User talk:HistoryofIran: Difference between revisions

Line 143: Line 143:

Hello sir, History of Iran. From your talk, I understood that I will not be able to edit about the Qajars? Is that really the case? Because my subject is the Qajars and Mathematics. In order to create an article about mathematics, I need to bring innovation to mathematics somewhere😂. But there are many events related to the Qajars that have not been investigated. For example: The Qotur problem (between the Ottomans and the Qajars), the Qajar-Russian conflict (1781-1782), etc. [[User:Eminİskandarli|Eminİskandarli]] ([[User talk:Eminİskandarli|talk]]) 17:11, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry Eminİskandarli, but I believe I have ~~already~~ written several comments that already answer your question. I don’t know what else to say. [[User:HistoryofIran|HistoryofIran]] ([[User talk:HistoryofIran#top|talk]]) 17:15, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry Eminİskandarli, but I believe I have written several comments that already answer your question. I don’t know what else to say. [[User:HistoryofIran|HistoryofIran]] ([[User talk:HistoryofIran#top|talk]]) 17:15, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, HistoryofIran. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You’ve got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Safavid Iran, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khamsa.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 15:51, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:52, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Not from me; just a disgruntled editor who can’t seem to read simple directions.) Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:52, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your input. However, I would like to point out that Hindko is recognized as a language in several reliable sources. For example, the Pakistani census lists Hindko separately as a mother tongue, and international linguistic databases such as Ethnologue and Glottolog also classify Hindko as a language, not just a dialect cluster. While it is true that some linguists group it under Lahnda, many others—and importantly, its own speakers—consider it a distinct language with its own identity. For this reason, describing Hindko as a “language” in the lead is both accurate and supported by sources. 2paknartopa (talk) 23:58, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran Hello, please do not change Hindko from being described as a language. Reliable sources and Pakistan’s census recognize Hindko as a distinct language, and many speakers identify it as such. 2paknartopa (talk) 00:33, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Rebellions against the Rashidun Caliphate indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:24, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your last edits. At the page Khanate of Kokand. You removed everything Uzbek. And removed all sourced info. And your claims was not even sourced. I Will restore what you removed. I give you last warning! I will report this to WP:ANI Densmartasvensken (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I’ve just indeffed this user for socking. Girth Summit _(blether) 01:37, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Girth Summit! HistoryofIran (talk) 14:51, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir.
I am expanding the Persian wp article on “Kafi-Zafar Hamedani”, an Iranian poet from 11th century. But we don’t have much information about him in Persian. I tried searching his name in English in google, but I got nothing. Can you help me find some website or PDF versions in English? Bbadree (talk) 12:23, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbadree: Hi. Unfortunately, I only found a small section about him in Persian Literature – A Bio-Bibliographical Survey: Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period (Volume V), page 459–460. I’ve uploaded the book here [1], it has a lot of stuff that I think you might find useful. Best. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:37, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot for this precious information sir. I’ll use it in the article.–Bbadree (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran: Hi again. I have expanded the article to some extent. Could you please take a look at it and tell me what it lacks fondumentally and structurally?Bbadree (talk) 04:35, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I can’t read the Persian script, so I’m using Google Translate. Article looks good, though there seems to be a few unsourced segments? Or perhaps my browser is bugging. HistoryofIran (talk) 09:46, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the sockpuppet investigations that you have performed on this guy, I wasn’t expecting there to be so many different accounts of him, like holy Jesus…. However, since 2023 he continues to deliberately vandalize and delete content from the articles Siege of Narbonne (737), Siege of Narbonne (752–759), Septimania, Siege of Ta’if, and basically anything even remotely related to the umayyads with newly registered accounts, but mostly disguised as anonymous IP addresses to avoid detection (he’s been blocked since 2021). Is there any way to include these anonymous IPs as well to the sockpuppet investigations on him? GenoV84 (talk) 11:44, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GenoV84. Holy Jesus indeed. Yeah IPs can also be included in SPIs. If a sock uses several IPs under the same range, the range can also be reported. Though with persistent socks like PaullyMatthews I would definitely recomeend requesting protection for the targeted article(s) so you retain some of your sanity. If I may ask, why do you think these IPs are PaullyMatthews? At Siege of Narbonne (737) [2], the IP doesn’t seem to act like PaullyMatthews imo. PaullyMatthews has a very… interesting way of talking. Very short and almost robot like. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since 2023, he has had two main styles of disruptive editing to avoid detection, and the edits that he has made over the years are always the same:

