User talk:Keivan.f/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Roxelana
hi there, thank you for your message. No I am sorry, that is all I have. Good luck with finding more information about the painting. Gryffindor (talk) 20:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hürrem and Mahidevran
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Unsourced personal info
Hi Keivan.f, note that I partially reverted your edits at Nur Fettahoğlu as some of the personal info (including spouse names, marriage dates and parent names) you added was not supported by sourced article content. In addition to the BLP issues, the instructions at Template:Infobox person note that height should only be included if the individual is noted for their height or if it is particularly relevant (e.g. for sports figures or models). The names of family members are generally only included if they are independently notable (per WP:BLPNAME). --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- It's not better for me to "to search about her in internet", it's better (and policy) for you to include your sources when you add the material. If the Facebook page confirms the details of her second marriage, then include the source when adding the material. You also added the name and marriage dates of her first marriage, this requires a source as well. The Turkish wikipedia entry is irrelevant as wikis are not reliable sources, and the information there is equally unsourced. The onus is on the individual adding or restoring content to verify the content, so please ensure you include a citation for each of the claims being made. As the infobox is supposed to be a summary of article content, it would be beneficial if the material is added as prose to the article (with the relevant citation), then added to the infobox if relevant. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 22:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Mahidevran's photo
Stop it! If there is a conflict, first before you talk. Belongs to you, not any opinion on discussion [1]! Next time, I will report to Administrator your vandalic edits other languages! Maurice07 (talk) 14:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Rosne_Pranvere.jpg){kind=link}
Aisha move
I was coming here to tell you how to request a move, but I see you already know how. I've reverted you here. It's an article with a number of editors and any move should be discussed. Dougweller (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
North Korean Fashion Watch Barnstar |
| Gerald Shields, founder of the North Korean Fashion Watch, awards you the North Korean Fashion Watch Barnstar for your continuing efforts to add reliable and poignant discussions about North Korean topics, such as Ri Sol-ju. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:39, 28 April 2014 (UTC) |
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Keivan.f. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Fatma Sultan (daughter of Suleiman I), for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Fatma Sultan (daughter of Suleiman I) to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.
If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.
Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 12:34, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Muhteşem Yüzyıl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sultana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Signature
I wanted to let you know that your signature violates WP's signature policy because it has markup that enlarges the text. This is what your sig would look like without that markup:
Regards, --AmaryllisGardener talk 17:43, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Ice Bucket Challenge
Hi Keivan, please note that the humor thread on the AfD is hatted and closed, so please do not add to it futher. The page is for AfD discussions. If you have any other off-topic comment, please place them on user Talk pages. It's not fair to others who have the AfD on their Watch Lists to deal with these off-topic comments any further. Thanks very much! Softlavender (talk) 09:06, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Softlavender: Sorry, you're right. ;) Keivan.fTalk 09:21, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Roxelana/Hurrem Sultana
If you wish to move the article, start a new move discussion. The most recent move discussion was opposed to a move, so that is the prevailing consensus. If you wish to check to see if consensus has changed, start a new discussion. --Jayron32 19:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mihrişah Valide Sultan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consort. 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) 09:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Liberties
Hello, and thank you for all the good work you are doing!
When making drastic changes however, such as removing relevant coats of arms that have been there for years from the templates of royal families, or such as applying your own name formats to them, you should be more careful to have consensus with you. That is normally done by starting a discussion to which any and all interested editors may contrubute, best done on an article's talk page.
On the subject of royalty, just as an example, it is not WP policy that a few select royalty editors, with whom you might communicate exclusively, decide any- and everything that goes into or out of those articles. All editors have a right to be heard and to contribute as well as they can, in the same way that you or I do. If you continue to do things your own way, and the results are drastic changes to Wikipedia's contents, you'll find yourself at odds with other editors who may feel your good faith actions are offensive and destructive, not to say vandalism (yet). That will then lead to disagreeble situations that nobody will enjoy.
WP:Bold is not meant to encourage editors to get themselves in trouble by habitually appearing headstrong and inconsiderate.
