermore, in my opinion, your further ungrounded stance about this is well illustrated in your rather weird analogy with the usage of "Hebrew" -- a language spoken by a minority who have major historical significance in Iran for more than 2,000 years, have parliamentary representation ever since the first parliament was founded in 1906, and are recognized as an officially protected minority in the constitution as well (nowadays Article 13). This clear agenda-loaded stance is also illustrated here as well. Lastly, given your referral to "WP:VANDALISM", just because someone pointed you out on your obvious tendentious editing, it only shows you unfortunately have absolutely no clue about WP's either. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I failed to see how that justifies removing mention of a language spoken in Iran from a template created to mention such. By your "logic", the Kalash language should be removed from the template languages of Pakistan because only a small semi-isolated community of no more than three thousand speak it.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

New account

Off to bed, busy tomorrow. Try the talk page of wiki project archaeology. Doug Weller talk 20:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Sirkap

Hello LouisAragon. You have a point that 100 hundred years is a lot for an archaeologist, however I do not see why something that was excavated 100 years ago should not be accepted as valuable information. That would eliminate a lot of the content of our museums worldwide! You are removing many photographs which are highly legitimate and valuable, and are also, quite appreciably, Public Domain. I would appreciate if you could reinstate the work that has been done (your deletions here), and I promise and will be careful not to incorporate dated historic interpretations (for example I kind of agree with you previous removal of the Aramaic text from Taxila from the Achaeminid page, but it seems legitimate on the Sirkap page since it was excavated there). Goldsmelter (talk) 20:54, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

reply

I need your reply on my talk page--Baltistani (talk) 13:57, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Ashura

Hello, LouisAragon -- I have just begun copy-editing Ashura (in response to a request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests). I have gotten to the section Ashura#Etymology, second paragraph. I don't understand the use of "J" at the beginning of the surname after the pipe. If it's Gilani, with a hard "g", in Persian, it would not become the "j" (or "soft g") sound, would it? (Please don't edit the article directly just yet; I'm in the middle of copy-editing.)  – Corinne (talk) 23:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC) I finished the copy-edit.  – Corinne (talk) 14:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Persian people

Is there a particular master you were thinking was socking as 570ad? The fact that it has not edited for a long period does suggest the possibility of a sleeper account, but you would still have ot tie it to another account since there are valid reasons for that kind of edit pattern. The incompetence of that 3RR accusation against you does not suggest a very experienced user. And yes, I agree the IP was probably the same user, but there's not much to be done with a one-of like that. Meters (talk) 01:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Replied to your email on my talk, but since I'm here I'll just copy it: Thanks. I'll keep my eye on that group of users and for the SPI. Meters (talk) 02:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Reported

Here. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:15, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Krtsanisi

Hey Louis Aragon,

yes there are 4 refs on that particular part, but only one of them applies the term "reconquest". Applying that seems a little POV implying an actual historical justification for an Iranian invasion, even if the author didn't intend to do this in the first place - it could be easily misunderstood < it is a justification from Persian ambitious POV of that time since those lands were briefly or temporary under their influence/grip or vassalage in previous centuries, however historicaly there is none thus why I don't think it to be apropriate to use that term generaly, maybe more specificaly in the background section elaborating the Persian POV on why they seeked to restore their domination over the region.

Best regards TheMightyGeneral (talk) 08:56, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

@TheMightyGeneral:, I agree with your rationale. Thanks alot for the response. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee/Ban Appeals Subcommittee

Hi, sorry if this triggers old memories, but is the discussion that gave this result on record anywhere [93] - if not, do they give reasons along with their decision? And how long did the appeal take? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

historian or not?

hello.check this pleas https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tomb_of_Cyrus&diff=747118190&oldid=744112441 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.222.31.49 (talk) 22:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 09:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, LouisAragon. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Oxford University Press - Journals Stream.
Message added 06:52, 9 November 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 06:52, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Indian English template?!

Hi LouisAragon. I saw you've reverted this edit [94], I have encountered same problem yesterday, Parthian Empire [95]. That users adds those templates to many irrelevant articles. I don't know if it's mistake or he really wants to add them. He registered on April 2015 and he has 24,500+ edits. I guess he's careless or maybe he thinks he can add those templates to any article which mentioned India. --Wario-Man (talk) 14:17, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Wario-Man:, hey, yeah it doesn't make any remote sense to put it polite. Yep, its not my first time either that I'm stumbling across such edits made by said user. Therefore, I'm inclined to believe that your last sentence and especially the latter part of it pretty much sums up the reason why the user in question is doing this. Its disruptive, and thus a warning should definetely be given if it happens again. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:39, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Also, btw, I'm not really sure what to think of these edits. It seems that the user in question didn't make any talk page section to discuss/mention these concerns, and I'm not really convinced by his edit summaries alone for some of those page name moves. HistoryofIran would probably be able to give an useful judgement about it, but he hasn't been active for some weeks now. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:39, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

They looks like ethnocentrist POVs. Better to contact Kansas Bear. And you can revert them, because there were no consensus for those moves and new names. --Wario-Man (talk) 14:51, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like it's just his/her own personal analysis [96], [97]. --Wario-Man (talk) 14:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I've restored original/sourced names of those moved articles. It was really frustrating due to some mistakes by me and caused some troubles for me. So please add all of them to your watchlist and keep watching. Regards. --Wario-Man (talk) 06:22, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Wario-Man:, hey, excuse me for the belated response. Thanks alot for the prompt justified action. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 18:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Would you please write your comment here? Talk:Persian_Empire#Issues I need a third opinion. Thanks. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Wario-Man:, seems I'm late -- again. Sorry. I just had a look at the talk page. Its kind of difficult, in my opinion, to reach a consensus adequately when you have one sole editor presenting a stance and is just way too keen to get rid of all the content as fast as possible, while the rest is showing a rather neutral and constructive stance at solving the issue. Edit warring and repeating the exact same words over and over on the talk page don't really help either (thumbs up for dealing appropriately with that). I agree with Doug Weller's argument to rely solely on the reliable sources (obviously), and perhaps your own proposal for renaming the article could do the trick as well, but I don't think that it should be needed. Everyone can go by a single mere click to all the articles in question, and see that the majority of them arent Persian in ethnic origin. So I don't really get the "everyone gets confused" and "just look at this YouTube vid for proof" stance, to be honest. The Safavid and Afsharid Empire both weren't ethnically Persian in origin, as you know, yet literally a huge number of reliable sources refer to both of them as Persian Empires. For example. Having said that, however, I'm pretty sure that some definetely erroneous editing had resulted in the inclusion of, for example, the Seleucid Empire into the article. Based in Persia and/or on the previous Achaemenid realm -- sure, but not referred to as a "Persian Empire" as far as I can see. At least not in isolated cases (referring here to the source Doug showed). - LouisAragon (talk) 02:30, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I won't edit that article anymore, because the consensus was pointless. That editor waited for the end of protection and then restored his favorite revision again.[98], battleground behavior and forum-like comments (I'm sure that he will continue his quest in the future because I've seen many editors like him). Plus, it seems the quality of Iranian-related articles is not important for the most of Iranian editors and they're not interested in those articles, then why I should involve myself? Regards. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Yup. Unfortunately mate, I have to concur with you about every single word. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Iran Similar WikiProjects

Hello, I was wondering under what basis you denoted the additions I've made as POV? Also, I'd like to discuss your removals one by one:

• India: Iran and India have had historical ties for millenia, although when relating to more modern-day history I can understand why it would be removed. So, I'm not too bothered by this one to be honest.
• Oman: Same as above, but with even less ties.
• Pakistan: Iran and Pakistan literally share a border (in addition to obvious historical ties), so there's no excuse for it to not be listed underneath there.
• Tajikistan: Significant shared history, culture, language, etc. Completely confused as to why this would be removed.
• Uzbekistan: Significant part of Greater Khorasan, shared history, etc. Again, I see little reason as to why this would be removed.
• Central Asia: A significant portion of Iran falls within cultural and geographic definitions of Central Asia.

Kindly explain why you've removed these, especially the last 4 listed above. Thank you. Yilangren (talk) 19:01, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Yilangren: He's right on the removals. These countries have no border with Iran and haven't been under Iranian rule since the Middle Ages.
And this is an obvious violation of the WP:NPOV policy, removing one and replacing it with those you believe that are more on point.
—Rye-96 (talk) 00:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Rye-96: I won't repeat what I mentioned about Pakistan and Central Asia since those points are far too obvious to even warrant debate. Regarding Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the countries and the people/cultures within them have been connected to and/or part of "Greater Iran" for most of Iran's history. Just because more recently they have not been, does not mean they are irrelevant. For example, Bahrain isn't included in there even though Iran had control of Bahrain quite recently, but the historical and cultural connection is weak compared to other states. So it should not be about how recently they were part of Iran, but rather how related they are in terms of overall history (as a whole, not just recent) and their people/cultures. Furthermore, you state that these countries have not been part of Iran since the Middle ages (which, btw, refers to the 5th to 15th centuries), yet much of Uzbekistan was part of the Afsharid Empire up to the late the 1700s. Finally, I have not removed the addition of Turkey once my change was reverted, so I'm not sure why that's relevant to the discussion and what that has to do with my *additions* being POV. Yilangren (talk) 00:30, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Yilangren: Iran's relation with Central Asia is complex, and ancient. The Khanates which comprised most of the modern-day Uzbekistan were only under the Afsharid domain for a quite few years (since 1737/1740 until Nader Shah's death in 1747).
It is not rational to simply list all of the modern-day nations which do not even share a border with Iran. The Central Asia project itself would be more than enough; though I won't object to that if you add it.
If you don't realize the relevance, then you might need to refer to the policy guides.
—Rye-96 (talk) 21:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Rye-96: Ah, understood about the Uzbekistan/Central Asia point and that you're right, Central Asia should more than suffice. Fair enough. Although, I'm still wondering about including Tajikistan separately from Central Asia, since that country in particular does share a common Iranian language and heritage. Personally, to summarise, I think the WikiProjects of Central Asia and Pakistan should be included at minimum, and I think Tajikistan should also be added but if there is a solid argument against that I'd be more than happy to listen.
Regarding policy, from other WikiProjects I've looked at such as India, China, and Turkey, none of them actually have any "Related/Similar Projects" section (from what I can tell), so maybe its not even a necessary section. Actually, is there any official policy regarding this? Yilangren (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi all,

I'd like to list you (and others) here because of your many good Iran-related edits (IF you and others do not mind). Thanks. 47.17.27.232 (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@47.17.27.232: Thank you for the nomination, I really appreciate it! (I'm assuming you're referring to Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran/Expert Wikipedians in Iran-related issues?) To be honest, I really wouldn't be very useful apart from maybe questions regarding Iranian Turkmen, Bojnord, Ethnic minorities in Iran, and North Khorasan Province (and maybe Ethnicities in Iran as an overview I guess? As opposed to in-depth detail on each minority?). Sorry if that's too little, I just don't want to seem like an "expert" in areas where others might be of more help. Thanks again! Yilangren (talk) 18:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: What about you? Any interest to be listed as an "Iran expert"? If so, in which field? (e.g. history). 47.17.27.232 (talk) 20:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Rye-96:, @Yilangren:, lets just delete all of them. Seems to be no such policy that opts for such inclusion. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@47.17.27.232:, I appreciate the offer, but no thanks. :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Alright; agreed.
—Rye-96 (talk) 23:38, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Makes sense, agreed.Yilangren (talk) 00:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Sasanian Empire Map. My statement.

Hello LouisArgon, it's been a long time since I have been on Wikipedia.

I thought I'd let you and others who reached a consensus back in July of what's been going on.

I recall the time you took my inaccurate map down you said Per HistoryofIran's talk page; this current version of the new map contains way too many fallacies. Reverted back until Keeby finishes his 2.0 version.

So today I returned to Wikipedia to see that the map in the infobox that I created was nominated for deletion on Wikimedia commons for not providing a source in the description of it like how I did on Wikipedia. Which of course all know that the map is not accurate. But I do believe that providing sources stalled the deletion discussion.

But its because of all of these dilemma's that I've felt no choice but to turn this over to the Graphists of the Map Workshop. I have given them all of the knowledge you and HistoryofIran gave to me. As I told HistoryofIran on his talk page, I encourage you to comment on there as well and give your two cents on the matter. Perhaps provide them with information that you haven't given to me before about the Sasanian Empire at it's greatest extent.

Here's the link to the map workshop request: Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Map_workshop#Sasanian_Empire_Map

I'll put a similar note on the talkpage of the Sasanian Empire too.

Regards, Kirby (talk) 02:12, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, LouisAragon. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Admin?

Hi Louis Aragon, I hope you will consider taking up this invitation? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey Kautilya3! Thanks for letting me know your positive opinion. Genuinely appreciate it. I just had a look at the link, yeah, it surely is interesting. I'll perhaps list myself there. However, I'm really busy and I know that occupying such a "post" is pretty time consuming, so most likely that'll only be somewhere in the future. Sorry for the late response, btw, again. Take care - LouisAragon (talk) 18:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Your old Armenian nationalist IP friend returns

Hello, I don't think we've met before, but do you remember this dude? I think he's baaaaack. I reverted a lot of his more recent edits. Graham87 06:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Graham87, hey! Yeah, I do remember him. Seems though you already took care of it accordingly, as far as I can see. If there's anything else I can help you with (related to this, or other stuff), please don't hesitate to let me know. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Iranian people

Hey. I added Azeri Turkish and Arabic because Azeri people and Persian arabs are the people that their languages are not classified as Iranian languages but they have Iranian identity. Then we can say they are Iranian people but their languages are not Iranian. Ok? --– Hossein Iran « talk » 16:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@Hosseiniran: Azeris and Arabs are part of the Turkic and Semitic ethno-linguistic groups, respectively, according to the reliable sources. "Identity" has nothing to do with this. Hence, they do not belong in any remote way in the infobox. You're mistaking Iranian with Iranian. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Azeri are Turkish language speakers but they have Iranian identity even though their nationality is Iranian, Azerbaijani or Russian. I mean is their ethnic identity. And Arabs, there are some Arabs in Iran. I didn't say all of them are Persian Arabs. Persian Arabs are ethnic Iranian people who their language is Arabic (linguestly Assimilated to Arabs). Like some people in Bahrain which their language and nationality is not Iranian but they have Iranian roots.--– Hossein Iran « talk » 08:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Messy article

Hello. please take a look at List of Turkic dynasties and countries? it became a mess, because some users and ips added their povs to it. for example, it includes Safavids, but there is nothing about their mixed background. it also has many non-turkic dynasties, plus they labeled non-turkic regions as turkic just because there are some turkic minorities in those regions. i feel some users owned this article.153.211.200.91 (talk) 09:44, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Check this

Hi. How are you? A new users edited these articles[99], [100] and [101] and then wrote this on my talk page[102]. His/Her pov-pushing is obvious on Persian people, but I'm not sure about Qajar art. What do you think? --Wario-Man (talk) 18:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

@Wario-Man:, hey, I'm great, thanks mate. What about you? :-) I took a look at the edits; meh, as far as I can see, its just another one "of those", only here to change a few words which they believe are incorrect. If they have actual grounded concerns, they'll have to provide logical arguments backed up by WP:RS sources on the talk page of the article in question. And generally, those few with actual grounded concerns do that. The only thing I'm literally seeing atm however, is the "typical" SPA stuff, e.g. changing/removing specific words. I see that you've already adressed this on his talk page. Thanks, that was the right thing to do. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:51, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:33, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

@Bzuk:, thanks alot! You too! - LouisAragon (talk) 22:54, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Ummm.. yeah..

Hey mate, I know that I am a lazy and inactive bugger that almost never respond and don't keep my promises. But could you lend your opinion to this discussion? [103] Would be awesome. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Any comments?

Bro, would you leave your comment on this issue? Any agreements or disagreements?
—Rye-96 (talk) 13:55, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, LouisAragon!

Happy New Year!

LouisAragon,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Wario-Man (talk) 18:51, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

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

@Wario-Man:, thanks mate. To you as well! Hope you had a good one. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Happy new year! And thank you for your interests in Iranian history. – Hossein Iran « talk » 21:59, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Apologies - File:IndoScythianKingdom.svg

Hey Louis, for some reason, I missed your request on my userpage. Is this still current? If so, I am willing to work on your request. Or has someone else already done what you wanted? Best, --Lommes (talk) 14:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Dear LouisAragon

I actually changed the greater ethno-linguistic group to the language branch in the first sentence because the wording (Iranian) in older version was too confusing that one had to immediately change it to either "Iranic" or "Iranic-speaking". At that moment I went with the latter perhaps to emphasize how outlying they are in most aspects compared to other modern-day Iranic peoples, or vice versa. I also wrote "Northern Iranic-speaking" to be more specific because the term "Northeastern" would be misleading, too. You know what I mean. Besides, I have not had the opportunity to review the articles of other ethnic groups who speaks a language that was classified as belonging to the same greater language branch/family (Iranic) as them, so I do not know whether the misleading suffix -ian was used instead of -ic in those articles as well. Still, the -ian suffix might be understandable for some Iranic-speaking ethnic groups, but of course not (not in this century, at least) for that particular article as you probably would agree. I was actually surprised that no one noticed this until now. By the way, I am pleased to see that the article is not too long because unless expanded very carefully, a long Wikipedia article of a nation or ethnic group can often be quite problematic. This is the case in some ethnic group articles that I'm interested in. Regarding the removal of the category of Iranian people(s) in the region, I thought it should not be there unless the category itself is renamed to Iranic. However, when I removed that category, I added a new category about their language family so that there would be at least one category that mentions the word "Iranic". Once we discuss it here, I think you might consider removing or replacing the category again. As to the first sentence, your wording is definitely an alternative as opposed to the version prior to our recent edits, but my personal opinion is that a more specific one (e.g. Iranic-speaking, Northern Iranic, or even Alanic I daresay) would be relatively better than Iranic in this very peculiar case.

I would like to hear your thoughts about all these issues because your opinions matter to me.

Sincerely, Listofpeople (talk) 04:13, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Tagging articles as hoaxes

I have just declined two speedy deletion nominations as hoaxes that you made. In both cases a minute on Google produced sources making it clear that the subjects of the articles were genuine, and in one of the articles the sourced already cited achieved that too. Please don't tag articles for speedy deletion as hoaxes without first doing sufficient checking to be certain that they are hoaxes. Also, note that the speedy deletion criterion is not "hoaxes", it is "blatant hoaxes". The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:33, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@JamesBWatson:, The problem is, the user is creating articles with legit names, but spam drops the exact same bogus sources over and over, as well as writing the text in completely incoherent, "ramblish" English. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Virtually not a single part of the text makes sense. Even per Wikipedia's standards of years ago, they would be considered bad articles in every sense of the word. He needs to understand that there are certain standards here, and that he should feel obliged to abide to them. We can both create numerous articles, with legit names, but fill 'me up with the most ridiculous text if we want, with sources that don't remotely back up the story, as long as it looks legit. I mean, seriously?...

"The four big festivals (Nowruz, Mehregan, Tirgan and Yalda) in ancient Indo-Iran were celebrated with May in large squares and parks. These celebrations were drunk wine and rose water sprayed. Even today - after the Islamization is still on the Sofreh e Nowruzi (Nowruztable) of the Haft-Seen (Persian: هفت سين‎‎) Serkeh (vinegar) and Haft Mewa (Persian: هفت ميوه‎‎)(Seven varieties of dried fruit like Raisin, Apricot etc. are inserted into the water days before the Nauroz) in Iran and Afghanistan. The term "Maidan" was mentioned in 1647 by Adam Olearius for the first time.[5][6] Johann Christoph and Beer Olfert Dapper [1681] in Nürnberg have also written about Maidan in ancient Iran. Maidan is also called racetrack (horses). Edward Henry Palmer (1883) has Maidan translated as Hippodrome.

Sounds to me like someone who had a hell lot of fun with Google Translate and loads of unrelated material put together. Having said that, a Hoax Db tax would probably not be the most preferential way to adress the issue, so thanks for that. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

The Flag Of Eldiguzids

On January 21st LouisAragon reverted my edit, saying that the flag that I purposed was unsourced. The flag I purposed was sourced indeed. Many approved history books can approve this. I hope we can fix this issue fast as possible. Thank you for your time. - Oyuncu Aykhan (talk) 14:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Aight, and where are these supposed reliable sources that mention the flag and/or its motifs to have existed? Usually, when people want to "notify" others that they have "proof" of something, they actually do show it. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Pero Lopez de Ayala article

I have provided proof that Lope de Barrientos was a highly influential individual in the Kingdom of Castile. Dr. Nicole Reinhardt is an expert in the field of royal confessors. I think your problem is that Lope de Barrientos' list proves Pero Lopez de Ayala had Jewish ancestry. I am an Ayala descendant. I have no problem with his Jewish ancestry. I'm going to discuss this with Wikipedia. If you won't leave the article alone, I want it removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.98.102.139 (talk) 20:29, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Abkhazia

Sorry, lost in my revertions. --Skyfall (talk) 21:21, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Additional deviating definitions listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Additional deviating definitions. Since you had some involvement with the Additional deviating definitions redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 08:05, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Jats

Hi. Would you please check the content on Massagetae? The "Jat theory" seems WP:UNDUE and Singh is not WP:RS, I believe. The article should be rewritten. 78.164.96.144 (talk) 11:37, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Categry

Hi, what's the wrong with categort:Iranian notable women in article Shirin Ebadi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadegan (talk • contribs) 19:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@Shadegan:, are you serious? Having an article on Wikipedia already means that person is "notable". Furthermore, the appropriate categories for women (e.g. Category:Iranian women activists, Category:Iranian women lawyers, etc) are already present on the article. It's like adding a category "notable American men" on the Franklin D. Roosevelt article, or "notable Iraqi men" on the Saddam Hussein article. Though obviously created and added in good faith, your category makes 0.0% sense. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@LouisAragon:, thanks for your kind guidance. I introduced an article [104] that refers to a Lurish local heroine. I will be grateful if you could help me there. Best RegardsShadegan (talk) 07:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

@Shadegan:, no thanks needed. :-) Feel free to ask if you have any further remarks/questions etc in the future. Sure, I'll try my best to lay a hand on it in the future (can't really promise a fixed date though). - LouisAragon (talk) 08:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Just copy-edited it a bit for you, as a start. - LouisAragon (talk) 08:37, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Sack of Shamakhi (1721)

Hello, Louis Aragon - You'll have seen that I just made a few more edits to Sack of Shamakhi (1721). After I copy-edit an article, I keep it on my watchlist for a while. If you're getting an article ready for nomination as a good article, please do not hesitate to ask me to review material you've added since I originally copy-edited the article before you nominate it. I wanted to ask you something about the notes at the end of the article.

(a) I wonder why they are in columns. I don't usually see notes in columns. It looks a little odd, and I don't they they are as easy to read as they are if they are not in columns.

(b) Early in Note C, it looks like you start a quote, because I see a set of double quotation marks, but then there is no set of closing quotation marks to indicate the end of the quote. Perhaps you don't need those opening quotation marks.

Best regards,  – Corinne (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne:, no way I could possibly miss your helpful edits. :-) Thanks so far. Regarding point a, I agree with you, just fixed that. Regarding point b, had to search for it for a sec, but then I realized that what was Note C at the time you made your edits, has now become Note D. Fixed that as well! - LouisAragon (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I made a few further edits, re-wording some sentences. There are a few things that are a bit unclear, and I need to ask you about them:

The following sentences appear in the middle of the second paragraph in Sack of Shamakhi (1721)#Background. (I'm going to number the sentences for ease of discussion.)

• (1) Hoping that Daud Beg and his Dagestani allies would assist with the revolt on the eastern front, Daud instead put himself at the head of a tribal coalition, and subsequently launched a campaign against both the Safavid government forces and the Shia population of the empire, eventually marching upon the provincial capital of Shamakhi. (2) In the same year he was released, Shirvan province became a target for their raids. (3) By 1718 the Lezgin incursions into Shirvan had intensified. (4) According to Rudi Matthee, this was rumoured to have been incited by then grand vizier Fath-Ali Khan Daghestani (1716–1720).

I see two problems with sentence (1).

(a) The participial phrase beginning with "hoping" is kind of "dangling" in mid-air, because it can't be Daud who was hoping that Daud Beg and his allies would assist with the revolt (unless there are two Dauds). Who was hoping that Daud Beg and his allies would assist with the revolt (and is that information really important)? -- The Safavid government, which includes King Sultan Husayn (given that he stood at its head).

(b) The sentence is a little long. Before I break it up, I need to understand your answers to my question in (a) and my questions below.

Regarding sentence (2), I see at least two problems:

(a) You say, "In the same year he was released", but you never say exactly when he was released, so I wonder if this is really important. -- The sources only mention in what year he was released, but not the precise date. I guess you could leave that out.

(b) You say "Shirvan province became a target for their raids".

I have two questions about this:

(i.) Why would you separate the mention of Shirvan province from the mention of the capital of that province (made at the end of sentence 1)? I'm not sure this sentence is needed at all. -- I agree, I guess it's not really needed.

(ii.) The antecedent for "their", in "their raids", is a little unclear. The reader has to go way back, and guess that it refers to Daud Beg and the coalition of tribes ("tribal coalition"). There is a plural noun ("Safavid government forces") and a double subject ("Safavid government forces and the Shia population") closer to the word "their", so a bit of confusion is introduced. If you decide to take out this sentence entirely, you don't have to worry about this. If you decide to keep it, you might consider substituting a phrase that would be clearer, something like "the raids of Daud Beg and his tribal forces". -- You are right, "their raids" refers to Daud Beg + his coalition. Yeah, I think that the substitution you propose is much better.

Sentence (3) begins, "By 1718 the Lezgin incursions..." Are the Lezgins the same people as the "tribal coalition" mentioned in sentence (1)? If so, shouldn't that be made clear, perhaps by using the adjective "Lezgin" before "tribal coalition" in sentence (1)? -- Well its a bit tricky. The utter vast majority of the tribal force was made up of Lezgins, but later on several other ethnicities joined them as well (incl. the Ghazikumukh, as you can see further down the article). However, given that the coalition was dominated by Lezgins, and the sack is generally ascribed to be simply done by them, I think adding the adjective would be a good thing to do.

In sentence (4), you have this phrase: "this was rumoured to have been incited". It's not completely clear what "this" is. Is it the incursions by the Lezgins or is it only the intensification of the incursions? -- the intensification of the incursions.

If you can just answer my questions, I'll be glad to work on the sentences.

Other than that, I think the prose of the article is a little better now. What do you and Shearonink think?  – Corinne (talk) 04:36, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne:, I replied (in bold). Hope this makes it more clear. If not, lemme know! - LouisAragon (talk) 16:06, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I re-worded some sentences and removed others, as discussed above. I couldn't figure out a way to make it clear that the tribal coalition in the phrase, "put himself at the head of a tribal coalition" were the Lezgins, or were mainly the Lezgins, mentioned a few sentences earlier, other than to add the phrase "consisting mainly of Lezgins", or the clause "which consisted mainly of Lezgins". Do you think adding one of those makes the sentence too wordy or is needed to make "a tribal coalition" clear?  – Corinne (talk) 17:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Corinne! I think "consisting mainly of Lezgins" should do the trick. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:08, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Something interesting

You may want to view the edits of this editor. A compare and contrast with an "old acquaintance", might be of particular interest. Böritigin of Ghazni, is a perfect example. If my suspicions are correct, I would suggest a bit of patience. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Sack of Shamakhi (1721) 2

I did a bit of copy-editing to the lead. Your opinion(s) would be appreciated. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Why not place the picture up near the lead? Unless you have another picture... --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, thanks for the effort. Looks good, a few minor things;

- Most sources state that the general harm done to the Russian merchants, i.e. those who got killed + grave economic damage inflicted to them was the casus belli. Not just only their death. I'm therefore not entirely sure about the new wording of that particular sentence.

- I'm searching for an additional pic, if I could obtain one that would show any of these..... 1) Shamakhi in/around 1722 1) a pic of Lezgins during that era 2) Vakhtang/Hosayn-Qoli Khan during the counter-campaign 3) Fath-Ali Khan Dagestani 4) the siege itself.

...that'd be great. If I happen not to find any of these, I will indeed move the current Shamakhi pic (by Kaempfer) to the top. Btw, one more thing; do you happen to have any sources (by any chance) that mention the number of Safavid forces during the siege and the number that got killed? - LouisAragon (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sack of Shamakhi (1721)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sack of Shamakhi (1721) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 09:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

A relief of Faravahar for you

I award you this bas-relief of Faravahar for your contributions on Persian history. --Z 17:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

@ZxxZxxZ:, thank you! - LouisAragon (talk) 19:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Gilak and Mazandarani ethnic groups

Dear LouisAragon I was wondering why Gilaks and Mazandaranis are put in the same ethnic group as Persians in the Ethnicities in Iran page . Although Gilaks and Mazandaranis are close to Persians they are still their own separate ethnic group. Is it because they are only found in Iran? If that is the case then Lurs should also be categorized as Persians the same way Gilaks and Mazandaranis are. Regards, WikiEditor16 (talk) 16:30, 21 February 2017 (UTC)WikiEditor16

@WikiEditor16:, hey! You mean in the graph? That's because the archived World Factbook page, includes/included them as being part of the Persians. Yeah I know they are definetely separate, but its just for the sake of statistics and only shown like that in that graph (I know its not ideal, but at least its kind of "stable"). Hope this answers your question. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

User Callofworld

That user creates obselete, pesudoscientific templates such as "Aryanic peoples" and push it on various articles. And i dont think that he/she is a new user, probably previously banned. 79.98.30.65 (talk) 12:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@79.98.30.65:, I completely agree. He's making some of the most ridiculous edits I've ever seen. As a start, all those templates need to be AfD'd. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, LouisAragon. You have new messages at Talk:Sack of Shamakhi (1721)/GA1.
Message added 22:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shearonink (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Requests

I think Aryan race article was so badly written and very low-level quality. There is no such thing as "original Aryans", what the hell. If you have enough time, i request you to rewrite the article based on academical sources. The article is semi-protected and i cannot edit it. 185.8.60.29 (talk) 12:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Also please watchlist this page 1. 185.8.62.109 (talk) 07:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Tajiks of Xinjiang/Name Change

Tajiks of Xinjiang must be changed to Sarikoli people or Sarikolis. These people are not Tajiks, do not speak Tajik. No one calls them as "Tajiks" except for Chinese people. I don't think it's even a common name. 185.3.166.49 (talk) 10:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Pan Turks

Hi Aragon,

Could you please review the articles related to pan-turkism agenda? They are badly manipulated and poorly re-written. There are also lots of claims with no/biassed/fake citations. Could you spend sometime checking them out?

cheers, Ajax — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReneAjax (talk • contribs) 06:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Jstor

Have you seen or read this article?

• INTRODUCTION TO CHRISTIAN CAUCASIAN HISTORY, The Formative Centuries (IVth-VIIIth), CYRIL TOUMANOFF, Traditio, Vol. 15 (1959), pp. 1-106.
• Page 27, "Already in the Achaemenian phase, the office of Satrap of Armenia became hereditary in the Iranian families of the Hydarnids and, then, the Orontids...[...]. The fact that the Orontids were descended from the Achaemenid Great Kings, who were no more, and that they held sway over most of the territory of the old Vannic Monarchy, when conjoined with their power and their de facto, autonomy, led them to assume the status of kings." --Kansas Bear (talk) 09:24, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:, nope I had not. Thanks alot! - LouisAragon (talk) 02:52, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I see that another editor has used Toumanoff as a source. Perhaps you should inquire as to their opinion concerning this subject? --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Watch this guy

Obvious racialist pov-pusher who targeted Armenian-related articles. See his edits. Using outdated terms like "Armenoid", adding Armenians as a Semitic group and other similar disruptive changes. --Wario-Man (talk) 10:36, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Not related to this one, just fyi: [105] --Wario-Man (talk) 10:38, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Conflict

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.--AlpAy (talk) 19:25, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Rosie Malek-Yonan

On the Rosie Malek-Yonan revert / question, see Hoang v. Amazon.com, Inc. for some background. I think you did things right in general by pointing out BLPPRIVACY, but the California law clearly doesn't apply to Wikipedia (focusing on scenarios where paid subscribers can upload images and update info, IMDB Pro, basically[106]), but if it's unsourced or the subject doesn't want the full DOB even if mentioned in reliable sources, BLPPRIVACY works for me. Ravensfire (talk) 04:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ravensfire:, hey, thanks for your message. I just mostly went with what "BlackPango" said in his edit summary. I noticed as well that on the official website of "Rosie Malek-Yonan" (I took a brief look), she didn't list her date of birth for example. If you think however that it'd be a valuable addition to the article, aka to re-insert the material I removed, then feel absolutely free to do so.
The sole reason I decided to check those diffs of "BlankPango" more closely, was because I thought that the particular info that was removed by him didn't quite match his edit summary, for he also removed some categories and other trivial info. There used to be a sockmaster active on the article who did the exact same thing (he and his socks got indeffed in 2015). - LouisAragon (talk) 04:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Actually...having taken a second look, I'm 99% sure that its another sock of him.[107] - LouisAragon (talk) 04:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Sack of Shamakhi (1721)

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 16:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Shearonink:, appreciate it! And thank you for reviewing it! All the best, - LouisAragon (talk) 18:52, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sack of Shamakhi (1721)

The article Sack of Shamakhi (1721) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sack of Shamakhi (1721) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 17:02, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

See my talk page

I really have no time to work on this complaint. Thought I'd let you know. Doug Weller talk 20:20, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Thanks. I just put my two cents in nevertheless. I believe it'd be useful, whenever you have time that is, to take a look at the material and resort to admin action. This is something that stretches back for quite some time, and remains a clear disruptive factor. - LouisAragon (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Sigh

[108] Got some IP-hopping troll begging for attention, any suggestions on what I should do? --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sack of Shamakhi (1721)

On 15 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sack of Shamakhi (1721), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Sack of Shamakhi was used as the casus belli by the Russian Empire in order to launch the Russo-Persian War of 1722–1723? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sack of Shamakhi (1721). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sack of Shamakhi (1721)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs

Thank you for your recent articles, including Isidore Borowsky, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including Isidore Borowsky, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@Piotrus:, didn't I already do that though, on the day I created it? ;) [109] - LouisAragon (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you did, I am sorry - must have gotten confused (I reviewed few dozens of articles on that day, maybe that message was meant for someone else). But anyway, nice article, I created a stub on pl wiki, it was surprisingly missing the entry on him as well. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:22, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Izydor Borowski

On 23 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Izydor Borowski, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Izydor Borowski was born in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth but later rose to the rank of general in Qajar Iran? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Izydor Borowski. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Izydor Borowski), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Zeynab Begum

On 24 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zeynab Begum, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Zeynab Begum was one of the most influential princesses of Iran's Safavid dynasty? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zeynab Begum. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Zeynab Begum), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Tughril#Spelling

Louis, a few things. First of all, thanks. Second, CU does not confirm IPs to accounts--if you didn't know that, now you do, and I ask that you don't make statements like that which we (admins etc) then have to refute. Third, I think you should add this to the SPI, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EMr KnG/Archive, just for the record; User:Vanjagenije loves doing paperwork. Fourth, and most importantly, I think it is time you find an admin to do a rangeblock; this has gone on long enough. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:44, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

@Drmies: What is this about? Why I am being pinged? Vanjagenije (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

User:Vanjagenije, you have done a lot of work on that SPI, and I thought you might know if we need to .... ah I see what you mean--you didn't know I was pinged because of Talk:Tughril#Sockpuppet--glance under the "side show" tab. Does that explain it? :) Drmies (talk) 17:24, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

No. What statement did LouisAragon make that you had to refute? Vanjagenije (talk) 17:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Vanja, there's an IP that LouisAragon said was related to that sock, EMr KnG. You've made six clerical edits to that SPI, and so I thought you might have an interest. That statement is not relevant to the SPI, and should be explained by my second point. That was all. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Ahwazi Arabs help

Hi. I'm referring this appeal to you because you were mentioned here on the talk page of Ahwazi Arabs. I have had to contend with several editors constantly removing my cited edit using what i think are spurious arguments. Could you please provide an opinion on the talk page because the discussion currently only involves myself and an opposing editor? Please help. Good day. 222.232.48.140 (talk) 04:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

AN/I Discussion

Hello User:LouisAragon, I hope you are doing well. I noticed that you opened up this discussion and was wondering if it was officially closed by an administrator? If not I may consider reopening it. User:PAKHIGHWAY once again removed languages native to Pakistan from the "South Asian" section and added them to a newly created "Western Asian" section (despite the fact that Western Asia refers to the Middle East). I also see other problematic edits in his recent edit history, despite the ANI discussion. I look forward to hearing your thoughts! With regards, Anupam^Talk 15:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@Anupam:, hi, thanks for your message! Nope, that section was never closed by an admin. The flame just died out, because it was completely diverted by admin BsZ, who, for some very odd reason, picked only one minor part of the issue, and neglected the rest (99% of the complaint) which made everyone lose track of the entire discussion. Though such neglectance and rather improper editing is not something entirely "new" for the admin organ of Wikipedia, unfortunately, it should be considered unacceptable for one to get away with such a huge repertoire of WP:NOTHERE editing. I guess you could re-list (aka copy/paste) the entire discussion at ANI, and add these new matters you mentioned to it. What do you think? All the best, - LouisAragon (talk) 15:45, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply User:LouisAragon! Do you have a link to the ANI discussion with the last comment made? If so, I can reinstate that and mention the recent developments with respect to this editor. I appreciate your help! Kind regards, Anupam^Talk 16:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@Anupam:, I believe that this is what you're looking for? It includes the last comment made to it (apparantly by an IP as we can see). - LouisAragon (talk) 03:55, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you User:LouisAragon for your reply and for finding the appropriate link. I thought it would be important to preserve every comment made in the discussion before reinstating it. For transparency, I am pinging User:PAKHIGHWAY to this discussion with a declaration that I intend to re-open the AN/I discussion should his behavior continue in various articles relating to South Asia. Khuda hafiz, Anupam^Talk 04:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Under what pretext is "hindi" being represented as the "base language" of "South Asia"? Why is Hindi on top of Urdu, even though Urdu is older language and Hindi is essentially a language created out of thin air in 1880? Either alphabetically organize that article or separate as South Asian and Western Asian. Simple. Enough is enough of your Indian bias. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 13:38, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't think the chart mentions anywhere that Hindi is the "base language of South Asia". I also find it rather strange that you are concerned that "Hindi [is] on top of Urdu" in a chart, as if implying that this ordering means something. I simply placed those two languages at the top of the chart, with the rest of the list being alphabetized, because they were the most common languages in South Asia. I reversed the order of Hindi and Urdu per your request but feel that your way of speaking and editing is still very tendentious. As of now I'm leaning towards not reopening the ANI/I discussion unless I see further examples of tendentious editing. However, if User:LouisAragon reopens it, I will certaintly be commenting there, Anupam^Talk 16:11, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Paul Bashutsky

Hello! Your submission of Paul Bashutsky at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 17:43, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Safavid administration

You should take a look at this [110], in case you haven't seen it - it has some very valuable information. Especially at page 25-26. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:38, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, no, I hadn't seen that one before, thanks alot! Valuable indeed. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Azerbaijan,Azerbaijani and Fascist Persians

I do not understand it at all. Whenever I come up with a source and want to fix the page, doesn't accept. But if a stranger writes something against Azerbaijan, it is even without a source, and it is immediately accepted. It's all about Persia, Persia. All pages about Azerbaijan are in the hands of chauvinist persians. He/She is written as "right", and Azari is written as "fascist". Azerbaijan's ten centuries Iranian leadership is a reality. We are always losers, we are always assimilated. What are you trying to do? To give the world the message of "the azers are our calves"? You wrote Azerbaijanians page related people Iran peoples. And a member explained: "The Azerbaijanians are Assimilated Iranians." Is this page being governed by a couple of punches? Free encyclopedia? Free executives? Good job. Some justice, empathy, conscience, neutrality. Sebebineydiki (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Paul Bashutsky

On 7 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Paul Bashutsky, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Paul Bashutsky took part in the suppression of the Decembrist revolt in 1825, and was promoted to General of the Infantry three years later? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Paul Bashutsky. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Paul Bashutsky), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

The dispute

Whatever the nature of the dispute, or anything else you wish to say to me, can I suggest from this point you leave the messages at my talk page. Although I've made some lengthy posts, I'm no longer prepared to continue a discussion on a third person's talk page. The original post was for advice. --OJ (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sceriman family

Hello! Your submission of Sceriman family at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HaEr48 (talk) 02:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

"18th Satrapy of Persia"

This phrase appears in two Wikipedia articles, Lori Province and Speri (historical region). A google search results in no hits at all for this term except for those same two articles and their off-Wikipedia clones. Do you know if such an entity existed - or is it, as I suspect, just the Satrapy of Armenia? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Iranicaonline says that what would be known as Armenia was divided into two satrapy's. The 13th satrapy and, immediately to the east or it, the 18th satrapy, which comprising Ayrarat and areas to the north and to the south, including Urmia. "Armina under Darius and Xerxes had much narrower boundaries than the future Armenia of the Artaxiads and the Arsacids" [111]. However, the Satrapy of Armenia article clearly assumes Ayrarat is part of its territory - it mentions prominently the Orontid dynasty, and they originated in the Ararat plain and had their earliest capitals there. So I am confused. Is the 13th satrapy Arminiya, or something different? Or did the 18th satrapy merge into the 13th satrapy at a later date? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Tiptoethrutheminefield: some scholars envisage two satrapies, while others say there was only one (mainly referring to the Behistun inscription). Anyhow, basically, the 13th satrapy = "Armina" = the later "Western Armenia", with its "heartland in Shupria" (Chahin, 2013), and "inhabited by an Indo-European speaking people called Haik" (Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 1;[112]).
The 18th satrapy = the later "Eastern Armenia", inhabited by the "Matieni, the Saspires, and Alarodians", amongst others. The territory of the former "Urartu" was located within this 18th satrapy.[113] The 10th satrapy, Media, also had Armenian enclaves (per Mark Chahin, 2013). Per James R. Russel (1987, p. 45); "Armenia was divided into two satrapies, the 13th and 18th, by the Persians, and several sites mentioned in the inscriptions at Behistun have been identified in the south and west of the Armenian plateau". The Cambridge History of Iran (Vol 1.), linked above, explains the situation pretty well, while this other source (The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE) sheds some more light on it.[114]. Hope this answers your question. I haven't read anything about any merges. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:54, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the careful reply. The current article doesn't appear to adequately explain all this. If the Orontids appear to be based in territory that was part of the 18th Satrapy, why are they given such prominence in the article about the 13th satrapy? A lot of its content is not even about the Achaemenid period, and so far we have nothing on the 18th satrapy. Maybe it might be better to have the article instead titled "Satrapies of Armenia" or "Armenia under Persian satrapies" to cover both? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

FYI

IPs presenting Qizilbash as an ethnicity:

• 89.147.242.147 [115]
• 89.147.236.245 [116]

Which we have seen in another editor: John Francis Templeson.[117] Who also has edited Nawab Fateh Ali Khan Kazilbash.[118]

Doubt this is a coincidence.--Kansas Bear (talk) 23:49, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Their geolocation surely eliminates any drop of doubt that could have possibly existed. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:14, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Beylarbeylik?

Several provinces of the Safavid Empire, such as the Shirvan Beylarbeylik, uses the word 'Beylarbeylik' - but surely provinces in Safavid Iran were 'velayat/vilayat' and not beylarbeylik? Perhaps we should do it like this Shirvan Beylarbeylik --> Safavid Shirvan? Btw, do you have fully access to the Titles and Emoluments in Safavid Iran: A Third Manual of Safavid Administration? If so, is there any way you can send it? --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:59, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, yeah, you're completely right.[119] Apparantly, "beylarbeylik" is simply the Azeri translation of the word province/velayat. Indeed, as you suggest, the best thing to do is to change the names of those articles (that currently exist under the name "beylarbeylik X/Y/Z"), to Safavid "X/Y/Z". Then, basically what the first sentence should include, be it in different words; "The Shirvan Province ("Veyalat-e Shirvan"), was a province of the Safavid Empire (...)". Articles in the future (e.g. regarding Georgia, Khuzestan, etc.) should follow the same rule. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, unfortunately, I don't, but I obtained quite a few pages of it through the resource request feature here on Wiki. Combining that with the material thats visible for free on Amazon, I guess you could say that I'm not that super far off from having most of the info about many of the most important provinces/regions/cities. I'm definetely gonna buy the book in the near future though. Anyhow, lemme know which pages/regions/cities/etc you'd like to have. There's a possibility that I already have them in my possession, hence I could send you the pages asap. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Awesome, could you send me the section of Mazandaran, Gilan, and Shirvan? --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran:, all information about Shirvan is freely available through Amazon (just type Shirvan in the bracket on the left, material starts on page 284). Mazandaran is available partly (starts on page 242-242). Unfortunately, the pages about the governors of the entire Mazandaran and Gilan Provinces, are some of those that are not freely availbe at Amazon, nor do I have them in my possession myself.

Btw, even though I know that its not really what youre looking for, but there are alot of places in Mazandaran/Gilan that can be found for free through Amazon, such as "Rostamdar", "Rasht", etc. Just play a bit with names in the bracket, you'll get really far. Also you really should create an Amazon account in case you dont have one; they'll allow you to view quite a bit more. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

PS1: after creating an account, you should definetely type the word "glossary" in the bracket for once. You'll really like it. Basically gives you a large list of all Safavid-era titles + their meaning. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

PS2: I do have Astarabad in my possession (amongst others), just in case. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sceriman family

On 23 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sceriman family, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Sceriman family, a wealthy Safavid merchant family of Armenian ethnicity, gained Roman citizenship in 1696? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sceriman family. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sceriman family), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

This is a lot so please bear with it

The current template has many issues. Apart from the disputed inclusion of Central Asians and Caucasusians there are also micro-errors and micro-ommissions. Several Chinese ethnicities and the Tamil people are excluded in the sections for Malaysian American and Singaporean Americans despite the existence of Malaysian Chinese and Malaysian Indians and Singaporean Chinese and Singaporean Indians and the Tamil language being official in Singapore and also Mandarin Chinese. Punjabi Mexican Americans should be group together with Asian Hispanic and Latino Americans and while the several miltiracial ethnicities should also be together. Taiwanese Americans should also include other Chinese ethnicities. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 21:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Also Sindhi Americans are also Indian Americans not just Pakistani Americans and Pashtun Americans are also Afghan Americans. The only stuff that were being discussed were about Armenian Americans and Iranian Americans, who are presumed to be European Americans but the other stuff don't seem to be disputed. The person disputing this did not comment on Malysians just gave a vague "bogus" comment so it is unknown what their opinion is.Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 21:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Review request

Hi, please have a look to this: Layli (Lurish doll) to review if it needs any amendments or improvement, thanks.Shadegan (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

az:Çuxursəəd bəylərbəyliyi and Iranian Armenia (1502–1828)

The same thing?--Abutalub (talk) 04:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Abutalub:, hi, "Chokhur-e Sa'd/Çuxursəəd" is the same thing as the "Erivan Province/Yerevan Province", the later Erivan "Khanate". Iranian Armenia referes to all of Eastern Armenia under Iranian rule from the Safavid era and onwards, of which Chokhur-e Sa'd/Yerevan Province is one episode and part of. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:19, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Safavid Georgia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Abbas I and Vali. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Safavid Qarabagh