Disruption as anonymous IP addresses, with or without offensive comments and insults in the edit summaries;
Disruption as newly registered user accounts, with very short edit summaries (such as “fixed typo”, “added source”, etc.) or no edit summaries at all.
Disrupting the same aforemetioned articles once or twice every month (yeah, seriously), although he usually doesn’t crash out as badly as he did yesterday and today before being rangeblocked; this is why I have to check on them on my watchlist, other editors don’t seem to care about reverting his edits anyway (understandably so, these articles don’t have many viewers and are mostly about military conflicts dating back to the Early Middle Ages).
Moreover, multiple registered accounts tha vandalized the aforementioned articles have already been investigated and confirmed as sockpuppets of PaullyMatthews (see revision history), while the localization of the various IP addresses that he has used over the years (see revision history) point to the same locations, either Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.

GenoV84 (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My main gripe for this connection is the lack of short and consice, robot-like, comments, since that is his signature move during all these years. Not that socks always follow the same pattern, but you’ll be surprised how uncreative some remain despite getting caught for the same stuff dozens of times. But then again, an admin looking into the SPI might be more convinced than me. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HistoryofIran, I noticed you removed my edits on Bakhtiari people and on Feyli Kurds due to the source. I read the books, they all cited reliable sources, thats why I used them. Since your saying the books are not reliable or published, you’re saying I can go in those books I cited and cite each source they had individually? Because they had usable sources, I only used the specific books because it was less sources to cite. I have no problem doing this because there is a genuine movement of Bakhtiaris who reject the Lur label and they should be in the article just like all other articles about ethnic groups give the people’s perspective, actually I think it deserves more of a place in the section than the nonsense about them being Greeks. And I added the source from before 1900 to show that its not something new. As for the Feyli people article, why not just rename it to “Feyli (term)” or something? The only reason I made the Feyli people article is because I’m a Feyli myself and wanted to answer everyone who wastes time debating if we are Lurs or Kurds. As long as the articles about Feyli Kurds and Feyli Lurs mention that they are distinct from each other I have no issue with the Feyli people article being deleted. Ilamxan (talk) 22:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ilamxan. We should follow relevant, high quality WP:RS by experts and their current consensus. And that is not what you did at the Bakhtiari article, nor at the Feyli people article, sorry. The Encyclopedia of Islam volume three, covers the Bakhtiari origin part thoroughly and without sounding like a vague, debate panel (with all due respect), WP:RS of similar caliber should be cited. The disambiguation article Feyli already exists. Please see WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:SYNTH. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:12, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Smith and Curzon were not to prove anything but that the arguments of their identity is not something new. Farjadian only did genetic tests and shared their results, while Zolfaghari is himself a Bakhtiari and even in the source said that Bakhtiaris are Lurs, he just gave all viewpoints. No one is saying they aren’t Lurs, this is like the Greek theory. Ilamxan (talk) 15:08, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the information you’re adding are vague claims that are badly cited (tons of pages, impossible to verify unless someone feel like reading at least 20 pages), and not WP:RS. This is also not the same as the Greek theory, as the latter actually talks about the origins of the Bakhtiaris. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unrelated but do you think the page Arab-Persians should be looked at? Alot of its content makes no sense and “Arabized Persians” would not only be more descriptive but also more historically accurate. The page literally says that “Arab-Persians” identify with one side only, there was never such thing as a dual Arab-Persian identity. However it is well known that Persians got Arabized to a large degree and the Arab part of Khuzestan, most of southern Iraq, Kuwait, and Bahrain were Iranians who got Arabized yet would never acknowledge it. Wouldn’t something similar to the Arabized Berber page be better? ✹Ilamxan⛰︎ (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me of that article. I don’t think that article should exist at all (looks like WP:OR/WP:SYNTH), doesn’t look like a thing in WP:RS. I don’t think Arabized Persians should exist either unless it is actually a notable topic in WP:RS. There’s always Arabization for info to be added. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Safavids and their rulers were Akhbari in their approach. For example, we find Al-Muhaqqiq Al-Karaki Al-Akhbari and the Hadith scholar Baqir Al-Majlisi as their religious trustees in the position of Sheikh Al-Islam. They relied on them and followed their approach. It was known that the Akhbari scholars were scattered throughout the place, moving here and there. They were under an alliance, not within the Safavid allegiance, so “akhbarian” is written next to “Safavids”!
We find in the book The Safavid Persian Empire, by Roger Savory, page 237, the appointment of the position of Sheikh al-Islam to al-Majlisi al-Akhbari?! Akhbarian (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:SYNTH and WP:COMMON NAME. WP:RS does not use “Safavid-Akhbarian”, let alone when it comes to war. Heck, this applies to all other dynasties. HistoryofIran (talk) 09:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The name must be added, because the Akhbaris were not under the rule of the Safavids, so if they followed them, it would be like the “Guardianship of the Jurist,” so they must be added to report their assistance. Akhbarian (talk) 11:19, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that’s not how it works. Please re-read my comment and click the links I posted. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:28, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is true, but I will end the conversation. Akhbarian (talk) 12:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think the sock master you know is back. Beligrentins (talk · contribs) [3] Kajmer05 (talk) 10:17, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nice find, all articles outside my Watchlist. Thanks Kajmer05, I’ll file an SPI shortly, almost the same name as one of the previous socks too Beligrentsinspect. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:40, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HistoryofIran!,