Keep up the good work, but please be a bit more considerate and careful! Discuss openly before you remodel extensively! Sincerely, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:54, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- "Headstrong and inconsiderate"? "Offensive and destructive"? "Vandalism"? Whooaaah. Did two edits, easily undone with a single revert, really warrant such strong words? And "drastic changes"! Really? A drastic change would be translating the template into Thai, not this. Nobody appreciates condescending lectures on her or his talk page, especially not over something blown out of proportion. I believe you've been told that when you left a similar message on another user's talk page. Surtsicna (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- You have either misread what I wrote or else you are just trying to pick another fight with me again. There is no personal attack here. I'm trying to tell this young and enthusiastic user to be more careful lest he be misunderstood as a problem user, and to use the talk pages of involved articles to avoid such problems, which I believe you have been told many times. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Dear SergeWoodzing, I understood what you said, but what about you? Didn't you just change the names of Swedish royals to the format you like and revert my edits? I didn't find any discussion about this. Also what was the purpose of those images that were in royal families' templates? Of course if anyone feels my edits are offensive and destructive, s/he can discuss it with me. And about the infobox of Carl Gustaf, I should say that I changed the name formats, for example I changed Prince Carl Philip to Prince Carl Philip, Duke of X, because the children of sovereigns and consorts are mentioned by their titles in their parents' infoboxes. Take a look at George VI's infobox. Her second daughter's name is written like this: Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon not just Princess Margaret. And also we are friends here, and there's no personal attacking as you said. Keivan.fTalk 19:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, I have been told that. By you. Who else on Wikipedia enjoys lecturing others more than writing articles? Oh, good thing you said there was no personal attack here, because the words "headstrong and inconsiderate" and "offensive and destructive" were quite troubling. Allow me to remind you of that the next time you try to lecture me about my tone or something similarly trivial. Wikipedia needs "young and enthusiastic" users to do exactly what Keivan.f is doing - contribute, do whatever they believe will improve an article, and they do not need to seek anyone's permission or blessing beforehand. Surtsicna (talk) 21:27, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Dear SergeWoodzing, I understood what you said, but what about you? Didn't you just change the names of Swedish royals to the format you like and revert my edits? I didn't find any discussion about this. Also what was the purpose of those images that were in royal families' templates? Of course if anyone feels my edits are offensive and destructive, s/he can discuss it with me. And about the infobox of Carl Gustaf, I should say that I changed the name formats, for example I changed Prince Carl Philip to Prince Carl Philip, Duke of X, because the children of sovereigns and consorts are mentioned by their titles in their parents' infoboxes. Take a look at George VI's infobox. Her second daughter's name is written like this: Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon not just Princess Margaret. And also we are friends here, and there's no personal attacking as you said. Keivan.fTalk 19:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- You have either misread what I wrote or else you are just trying to pick another fight with me again. There is no personal attack here. I'm trying to tell this young and enthusiastic user to be more careful lest he be misunderstood as a problem user, and to use the talk pages of involved articles to avoid such problems, which I believe you have been told many times. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
"Who else on Wikipedia enjoys lecturing others more than writing articles?" ~ gross exaggerations, overly familiar insults and personal attacks like that are what you get if/when you ever disagree with some editors. Best of luck to you, Keivan.f, I mean that. I've seen how you in fact do seem to feel you need to "seek ... permission or blessing beforehand", and that's very good, but all I'm saying is: do it on the talk pages, not in messages to other users. Just my advice, take it or leave it. And you'll also see that I in fact do use the talk pages of articles as a basic rule whenever any reverting is done. That's what we're supposed to do, no matter what you see some other editors doing. Try to forget all the nasty animosity that was created here. That was really not my intention. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- OK! The result of your statements is this: please discuss on talk pages and share your opinions with others. And I forgot all the nasty animosity that was created here. ;) Keivan.fTalk 12:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- Bravo! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- OK! The result of your statements is this: please discuss on talk pages and share your opinions with others. And I forgot all the nasty animosity that was created here. ;) Keivan.fTalk 12:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
September 2014
Please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, as you appear to have done by removing the images from over 50 royal family templates, without edit summaries, after a 'slow burn edit war' at Template:British Royal Family where you were advocating that such an image be kept Reventtalk 09:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- He/She should be asked why he is reverting so many approved articles and erasing info without explanation.
68.100.172.139 (talk) 00:53, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
- @68.100.172.139 Adding unnecessary photos that have no purpose is not a precious information. Stop adding pictures to the articles of Ottoman consorts with explanation like this: Murad III, son of Nurbanu Sultan. If someone really wants to see his photo, s/he can visit his article's page. Keivan.fTalk 06:28, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
- And also I find no rule in Wikipedia that we should always explain the other users why we edit an article. Here's not a primary school. We don't need the others permissions on talk pages before a little edit to an article. Also reverting an IP user's vandalism doesn't need explanation. Keivan.fTalk 07:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
- @68.100.172.139 Adding unnecessary photos that have no purpose is not a precious information. Stop adding pictures to the articles of Ottoman consorts with explanation like this: Murad III, son of Nurbanu Sultan. If someone really wants to see his photo, s/he can visit his article's page. Keivan.fTalk 06:28, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Spelling error for Oprah
On the Oprah Winfrey page under the section "born" her name is spelled Orpah. Just an Fyi
- The sources say that she was born Orpah, but because it was difficult for her family to pronounce this name they changed it to Oprah after a while. Keivan.fTalk 22:43, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
October 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Noriko Senge 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:
- son-of-izumo-taisha-priest-relinquishes-royal-status/#.VDFoc1e5_y0}|accessdate=5 October 2014}}</ref>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:02, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Good
Wikipedia is very good tool!I enjoyed it soon much and its writers r also very intelligent but I want Wikipedia to show pictures also by the way it is very informative and detailed and it tells about every point.By using it I got so many information. Please show pics of everyone's. I like Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.118.210 (talk) 10:30, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
- It's good that you have become interested in Wikipedia and I hope you like the place. Actually, we can't add images to every article in Wikipedia because of copyright licenses that they have. Only free images can be uploaded under Wikipedia's rules. I suggest you create an account and start editing if you really like here. Keivan.fTalk 15:23, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I have commented on the talk of this article about changing the title of this Article. I think you belong to Shia form of Islam
- @Owais khursheed: Yes, I belong to Shia form of Islam but I have read about Sunni caliphs too and I think it's not really good to have the three others' articles under the titles Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali and then this one as Uthman ibn Affan. You said that Uthman is known under the name "Uthman ibn Affan" but I think Umar is also known as Umar ibn al-Khattab and Ali as Ali ibn Abi-Talib. So I think it's better to move Uthman ibn Affan to Uthman. Keivan.fTalk 15:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
yeah they should have these names. you should instead request an admin to change their titles to their proper name. But you are going in the other way. Abu Bakr is popular by this name. you should request Admin for changing Ali to Ali bin abi Talib and like wise for Umer (may allah be pleased with them). Owais khursheed (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- But it seems that the other users won't agree with changing the name of these articles (Umar and Ali), so it's better to move Uthman. As I see it seems to be a normal move because you and maybe some other users won't agree with changing the name of Uthman's article. Keivan.fTalk 15:48, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 18:20, 10 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Dougweller (talk) 18:20, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
User rights
Hello Keivan.f. Your account has been granted the "rollback" and "reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.
- Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin).
- The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:
- 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.
Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! —Tom Morris (talk) 14:13, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- @Tom Morris: Thanks a lot! Keivan.fTalk 15:59, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Prince Chichibu
Prince Chichibu was passed over in the line of succession in October 1940 in favour of his younger brother Prince Takamatsu. I have found several references relating to this matter (in the article Line of succession to the Japanese throne, see the section "Succession debates and conteoversies, reference #12). Please do not make any changes to the article without supporting references. Thank you. Aumnamahashiva (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)