Dear LouisAragon,

I have made changes to the above mentioned page. I translated the some pieces of materials of the Azerbaijani version of the page itself to English language. Could you please elaborate, what is the problem with the translated material? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenny Herhardt (talk • contribs) 06:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Hi Louis, My name is Amin. Our mutual friend @Rye-96: told me about your existence and said you were a cool dude. Anyways, I just wanted to thank you for your contributions to the platform. Groetjes, Amin (Talk) 19:56, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

@Amin:, hey there! Thanks man, appreciate it. Stroopwafels can taste really good, so dankjewel as well for that. ;-) - LouisAragon (talk) 23:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

List of Iranian dynasties and countries

Rojava is a kurdish autonomous region in north of syria, why you removed that ?!!! even you you removed two federal region of pashtun people of pakistan wich is autonomous and i added that,it's not fair😕, and you should add gorno-badakhshan autonomous of Tajikistan to this list but you didn't do that. Akilis alva (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@Akilis alva:, I had already commented about this long ago on your talk page. Rojava is a good addition as it's de facto autonomous, and South Ossetia is indeed de facto independent, so I restored that part as well. The rest was just nonsensical and/or WP:UNDUE weight (i.e. "semi-autonomous"). Anyhow we're in the process of changing the article as it has become too problematic (see also "List of Turkic dynasties and countries"). Both these articles have become a hot-spot for all kinds of WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Is it possible I can look at your sources

I was just mesmerized by the Safavid Georgia article. This is a part of history that I would love to do a read on, I would love if you bestow upon me any of those books especially William Floor's which I assume where your most important material come from. I'M BEGGING YOU PLEASE. Mr.Helping Hand (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Mr.Helping Hand:, what do you mean with "bestow upon" in this context? All titles (incl. the ones by Floor) are mentioned down below the page. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't want to sound hostile, I assumed you had the books in pdf forms, I can still buy them later this year, but 90% of my books are in pdf/epub forms. If I don't mind asking do you have a pdf or physical copy. I don't have that many Safavid focused books, that is why I am asking. Mr.Helping Hand (talk) 16:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Afsharid Empire map

[120] Just uploaded it, anything else that needs fixing? --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:13, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: wth, didn't see your question right after the link to the new map. Weird stuff.
I think I posted some other things that need fixing on your talk page. Lemme know if you can't find it back. PS: I just added the new Afsharid map to the article btw. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

What year is this map ? 1747 C.E. ? Mr.Helping Hand (talk) 00:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

To use picture files in other Wikis

Hi, I'm Shadegan, the author of file: [121]. I want to use the file in other Wikis (Farsi Wikipedia), but it's not possible. Could you please help me for the solution. Best SHADEGAN (talk) 14:55, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

A History Question (Qajar’s eastern territory)

Hello LouisAragon. Long time no talk. There is a question that has been in my mind for a long time and has confused me. Although I have read and searched as much as I could, I still cannot get the direct, true answer. It is about Qajar’s eastern territory, at its greatest extent. What I can infer from Qajar’s article on Wikipedia and some other sources, it seems that Qajars never successfully had the control of Herat and basically any part of Afghanistan at all (because of Durrani Empire). This convinces me, until I see maps that claim Qajar controlled big parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan. I think the most viral map about Qajars on the internet is this map: [122]. At the first glance, the image seems to be very detailed and helpful, but after I read about the history of Herat and Afghanistan, the image does match the information that I’ve read at all.

So now my question is how accurate is this map? Why there is literally zero information about those Arbitrations (MacMahon/Goldsmid)? Did Qajars had the control of western Pakistan? Does Treaty of Paris 1857 mean Iran had the control of western Afghanistan the whole time before that treaty? Why these historical maps ([123], [124], [125]) have shown Qajar’s territory very differently? I even get more confused when I see Qajar’s maps in Iranian history textbooks that have been taught in schools in Iran: Elementary school:[126] Middle School:[127] High School:[128]. 🤔

Since you are one of the most active users who edits regularly about Iranian history articles on Wikipedia, I really like to know the answer and explanation from you. The map on the Wikipedia page looks perfect to me, since it is exactly match the information on the article, and I don’t plan to change or edit it at all, but at the same time I really like to know the answer, since I am confused. Please respond thanks. Og007 06:08, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I would be glad if I hear the answer from you. Thanks. Og007 21:29, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ali Zifan:, indeed long time no talk! Excuse me for the belated response, been very busy. To answer your questions;

1) yes you are right about that. I've seen most of those weird maps before as well. Until a few years ago, I myself never understood this whole thing either. I did quite a bit of research, and still I couldn't find anything about it. It must be some "thingy" of the past that just managed to linger forth, very odd. The Qajars (from Fath-Ali Shah's later rule, to the signing of the Paris Treaty in 1857) claimed Herat as belonging to them, but they only held it for a very short period of time (literally a few months), from late 1856 to early 1857 ([129]-[130]). Before and after that, they never did. "Claiming" something and actually "controlling" something is a totally different concept as you know, but I think some people misconstructed that "claiming" part into actually "controlling" it.

2) Qajars didn't control anything that is part of present-day Pakistan. Its another bogus claim. So yeah, you're right about that too. PS: I just adressed this unsourced bogus, related to this discussion, on the Herat page.[131] - LouisAragon (talk) 00:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Btw @Ali Zifan:, would you perhaps be able to fix these two maps btw? Yes, the Qajar map on Wiki is pretty good [132], but still not complete. The Qajars never "controlled" what is present-day Turkmenistan. Similarly to the Herat story, it was once again just a claim. A claim which they dropped by the Treaty of Akhal (1881). Also, the Qajars controlled the entirety of Eastern Georgia aka the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti, not just Lower Kartli/Tbilisi (see also; Battle of Krtsanisi). If you could adress this, that'd be great. Also, on this map, Iranian Balochistan needs to be added to the territory of the Seleucids, not to that of the Mauryans. This is another "e-legend" that was made by ppl who have been interpreting "Gedrosia" as being equal to the entire geo-political "region" nowadays referred to as "Balochistan". Even though this is contradicted by every single reliable source. You can see the extensive discussion I had with "Kansas Bear" about the matter here. Feel free to copy-paste some of the sources we mentioned in our discussion to the Wikimedia file (in order to back it up) if you feel like doing so. All the bests, - LouisAragon (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the answer. I will update those maps as soon as I have access to my editing software. Also I don't have access to my previous gmail (aliz...@gmail.com) anymore, since I deleted it months ago. Og007 02:24, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

- Always welcome.
- Ah, that explains, cause soon after I got a notification telling me that the mail couldn't be send.

- LouisAragon (talk) 02:42, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the first map please check this image (created with paint), so I can correctly make changes. Also I just have one more history question: when was the last year that Iran/Persia actually "controlled" Bahrain? I know Pahlavi and Qajar "claimed" it, but I guess it would be during the Safavids that Iran actually controlled Bahrain, but I am not sure the exact year, so it would be great if you tell me. Thanks. Og007 02:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ali Zifan:,

- Yes, the location of the red "delete" circle is good. Basically the entire area that is covered with green/red stripes to the north of Iran's northeastern borders. Regarding the blue "add" circle on the northwest; the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti was located a bit more to the east of the circle. If you compare the map on the Kartli-Kakheti page and the same area in that region on the Qajar dynasty map, you can see that there's some area lacking on the latter. The area that is lacking, is the area we need to add to the Qajar dynasty map.

- The last time Iran controlled Bahrain was under Nader Shah (r. 1736-1747).[133] Edit; seems I was mistaken. The last time they did, was under the Zands. In 1783, Iran lost control over Bahrain."Iran, which ruled Bahrain from 1602 to 1783, was expelled by the al-Khalifas, who still reign. (p. 54)""Bahrain was under Iranian (Persian) domination for almost two centuries (from 1602 to 1783). (p. 118)"[134][135][136][137] So yeah, 1783 is the "final/last year".

- LouisAragon (talk) 03:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for you answer. I updated the maps. Og007 17:48, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ali Zifan:, few minor things;

• On the Seleucid map, you made a small typo ("Gedroisa", instead of "Gedrosia"). Also, its really only present-day Iranian Balochistan (i.e. "the westernmost part of Gedrosia") that was under Seleucid control. The eastern part ("Pakistani Balochistan") was ceded to the Mauryans.
• Regarding the Qajar map. The Qajars did launch attacks to regain Merv (they just never managed to take it), so the invasion "arrow" should be re-added as well as the river name "Atrek", the city name "Merv" and the date "1884". Only the Green/Red stripes should be removed.
• Regarding Georgia/Caucasus on the Qajar map, I think it didn't work out entirely well. My bad. I did some additional research to solve it once and for all, and in all honesty, I came to the conclusion that the original NW borders were already pretty correct before we changed it. Once again a story about "claiming" and actually "controlling". So, I'd say we were wrong to change that part of the map. Probably the easiest thing for you to do now would be to take the previous version of the map (before your edits), and to just remove the green-red stripes from the northeast. That's basically the only thing that needs to be done, as the rest of the map is pretty verifiably correct.
• Oh, and there's this one thing about another map (now that we're still at it); recently, HistoryofIran and me fixed the Afsharid dynasty map, so I was wondering whether you would be willing to adress these changes on your own orthograpic version as well?[138]

Thanks alottttt! - LouisAragon (talk) 01:38, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia of Islam---Baharlu

BAHARLU, name of a Turkish tribe in Persia. In particular, the name refers to the ruling family of the Kara-Koyunlu federation of Turkmen tribes (also called Barani). It is most probable that the name ("those of Bahar") is connected with the village of Bahar (Ibn al-Athir, x, 290: W.hdn, read Vakar) situated at 13 kms. north of Ramadan. According to Hamd Allah Mustawfi, Nuzha, 107 (Eng. transl. 106) the castle of Bahar served as residence to Sulayman-shah b. Pardam Iwa'i, who later became one of the three chief ministers of the caliph al-Musta'sim and was executed by the Mongols of Hulegu khan. See especially the excursus on the family of Sulaymanshah by M. Qazwini, ibid., iii, 453-64. The nisba Iwa'i clearly points to Sulaymanshah's connexion with one of the basic Oghuz tribes: Iva (or Iva). The reasons of Sulaymanshah's expatriation from his principality of Bahar to Baghdad are unknown, but there are definite indications that even before the arrival of the Mongols the Iva had spread northwards towards Erbil and Maragha. The Khwarazm-shah Djalal al-Din had to repress their depredations on the roads leading to Tabriz (winter 623/1226). The presence of an Iva'i is mentioned even in Khilat (627/1230). These stages lead us to the region where the Kara-Koyunlu federation of tribes was formed. Even the emblem on some Kara-Koyunlu coins reminds one of the tribal tamgha of the Iva. On the other hand the connexion of the Kara-Koyunlu rulers with Hamadan is confirmed by the survival of their epigons in those parts. For a long time the region of Hamadan was called Kalam-raw-i 'Ali Shakar, after the name of the important Kara-Koyunlu amir. At present splinters of the Baharlu tribe are scattered throughout southern Persia. --V. Minorsky --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Ethnic groups in West Asia

The recent IP there is an EddieDrood sock, editor known for falsifying references and making up terminology not present in references. You might want to check the edits. See this talk page - the IP is linked at the bottom of the talk page. Doug Weller talk 14:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Sources

Sorry for using weak sources (e.g Wiki pages). I'll try to find good, reliable sources next time. Once again sorry. If you see any information written by me that you consider incorrect or in need of a source know that it must be from a long time ago and should be removed. WikiEditor16

User:Joohnny braavoo1 sockpuppet

New user with a specific interest in Bulgaria and Turks.[139] --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Iranian nomads

I guess I see why concepts like turkification which involved iranian nomads don't belong, but why remove people who were almost certianly iranian like the hepthalites (I admit I also added pages of lesser certainty). Thanks, Darokrithia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darokrithia (talk • contribs) 15:32, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Here are pages I would keep in Iranian nomads Hephthalite Empire, Yuezhi, Asii, Indo-Scythians, Komedes, and Arkaim,. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darokrithia (talk • contribs) 16:01, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

@Darokrithia:, 1) Hepthalites are of uncertain origins 2) same goes for the Yuezhi 3) idem for the Asii 4) Indo-Scythians already has the "Category:Indo-Scythian peoples" category, itself a daughter category of "Category:Scythians", itself a daughter category of "Category:Iranian nomads" 5) Komedes are of uncertain origins as well 6) Arkaim is an archaeological site (not a tribe), attributed to the early Indo-European speakers. Has really nothing to do with "Iranian nomads", in the strictest sense of the word. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Kharabat (poetry)

Maybe, but removing all meaningful content from the page is not the way to deal with it. If you think it needs a complete rewrite, then there's a template for this: {{cleanup-rewrite}}. If you think the page needs to be deleted, then we have a WP:deletion policy that outlines the procedure to follow. — Smjg (talk) 22:35, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Smjg:; "(...) all meaningful content from the page".

Such as? Your assertion that there is "meaningful" content on the page, means you can point that out and remove the unrelated/wrong content from it, am I right? The user who is responsible for adding that 15kb of gibberish text, has an editorial pattern solely marked by violations of WP:OR, WP:RS and WP:TENDENTIOUS. What sense does it possibly make, to keep huge amounts of "content" of literally 0.0% quality, over having a safe stub article that at least doesn't spread misinformation to our readers? And I'm not even talking about the prose, which is objectively even worse than what google.translate provides. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

I decided to rewrite it myself and added a proper source. Based on my experience, waiting for someone else to rewrite such a low-profile would basically mean waiting for a few years. All the best, - LouisAragon (talk) 23:05, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

You mean you checked every sentence and not one of them had any meaning? Hmm. Your version barely qualifies as a stub, as it states nothing about what the term means. At least, I can't make any sense of this: "In Persian poetry, the word kharabat is sometimes used as a proverb for the word tavern.".... — Smjg (talk) 22:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

I've just seen your username on RTRC and I think you deserve it right now. :) The Stray Dog Talk Page 00:13, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/RaviVery

One more apparent sockpuppet of PakePakwan.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:11, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Parthians

Hi. I've created a navbox for Parthians. See Template:Parthian Empire. Is current name good or I should move it to Parthians, Arsacids or another proper name? Please help me improve it. --Wario-Man (talk) 08:19, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@Wario-Man:, heyy. Hmm I think the name is good like this. Thanks for creating it btw! Most classical-era articles are in a relatively poor state, but obviously it never hurts having such templates already at our disposal, in order to be able to track the main topics with ease. - LouisAragon (talk) 00:54, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Delhi Sultanate

I made some changes to the delhi sultanate and then received a message from you saying I have complied with the rules? I think I changed it from a muslim empire to a turko-persian empire which makes so much more sense?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.98.53.201 (talk) 10:33, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Yeah, you were reverted because it was unsourced and you didn't provide an edit summary either. Furthermore, not all of the ruling dynasties were of Turkic origin. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Khorasan

Hello, LouisAragon – What do you think of this edit to Khorasan? Is it appropriate to link a geographical name to Wiktionary at the top of a disambiguation page?  – Corinne (talk) 20:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne:, hello. To be honest, I have no idea. Do you think its an inappropriate change? - LouisAragon (talk) 22:45, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Original research?

Hello. What do you think about this:

• Azerbaijan (Iran)
  • Unsourced claim: Iranian Azerbaijan is administratively divided into West Azerbaijan, East Azerbaijan, Ardabil, and Zanjan provinces.
  • Unsourced map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Iranian-Azerbaijan.png

See:

• Azerbaijan ä˝zĕrbījän´, ă˝zər– [key], Iran. Azarbayejan, region, c.34,280 sq mi (88,785 sq km), NW Iran, divided into the provinces of East Azerbaijan (1996 pop. 3,325,540), West Azerbaijan (1996 pop. 2,496,320), and Ardabil (1996 pop. 1,168,011).
• Azerbaijan, also spelled Azarbaijan, or Azarbayjan, Persian Āz̄arbāyjān, geographic region that comprises the extreme northwestern portion of Iran. It is bounded on the north by the Aras River, which separates it from independent Azerbaijan and Armenia; on the east by the Iranian region of Gīlān and the Caspian Sea; on the south by the Iranian regions of Zanjān and Kordestān; and on the west by Iraq and Turkey. Azerbaijan is about 40,000 square miles (100,000 square km) in area.

I think the whole article needs a review. And if the article is not limited to a historical region, why I don't see similar content for other regions of Iran? Compare it with Iranian Kurdistan. --Wario-Man (talk) 15:18, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey, sorry!

Sorry, my cousin has a habit of editing wikipedia pages and she's been doing it for years, I do not like to edit anything. My apologies, you can re-edit your edits. Can you please ask your user-friends to resolve the block? I promise I will not be continuing to edit in this website in future, so there would be reason to block my IP for more than 2 years. If this is not a place where I can write this message, could you please show me a talk page where I can post this so my issue will be resolved, thank you.

94.43.171.124 (talk) 15:16, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Caucasus

I reverted an edit by 94.43.171.124 on Caucasus (history) thinking it was vandalism, but undid myself as I wasn't sure of Caucasus naming conventions. However I noticed that you reverted their previous similar edit to the article so I was wondering if you could check out the recent change to the article for me and revert it if warranted. benzband (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Benzband:, ah, I see your message only now. Thanks for leaving me a note about it. Appreciate it. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

User:Psychonot

I just saw your edit and warning of User:Psychonot here, reverting his edits. I just reverted his edit to the Template:Nuclear power in Iran were he added Khamenei as a nuclear negotiator, which to my understanding he is not. User has now been editing Rohingya people including the statement about refugees having babies and being "irresponsible", and some other disruptive editing to the lead section, which is not even the place for it.

Since you mentioned he has been warned before and simply deleted his messages, user seems to be WP:DISRUPTIVE and doing WP:NOTADVOCATE using Wikipedia as soapbox, without concern for structure or tone of the articles itself. This should be brought to admin attention, what's your take? DA1 (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

@DA1: Yep. I'd say hes pretty much WP:NOTHERE. I strongly suspect hes not a new editor either. A block is needed. Just a few minutes before you wrote me this message, I posted my concerns to another user who happened to have reverted some of his disruptive edits recently as well.[140] - LouisAragon (talk) 20:03, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

So how do you settle this issue? Judging by the discussion in the link you shared, he may be a sockpuppet as well then. -DA1 (talk) 20:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

I just asked an admin. He advised it should be brought to ANI. Are you, by any chance, willing to do it? Unfortuantrly, I don't really have much time atm. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

I have not yet, have you? In case of reference, here is the edit [141] on Rohingya where he adds the line about having babies under the subheader "Irresponsibility". DA1 (talk) 02:43, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Tus, Iran

Hello, LouisAragon – I don't know if you have Tus, Iran on your watchlist, but in case you don't, I thought I'd ask you about this edit. Besides the ungrammatical "Turkish and Mongols", I'm not sure it is accurate, but I don't know what to write in an edit summary if I revert, so I'll leave it up to you.  – Corinne (talk) 04:00, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Corinne & LouisAragon, I reverted the edit and added some information and references. Feel free to check it for mistakes. :) --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:20, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Fixing the block

In the AN3 complaint, my rangeblock should have been 107.77 not 107.71. (Who knew it was so hard to get these right?) Let me know if you still see the same guy editing. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Adalbero, Duke of Carinthia, rebellion

Have you found anything to support this sentence?

• "In May 1035, Duke Adalbero of Carinthia rebelled against Salian rule..."
  

I was unable to find a source for it. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: This is what I found;

• "The difficulties of the new course were already exposed in 1035 when Conrad II deposed Adalbero Eppensteiner as duke of Carinthia for pursuing a policy towards the Hungarians contrary to royal wishes"' -- Wilson, Peter H. (2016). Heart of Europe: A History of the Holy Roman Empire. Harvard University Press. p. 349

• "At the imperial diet in Bamberg during the latter half of May 1035, the emperor adjudged Adalbero guilty of an iniuria, or grave injustice (...)" - Wolfram, Herwig (tr. by Kaiser, Denise). Conrad II, 990-1039: Emperor of Three Kingdoms. Penn State Press. p. 329

• "Personal wrongs doubtless biassed his judgement when the Duke of Carinthia was charged with treasonable designs at the Diet of Bamberg in 1035. Adalbero was deposed and sentenced to the loss of his fiefs."" -- Cambridge Medieval History (Vols; 1-5)

• "Henry of Luxemburg was deposed from Bavaria in 1009, Ernest II from Suabia in 1027 and again in 1030, Adalbero from Carinthia in 1035, Godfrey from lower Lotharingia in 1044 and again in 1049 (...)" -- Reuther, Timothy. (2013). Germany in the Early Middle Ages C. 800-1056. Routledge. p. 195

What do you think? - LouisAragon (talk) 18:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, I did find this:

• "Duke Adalbero of Carinthia revolted in 1019 and Duke Conrad of Bavaria, deposed in 1053, was joined by the duke of Carinthia and the bishop of Regensburg in an attempt to replace Henry III with Conrad." --Phantoms of Remembrance: Memory and Oblivion at the End of the First Millennium, by Patrick J. Geary, page 46.

Although does not match up with the time period in question. Henry II does not die until 1024 and is then succeeded by Conrad. And, the way the sentence comes across, that Adalbero was in rebellion against Henry II and then later joined Conrad of Bavaria? But, this does explain Adalbero's actions and the reasoning behind the judgement of the Diet in 1035. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

OE

Actually, this book bottom of page 64 to 65, gives a concise view of the OE's structure. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:19, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Their court structure.[142] --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Their culture.[143] --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:23, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Did you miss..?

Did you miss [144] or did you decide you liked it? William M. Connolley (talk) 11:49, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Comment and participate

Since you're involved, please comment. Talk:Muhammad_ibn_Musa_al-Khwarizmi#Request_for_comment:_Should_ethnicity_of_al-Khwarizmi_appear_in_the_lead.3F --Wario-Man (talk) 14:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Book request on the Resource Exchange

Hi there, just wanted to check that you received the pages you were looking for from The Monetary History of Iran: From the Safavids to the Qajars. If so, could you mark your request as {{resolved}}? Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Western azerbaijan

You did a good job. I agree its all nonsense, I had actually requested for the whole page to be deleted a while back because the only sources were of aliyev speeches. It was denied. Ninetoyadome (talk) 19:59, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

edit warring on aq qoyunlu

hello. i have reported the edit warring user [145] but i'm not really familiar with reporting system. can you please write your comment there ? because you reverted his edits too and seems your are experienced94.177.78.186 (talk) 16:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Seems its already dealt with. Thanks for letting me know nevertheless, and of course, for taking the necessary steps (i.e. opening a 3RR section). - LouisAragon (talk) 23:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Joohnny braavoo1 sock?

A "new user" has made similar edit to the Qara Khitai article.

• edit by Joohnny braavoo1 assigning Turkic to Qara Khitai
• edit by Brazil38 stating Qara Khitai were Turkicized
  

Judging from the formating of the references used by Brazil38, this is not a new user. --Kansas Bear (talk) 14:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: yeah, spot on. Another giveaway, imo, are the kindergarten level edit summaries.[146][147] - LouisAragon (talk) 23:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Mehrdad 12 and Sockpuppetry associated with User:History of Persia / User: Artin Mehraban

I noticed you've dealt with both User: Merhdad 12 and User:History of Persia. There is an issue with User:Mehrdad 12. A friend of mine stumbled upon this historically innaccurate map (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:131Etendue_de_l%27Empire_Fran%C3%A7ais1.png) added to a the French colonial empire page. It was created by the afforementioned user. User:Mehrdad 12 has accounts on the Persian Wikipedia as well as Wiki Commons. He freqently falsifies image edits and contributions without sources and adds his self created images to articles. Most of his edits have been reverted by me, or others such as yourself. I feel his image edits in particular are damaging to the integrity and mission of Wikipedia and Media Wiki.

I have a good reason to suspect that this is User: Artin Mehraban who formerly had a sockpuppet account as User:History of Persia. The MO is very similar. Bad English, no reason for edits, false information, and focus on revising Persian History "Afsharia"("Mehrdad 12" associates with this on the Persian Wiki, and "Artin Mehraban" edited this article on the Persian Wiki) and image editing without sources. I also should point out that the name is very similar (Mehrdad v Mehraban.) I am bringing this to your attention because i believe since you have dealt with him that articles that he has edited should be checked for falsifications.-- Wilner (Speak to me) 07:46, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Hey R9tgokunks, thanks for your message. I'm sorry for giving such a late response. Had completely forgotten about it due to being busy with other things. Glad to see that you're another editor who pays proper attention to bogus edits, linking them together with WP:NOTHERE editors of the past, in order to find the "root" of the issue.

There's really a decent chance that its him. But we need a smoking gun. Right now, his editorial pattern is too irregular and too much of a "common" disruptive type, IMO. Give him some more rope. Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 17:31, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ANI Experiences survey

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

And the hits just keep on coming.....

Hoping you can view this. Cambridge History of Turkey. ALL VOLUMES!

https://archive.org/details/iB_CT

Enjoy! --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: dayum, splendid! - LouisAragon (talk) 17:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

User:AScythianSoul

• AScythianSoul (talk · contribs)

I think this user is WP:ACTING sock of Korean user Kumasojin. He/she creates (intentionally or unintentionally) a strawman on Iran-related articles and as disruptive as this vandal. Probably you has also noticed them, since their editing topics are within your areas of interests. @Kansas Bear, Wario-Man, and HistoryofIran:, FYI. -91.146.40.248 (talk) 12:43, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

i am iranian, so i edit iranian topic only. is there some problem?AScythianSoul (talk) 12:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, LouisAragon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

History of Azerbaijan

I call on you to stop making biased and unjustified edits to the page History of Azerbaijan. I have noticed that you have a history of making harmful edits to pages related to Azerbaijan. It seems, your personal attitude towards Azerbaijan severely affects your objectivity. --89MsHm (talk) 09:31, 05 December 2017 (UTC)

There are no reliable sources to be found that state that "Sumerians" (!) and "Elamites" roamed in the territory of the present-day Azerbaijan Republic. Its one of the biggest hoaxes I've heard in a long time. Same goes for "Altaic nomaids".

Rawadids, Assyrians, Medes, and Manneans are completely unrelated to the soil of the contemporary Azerbaijan Republic as well. They were based in historic Azerbaijan, i.e. "Iranian Azerbaijan", not Arran/Shirvan.

• MANNEA (Neo-Assyrian Mannāyu, Old Testament Minni, Vulgata Menni, cf. Postgate, 1987-90, p. 340a), name refering to a region southeast of Lake Urmia centered around modern Saqqez. -- Zadok, Ran (2006). Encyclopaedia Iranica.

• RAWWADIDS (Ar. Rawwādiya, Rawādiya), a family of Arab descent that controlled Tabriz and north-eastern Azerbaijan in the late 8th and early 9th centuries. Their Kurdicized descendants ruled over Azerbaijan and parts of Armenia in the second half of the 10th and much of the 11th century. -- Peacock, Andrew (2017). Encyclopaedia Iranica

• MEDIA, ancient population region and kingdom in northwestern Iran. The name is attested as Gk. Mēdía, OPers. Māda (Kent, Old Persian, p. 202), Assyrian and Babylonian Mādāya (Parpola, 1970, pp. 230-31; Zadok, 1985, pp. 214-15). -- M. Dandamayev and I. Medvedskaya (2006). Encyclopaedia Iranica.

• HUNS, collective term for horsemen of various origins leading a nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle. -- Martin Schottky. (2004). Enc. Iranica. Vol. XII, Fasc. 6, pp. 575-577

• "Less well known to the general public than their Babylonian and Assyrian neighbors to the west, the Elamites were one of a number of groups inhabiting southwestern Iran between the Bronze Age and the early Islamic era. Longtime adversaries of the Akkadians, Babylonians, and Assyrians. -- Daryaee, Touraj. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Iranian History. Oxford University Press. p. 37

• "(...) and running an empire which, from the mid-8th to the late 7th century bc, stretched far beyond the Assyrian homeland to include all of Iraq and most of Syria, wide sweeps of eastern Turkey and western Iran, and almost the entire eastern Mediterranean coast." -- Karen Radner,Eleanor Robson (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture. Oxford University Press. p. 359

" Even today there are names of villages in Azerbaijan associated with Cimmerians."

Really? Well call CNN then! Oh, but can we see the sources/evidence though?!

"Nadir Guli Bey"

Not even gonna comment on that.

You have brought no sources to prove anything. Nothing but loose words. Per WP:RS, WP:VER, the content had to go. Verifiability is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia: the appropriate response is to provide the requested reliable source, not to leave an editor a lousy personal essay for invoking the proper WP policies. Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 08:08, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion

I'd love to see your opinion at Talk:UAE Arabian Gulf League, thank you.--Bijanii (talk) 01:45, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

WP:OR

What do you think about this? Most parts sound like irredentism and WP:OR. --Wario-Man (talk) 10:56, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Wario-Man: Yeah, it is. Needs to be rewritten completely. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Then add it to your to-do list if it's interesting for you. Thanks. --Wario-Man (talk) 12:11, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Zeynab Begum

@Tdslk: Thanks, looks good! - LouisAragon (talk) 21:05, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

qashqai

can you stop this troll account?go see what he does in Qashqai people — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.158.114.141 (talk) 22:16, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Andrew David Urshan

LouisAragon, I just did a basic copy-edit. I tried to see some of the sources, but without success. If you will tell me how to see the sources, I'll try to look more closely at how the source is represented in the article and whether I could write a paraphrase, or a better paraphrase.  – Corinne (talk) 01:42, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne: Source #1 (The Cambridge Companion to Pentecostalism), Source #2 (Iranica). - LouisAragon (talk) 01:50, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

O.K. Thanks for the links. If you don't mind, though, I think I'll wait until tomorrow to do that. Is there any rush?  – Corinne (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne: Not at all. It only recently (2 days ago?) passed DYK nomination. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

GOCE Requests-page limit

LouisAragon, there is a limit of two requests per editor on the GOCE page; you just added a third. Please withdraw it until such time as one of your current requests has been given its copyedit; as Corinne is working on one of them, it probably won't be very long before you can resubmit that third request. Thank you for your cooperation. BlueMoonset (talk) 08:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset:  Done Thanks for letting me know. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:58, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

And now I'm letting you know that since one of the two existing articles has been completed, you're welcome to resubmit that request, which will have a timestamp only a little over a day later. I'm glad things moved along so quickly! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:12, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: thanks; that was fast indeeed! - LouisAragon (talk) 13:44, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Safavid Georgia

Hello, LouisAragon – I'll read through the article once more tomorrow to see if I missed anything.  – Corinne (talk) 01:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne: Splendid! Thanks ALOT once again! - LouisAragon (talk) 01:47, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad to help. I'll mention a few things here tomorrow.  – Corinne (talk) 01:49, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure! I already noticed you put a clarification tag in one of the alineas. Hit me up with any questions you have. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:55, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

O.K. Here goes:

In the lead:

1) I'd like you to take a look at this sentence:

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles (of the Bagrationi dynasty), converts to Shia Islam, as valis or khans.

The phrase "converts to Shia Islam" needs some attention. Until the reader reaches "as valis or khans", it at first seems as if "converts to Shia Islam" is a separate group. Then, when the reader gets to the final phrase, it becomes clear that the phrase is an appositive phrase constituting additional information about the pro-Iranian Georgian nobles. But it's best to avoid even slight ambiguity. The phrase would be clearer if it were changed to a clause, "who were converts to Shia Islam," or – even better, if only those Georgian nobles who had converted to Shia Islam were ever appointed – "who had converted to Shia Islam". However, I'm wondering if it is even necessary to mention this in the lead. Would you consider this wording?

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles (of the Bagrationi dynasty) as valis or khans.

If you think it is essential to mention that the nobles had converted to Shia Islam, then:

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles (of the Bagrationi dynasty) who had converted to Shia Islam as valis or khans.

2) Now look at this sentence:

• Though both kingdoms had already been subjugated by the early 16th century, the rulers of the kingdoms did not convert, and even though Tiflis had been garrisoned as early as Ismail I's reign, relations at the time were somewhat marked by traditional vassalage.

I'm think that "relations" is insufficiently clear. I think it should be spelled out (mentioned explicitly): relations between X and Y, or the relationship between X and Y.

Also, it's a little confusing when one reads that the kingdoms were subjugated, but then they've still got "rulers". Also, I would ask, "When did the rulers not convert"? -- At that time? Ever? I wonder why you are mentioning the rulers at all. I also think "even though Tiflis had been garrisoned" is a little obscure for the average Wikipedia reader, many of whom are non-native speakers of English and/or young people. Is there any way to say this that is less academic-sounding? The whole sentence is a little academic-sounding. I'm not sure what the main point of this sentence is.

3) Earlier, you had used both "mainland Iran" and "Iran proper" to refer to the main body of Iran (as opposed to the entire Safavid kingdom, including provinces outside Iran proper, I assume). "Mainland" is not the right word. According to Merriam-Webster on-line, a "mainland" (noun) is "a continent or the main part of a continent as distinguished from an offshore island or sometimes from a cape or peninsula". "Iran proper" is better, but I think it would clutter up the article to keep repeating "Iran proper", "Iran proper", "Iran proper". I thought, after the first mention of "Iran proper" in the lead, and one mention at the beginning of the "History" section, I would write, "Hereafter, simply "Iran" in parentheses after "Iran proper". That makes it clear that "Iran" is to be understood as the main body of Iran without the provinces outside of it. Does that sound good to you?

4) In the fourth paragraph in Safavid Georgia#16th century is the following sentence:

• In 1580–1581 the Safavid government sent a force accompanied by the tupchi-bashi Morad Khan to Georgia together with a number of cannon founders and the materials needed for casting cannon.

What are "cannon founders"? Founders are people. I know the word "foundry", a place where objects made of metal are made, so "cannon foundry" makes sense to me, but it would be odd to consider moving a foundry, so I don't know. Also, I know there's a link at "tupchi-bashi", but I think it should be explained here.

More later.  – Corinne (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne:

1)

• We should definitely go with "Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles (of the Bagrationi dynasty) who had converted to Shia Islam as valis or khans. " Conversion to Shia Islam was basically a necessary prequisite in order to receive proper investiture by the Safavid monarchs. There were a few non-Islamic governors/vassal rulers (Teimuraz I of Kakheti comes to mind), but none of them ever managed to establish themselves as a "proper" ruler; i.e. they were quickly removed by the central government. Conversion was pretty much a characteristic necessity, if we were to take the entire period as a whole.

2)

• Yeah, I agree. It should probably be changed into "relations between the Iranians and the Georgians". Or something of that sort. Would you agree?
• Basically, during the first ~ 60 years of Safavid suzerainty over Georgia, due to various geo-political and internal issues, the Safavid monarchs allowed the Georgian Bagrationis to rule the province as Safavid subjects, without having to convert to Islam. With "rulers" I basically mean "governors / vassal rulers / subordinates". Its quite complex; the Safavids were quite tolerant towards the Georgia Province until the 1610s and its governors/vassal rulers. If I still need to clear up some things about this, please don't hesitate.
• The first governor to convert was Davud Khan (in 1562). The governors/vassal rulers of the Georgia province prior to his tenure are not known to have converted. But that was mostly because Eastern Georgia was de facto occupied and "militarized" by the Safavids, due to 1) ongoing wars against the Ottomans 2) a few uprisings against the Safavid rule. Undue for the lede as well I'd say. What about removing the entire sentence; "Though both kingdoms had (...) marked by traditional vassalage"?

3)

• That sounds perfect to me.

4)

• I just checked the source once more. At first, before opening the right page, I thought it must have been a typo on my part, but the source actually says "cannon founders". The Safavids and Ottomans were at war at the time. A major part of the war razed over the Georgia province, thus the government sent people to the province in order to set up a cannon foundry.
• "(...) sent a force accompanied by Morad Khan, the commander of the artillery corps (tupchi-bashi), to Georgia (...)". Something along these lines should do the trick?

Btw Corinne, I noticed you changed "It would create a perfect circumstance if a campaign was needed against the Ottomans, with whom they were at war at the time, over Imereti" into "It would create a perfect circumstance if a campaign was needed against the Ottomans, with whom they were at war at the time over Imereti".
I meant to say that the Ottomans and Safavids were already at war at the time. But not yet over Imereti. The Safavids were trying to create an argument with what whole marriage story during the war to conquer Imereti (an Ottoman possession). So they were not "already" at war with the Ottomans "over Imereti". My bad, should've formulated it more appropriately. - LouisAragon (talk) 13:38, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Re 1): I'd like to re-arrange the sentence a bit so as not to leave "as valis or khans" at the end:

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment as valis or khans of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles (of the Bagrationi dynasty) who had converted to Shia Islam.

Personally, I find parentheses distracting. At the very same time they minimize (in importance) what's within the parentheses but slow down and distract the reader. I feel that, often, you've got to make a decision: is the information important to include at this point or not? If not, remove the information. If so, work it into the sentence so that it has the importance it deserves. If you think the sentence would sound all right without the parentheses, I recommend removing them:

(a) parentheses removed:

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment as valis or khans of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles of the Bagrationi dynasty who had converted to Shia Islam.

(b) information removed entirely:

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment as valis or khans of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles who had converted to Shia Islam.

(c) information included at the end of the sentence or in a separate clause:

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment as valis or khans of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles who had converted to Shia Islam, mainly those of the Bagrationi dynasty.

• Safavid rule was mainly characterized by the appointment as valis or khans of pro-Iranian Georgian nobles who had converted to Shia Islam; these nobles were mainly members of the Bagrationi dynasty.

I just looked at the article and saw the many changes made by Kober. I guess some are improvements in wording, but I cannot judge the changes to content. You or others will have to do that. The changes kind of made my comments above superfluous. I will leave up to you what changes you wish to implement. If you need me to read through the article again once any content issues have been resolved, let me know.  – Corinne (talk) 01:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne: Yep, I'll let you know. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:48, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Andrew David Urshan

On 20 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Andrew David Urshan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Andrew David Urshan, an ethnic Assyrian from Persia, conducted Pentecostal revivals in the United States Midwest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Andrew David Urshan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Andrew David Urshan), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 00:01, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Can i have your opinion please ?

Hi, i would like to know if you can give your opinion about the Al-Kindi article. I’m looking for other users opinion to try to solve a dispute with another contributor about the ethnicity of Al-Kindi. Thanks for your valuable time. Farawahar (talk) 13:36, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think my opinion would add anything to the convo. The overwhelming number of WP:RS sources consider Al-Kindi to be of Arab origin.
"Such important figures as the Arab al-Kindi we shall therefore have to leave aside, although he is in a sense the founder of Islamic philosophy, and the later stages of its development would not" -- S.H. Nasr (1975). Philosophy and Cosmology. p. 419. In R.N. Frye. The Cambridge History of Iran, (Vol. 4). - LouisAragon (talk) 00:26, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet?

• Sazz10

• First edit, Template:Tunnels in Turkey. Notice any familiar name(s)?
• Second edit, List of tunnels in Turkey
• Third edit, Al-Husayn I ibn Ali talk page, "....was a Turk..."
• Fourth edit, Talk:List of Turkic dynasties and countries, surprise, surprise.
• Fifth & Sixth edit, User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad, odd how a new user found this Admin.
• Next three edits, Xiongnu... --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Good 'ol Johnny Bravo... - LouisAragon (talk) 00:15, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:34, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Bzuk: thanks appreciate it, you too! - LouisAragon (talk) 00:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Dispute

I pinged you on my talk page.[148] --Wario-Man (talk) 16:11, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Bournoutian book

Thanks for the information, i didnt know about this book. The paragraphs you quoted seem very interesting. Ninetoyadome (talk) 21:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ninetoyadome: you're welcome! - LouisAragon (talk) 00:12, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Chaldiran

Merry Christmas to you Louis. Thank you for the thanks. I mostly do WikiGnome-ing and copy editing and having some of this noted and appreciated is a pleasant Christmas present. And thanks to you in turn for your more substantial inputs to this article. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:02, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

And to you too, Gog the Mild! You're welcome any time, any day. It's thanks to people like you that this site is able to run smoothly. Your hard work doesn't go unnoticed. Take care, - LouisAragon (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Ali-Qoli Khan Shamlu

Hello, LouisAragon – I found a lot that was unclear in this article. To save time, I left "clarification needed" tags with hidden notes to you. Let me know if you need any help in wording sentences, and I'll be glad to read it through once or twice more after you've worked on it a bit. Best regards,  – Corinne (talk) 01:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne:  Done. If there are still things that need to be cleared up, lemme know. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:34, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

South-Central Asia

See [149], [150], [151], [152]. His other edits look problematic and unhelpful too.[153] --Wario-Man (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@Wario-Man: yeah, thanks for letting me know. One of his socks got caught on Wikimedia a few days ago.[154] That's probably why he decided to move back to Wikipedia. ;-) - LouisAragon (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

PS: here's the SPII just made. Turns out he's a long-term disruptor whose main account is in fact globally locked. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Artaxerxes

Hello LouisAragon, I'm asking for your knowledge on the Achaemenids for an issue. As you know, the commonly accepted time of reign of Artaxerxes I is 465-424/3 BCE. For some reason, possibly related to some literal interpretation of the Bible or other texts, Jehovah's Witnesses firmly state that Artaxerxes ruled 475-424 BCE. In fact, periodically someone tries to change the coronation date on his Wikipedia article. This also happened yesterday, see here, yet this is the first time that someone brings that British Museum tablet as a proof. On the BM website, it indeed dates to Artaxerxes' regnal year 50 which, according to mainstream historians, should not exist since he ruled for around 41/42 years. I refuse to believe in both biblical literalism and that no respected historian noticed that issue. Yet I can't find a solution. Wrong reading of the tablet date? Wrong caption? Wrong Artaxerxes? Co-regency with Xerxes? About this issue, on the web is a flourishing of religiously-biased sites and self-published works, I haven't found anything reliable yet. Khruner (talk) 18:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@Khruner: Shit. Sorry for the late reply mate. Completely forgot about it.
This is something pretty peculiar. Though we have to be careful when making such statements, I'd say its probably a combination of a wrong caption and, in turn, a wrong reading of the tablet. But thats just my opinion. I clicked a bit further; on this page the BM lists his time of reign as "464BC - 424BC", i.e. the commonly accepted date. Perhaps they'd appreciate an email about this? Great find nonetheless. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:19, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

As you correctly state, the overwhelming number of RS sources state a different date, so thats what we should go with at all times. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Don't worry, I always adhere to the mainstream. That was a curiosity of mine, and I think I'll email the museum soon. Thanks! Khruner (talk) 21:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Battle of Chaldiran

Your thoughts on this edit? --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

This source:

• Guns for the Sultan: Military Power and the Weapons Industry in the Ottoman Empire, by Gábor Ágoston, page 59.
  

appears to contradict that edit. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

And this source:

• Military Transition in Early Modern Asia, 1400-1750, by Kaushik Roy, page 46.
  

states the Safavids captured some Ottoman cannons in 1516 and had copies made of them.

And on the same page, it states the Safavids defeating the Uzbeks in 1510 without the use of gunpowder weapons, but that in 1528 defeated the Uzbeks that had no gunpowder weapons(insinuating their usage by the Safavids). --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: Yep, its pure nonsense. From the early formation of the Safavid state, the army had a small number of artillery pieces as part of its capability. However, not at Chaldiran. A verifiable fact which has jack to do with the Uzbeks. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Said editor had posted on my talk page. I moved their comments to the article talk page. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Robert II, Count of Flanders

Well that explains why I could not find any source about him drowning! HA! Nice work, LA! --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:39, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: always welcome! - LouisAragon (talk) 15:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Disagreement about the reliability and neutrality of sources in the article of Nagorno-Karabakh". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 26 January 2018.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 12:29, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Disagreement about the reliability and neutrality of sources in the article of Nagorno-Karabakh, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Dispute resolution Nagorno-Karabakh

LouisAragon,

Because of the lack of the consensus regarding my deleted edits in the article of Nagorno-Karabakh, I have requested a dispute resolution.

Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#Deleted_edits_in_January_5_and_6,_2018

Human7777 (talk) 13:52, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Pari Khan Khanum

Hello, LouisAragon – There are just a couple of things that need clearing up:

1) The first sentence in Pari Khan Khanum#Under Ismail II needs clarifying, and

2) the first sentence in the second paragraph in Pari Khan Khanum#Death is an incomplete sentence. I didn't know what to do with it.  – Corinne (talk) 18:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Corinne! Fixed the first one, left a tag for the second one. HoI will know what to do with it. Take care, - LouisAragon (talk) 19:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Nader shah

Hi. In past I didn't know about rules of wikipedia and I even didn't know that user can't add file without its source, but now I know about rules. So that's why at this time I added files with its source, but even with source it didn't accept and restored by you, so I want to know cause. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SadiqiBeg (talk • contribs) 09:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

The first book, is unviewable, so unless you have that book, it would be impossible to know what it says. It currently costs $139 on amazon.com AND, Turcoman/Turkman are essentially the same thing.

The second a journal review, states;"Nadir's native language could not be "Turki or Eastern Turkish". As an Afshar he surely spoke a southern Turcoman dialect, similar to that of all the Afshars scattered throughout Persia,i.e. in usual parlance, " the Turkish of Azarbayjan." The Afshars were certainly an Oghuz, and not a Mongol tribe."

And yet, according to Oghuz languages, could have been Qashqai or Afshar.

- LouisAragon (talk) 19:31, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hellenization

To answer your question, I don't think you can or should broadly assume that Hellenization means Greek-speaking. It is somewhat beside the point what the historical boundaries of Armenia were, because in general I don't think these two words should be used interchangeably because Hellenization itself was very complex. A statement like "The Greek-speaking Christian population gradually became Turkish-speaking and Muslim" is not just a summary, it is a misleading oversimplification that fails to accurately summarize the reliable sources. My goal is to find a good balance where the important complexities that have been widely discussed in academic literature are not obscured. I think the Armenians have largely been left out of the illustrious list of peoples who inhabited Cappadocia, but "the Christian population of Anatolia became Turkified" or "became Hellenized" (or both) is misleading, especially in an article about the modern state of Turkey where we have to be careful not to represent a theory of general, sweeping continuity as fact when it is extremely controversial in scholarship.Seraphim System ^(talk) 04:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, Seraphim System. I get what you mean now. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Teresia Sampsonia

The article Teresia Sampsonia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Teresia Sampsonia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 03:21, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

azerbaijan

Hi. thank you for editing in this article and helping me. i have persian reliable source which says azerbaijan was never named azerbaijan before mosavat government. can you translate a few paragraph of it's text into english ? --Dandamayev (talk) 01:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dandamayev: Yes, it was never known as "Azerbaijan" prior to 1918. But the problem here ain't the sources. Even if you brought, lets say, 10.000 reliable sources, he'd still disregard them. The problem here is just one editor who can't edit neutrally on (history-related) topics vis-a-vis the Azerbaijan Republic (or better said, the WP:AA2 scope in general). - LouisAragon (talk) 11:52, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

PS: I can't translate that material, as I don't read Persian (I can only speak it). - LouisAragon (talk) 11:52, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok. I will return the text into latin alphabet, soon. but for a reliable source, see arran in Encyclopædia Iranica by Prof Clifford Edmund Bosworth. it will be useful. renaming of this territory is a long-term progress by panturkish statesmen . you must read books and articles from Prof touraj atabaki for it. if you can, contact with User:Khodabandeh14 --Dandamayev (talk) 12:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)