I noticed that you had reverted my edit saying that the lede should be unsourced. But if you were to look at the Achaemenid Empire or the Sasanian Empire you would see plenty of references in the lede. Could you please clarify.

Thank you!

Oceanbed347 (talk) 13:05, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please see WP:LEDE and WP:OTHER. It’s a WP:FA article, all that needs to be sourced is already sourced. And since it’s a WP:FA article, quality has to remain high. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:10, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So if its a WP:FA article then the lede should not be sourced. Am I correct?

If so I will keep it in mind when I edit other pages.

Thanks.

Oceanbed347 (talk) 13:21, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you see a WP:GA/WP:FA article with zero sources in the lede, than that is likely on purpose and means everything that needs to be sourced is already in the body of the article. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will keep that in mind when I edit other pages.

Thank you for clarifying.

Oceanbed347 (talk) 13:37, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oceanbed373:. Sorry forgot to mention, it can also apply to non-WP:GA/WP:FA articles, though that’s much more rare. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that you had also reverted some of my previous edits as well. You should have dropped me a message. I have been repeating the same mistake over and over again.

Keep an eye on me as I will be editing articles related to Iranian history. Please know that all edits I make are in Good faith and that if I make any mistakes it is only due to my own ignorance.

Thank you.

Oceanbed347 (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re right, I should have done that. Will do, thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’ve noticed that you often edit a lot of articles relating to Iran or it’s history and I was wondering if you would like to help me expand this article called Siege of Nishapur (1221) because as of right now it got nominated for deletion and im trying my best to expand it so it does not get deleted would you mind if could possibly help or? Because you most likely know 20x more about Irans history than I do ~~Shadow. 547 (talk) 12:38, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shadow. 547. Sorry, but this topic is not something I am currently motivated to look into. Maybe in the future. Best. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It it because the Mongols destroyed and burned Nishapur, a city in Iran? But whatever it’s fine and do you know who else would probably help expand the article? Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:10, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I already explained my reasons for not wanting to work on that article, I’m simply not interested. Please refrain from making such assumptions. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know who else could probably help expand the article or do you know what i should do to get the article more attention? Shadow. 547 (talk) 18:23, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There’s a thread started by 2A02:1406:112:E64B:EC5F:3110:3BA1:C05F (talk · contribs) at WP:AN/I about you. They apparently missed the part where they’re required to inform you. The thread is at Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents#Khanate of Kokland. —Hammersoft (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, History of Iran. From your talk, I understood that I will not be able to edit about the Qajars? Is that really the case? Because my subject is the Qajars and Mathematics. In order to create an article about mathematics, I need to bring innovation to mathematics somewhere😂. But there are many events related to the Qajars that have not been investigated. For example: The Qotur problem (between the Ottomans and the Qajars), the Qajar-Russian conflict (1781-1782), etc. Eminİskandarli (talk) 17:11, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Eminİskandarli, but I believe I have written several comments that already answer your question. I don’t know what else to say. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:15, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment