User talk:Shams pasargad 2000

December 2016[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from File:Navid Faridi 12.jpg. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Stylez995 (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Esteghlal Kish F.C.[edit]

The article Esteghlal Kish F.C. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article about a football club that fails WP:GNG and WP:FOOTYN.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from File:Navid-Faridi.jpeg, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Navid Faridi (January 2)[edit]

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

Please make all of your sources as footnotes (with the "ref" coding). And place each footnote next to the specific facts it proves. See WP:Referencing for beginners.

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

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Navid Faridi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Shams pasargad 2000, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017[edit]

Your addition to Fluoride has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Drchriswilliams (talk) 20:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Navid Faridi (January 9)[edit]

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines for sports persons and athletes and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Deleted recently because of not satisfying the specific notability standards.

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

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Navid Faridi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 21:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page moves[edit]

Please don't move this page to another title. A user talk page needs to be kept in place, to maintain a record of the history of messages to the editor. Also, it is difficult to think of a legitimate reason for moving page to a whole succession of different places, as you did. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Other accounts[edit]

Please state what other accounts you have used. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Khabargozari mehr (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shams pasargad 2000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

2cond chance: Me and my sister khabargozarimeh We're just a month writing artickle in wikipedia sometime she wrote artickle sometime i wrote ( one artickle)for finishing that.. We are use with our username and pasword privecy.please back our user name unblock for us. thanks with best regard . Dr. safari General dentist.Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 08:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Same soprt of copyright violations as the other account and both accounts have edited around articles on Navid Faridi, including both participating in the deletion review. Sorry, the overlap here is almost total. Clear violation of WP:SOCK. I doubt the claim there are two separate people here but even if there are, that'd be a violation of WP:MEAT. Yamla (talk) 14:11, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Your limited skill with the English language makes your request unclear. Are you saying that you and your sister use the same username and password?--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 12:58, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shams pasargad 2000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello . I read all the rules relating to sockpuppet.Sockpuppe I said that is a misunderstanding. My sister and I both work together on an edit be finish run correctly. For each edition we have a separate user name in the activity had an edit. However, i am not sockppet,This is a misunderstanding. Please enabled. My username shams pasargad 2000. Dr. Safari with Best regards & thanksShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 10:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See below. MER-C 04:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

@Vanjagenije: Pinging blocking admin to consider block against SPI case. --JustBerry (talk) 16:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: What is the exact question for me? Vanjagenije (talk) 21:10, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: Under Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khabargozari mehr, you had made a statement here despite the socks not being technically related. This, of course, does not preclude sockpuppetry (behaviorial evidence can still "prove," if not confirm, sockpuppetry). The user claims that they have not socked and, hence, wishes to be blocked. Do you have any thoughts on this assertion to share with other unblock request reviewing administrators? --JustBerry (talk) 16:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are several problems here that need to be cleared. This user says he was not socking, but admits WP:Meatpuppetry that is equally disallowed. He says Khabargozari mehr is his sister, but we still have no explanation on who Sadegh1993sadegh is. Also, it seams to me that everything this user wants to do is wrote about Navid Faridi, in spite of an obvious WP:conflict of interest. Then, there is also problem with copyright violations. This user (and two other related users) uploaded dozens of photos to Wikimedia Commons in violation of copyright policies. I think we need some more explanation here. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC

@Vanjagenije: Hello.I write everything truth for you and you are know whats my jub. Its sure misunderestanding , But I read and learned all the rules about sockpuppet and and Copyright i sad to my sister khabargozari mehr also about all of rules she dosent help me again about 1 artickle. We didnt know before about that.i told you before im only a month on wikipedia. Please release me to write. This is my free time and my interest in writingin wikipedia. thanks a lot.with best regard Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 21:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shams pasargad 2000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello.I write everything truth In the top lines, Its sure misunderestanding , But I read and learned all the rules in wikipedia,Please release me to write. I'm interested in here that I write , thanks alot and help me please Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 16:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not demonstrated sufficient competency in written English for contributing constructively. I am deeply concerned that you will compensate for this by copying text from arbitrary websites into Wikipedia in violation of the copyright policy. MER-C 04:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

@JustBerry: Hi. Can you help me about my block ? Yesterday I wrote for vanja my reasons, but he has not seen , thanks and with best regardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to ~~reach out on xis talk page~~ ping xim with the ping template. However, it might be best to wait a few days in case xe is busy. --JustBerry (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry:thanks i really appreciateShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 18:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: How can a blocked user reach me at my talk page? Vanjagenije (talk) 18:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: Whops, I meant remind me to reach out to you in a few days or ping you directly. Simplified what I meant and corrected my original message. My mistake. --JustBerry (talk) 20:32, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije:Hello vanja , i am still waiting for your response since yesterday, i hpoe you help me to resolve my block issue, because i really like to countinue editing in wikipedia and i wished somebody would warn me before blocking as far as i am new to wikipedia and i didnt know the rules exactly. Please advise.Best regards Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 19:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MER-C:Dear MER, It is true that my written english skills are not advanced but i hope some wikipedia editors were more friendly and help the lovers of article writting to improve rather than judging them, i think any person knows copy right is a violation and if done by me it was by misundrestanding ,So please dont afraid of my works i wont do copies ,Also i didnt know some wikipedia rules but now i improved. RegardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Try editing the Wikipedia of your native language (see here for a list) instead. MER-C 13:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: Now just see this your talk to justBerry about copyrigh photos , (please see[[1]]) It is written all photos are public and free to use in www.navid-faridi.ir website.with regards Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It says that ALL pictures of this website are free to use for news,websites and publications. That is not compatible with Wikipedia license. Wikipedia (and Wikimedia Commons) only accepts files that are free to be used for any purpose, including commercial purposes (see here: WP:NONCOM). Also, at the bottom of the said page, there is a message that reads © 2016 Navid Faridi. All Rights Reserved. This is in total contradiction. Images are at the same time free to use and all rights are reserved. That's not possible. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: Hi.Thank you so much for in this 6 day thought me many things about the rules wikipedia,and i have one question: i would like to ask if ican use these websites as refrences or footnotes, or they must be public to use like photos ? With many thanks Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 07:34, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Any WP:reliable source can be used if properly cited, it does not need to be in the public domain. But, you have to wp:paraphrase the source, not copy-paste it. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: I really appereciate your help and advices, now i am more familier with wikipedia rules, i hope i am able to countinue editting after a while because i am so intrested to learn and i hope unblocking is happening after a while for me. RegardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 15:08, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You still have not responded to the two issues I raised above. First, you have to explain who Sadegh1993sadegh is. Also, you have to declare your obvious WP:conflict of interest] regarding Navid Faridi. Are you in anyway related to him? Wikipedia does not allow WP:COI editing because of the WP:Neutrality concerns. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:13, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: sadegh1993sadegh is a wikipedia editor we know by far, he wanted to help us to write articles in wikipedia but we undrestood that he doesnt know about writting articles and editting too much in wikpedia so we got wrong advices, after that we countinued ourself but it took a while to know rules and technical terms of wikipedia, we are so intrested to learn and continue writing any article and be sure we will be neutral. Please advise, regardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 15:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: Dear vanjagenjie it was not only Navid Faridi that we wrote and was faced to problem but also we edit articles about other things like dental issues and sports, because we were not familier with the rules, Navid Faridi is a football player in our country and when we saw there is no article about him and wikipedia gave us option of creating new article about him we decided to do that. We are intrested in sports and dentistry articles and be sure we will be neutral and this time if we are able to edit again for sure we will get help of wikipedia real editors in the website first. RegardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 15:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry:Dear justberry, i explained my reasons to user:vanjagenije since four days ago but unfortunatly didnt recieve any response because i think he is on holiday, could you please help me to solve the issue if my explainations are reasonable to you and advise me so that i can countine using my acount for editing.regardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 13:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your explanation still does not explain who User:sadegh1993sadegh is. Not to make assumptions here, but "a wikipedia editor we know by far, he wanted to help us to write articles in wikipedia but we undrestood that he doesnt know about writting articles and editting too much in wikpedia so we got wrong advices" sounds like you may have made some poor choices, but decide to create a background to assign the blame to someone else. I would ask that (at the least) you read through WP:NPOV, and tell me what you understand regarding promotional language. Do you see how terms, such as "good," "effective," "so young" are promotional, and other glorious claims in the draft Draft:Navid Faridi are unsourced? Additionally, User:Fastily mentions that you and your socks have made "similar edits to Navid Faridi and making disruptive edits to deletion processes regarding that page and any uploaded photos of said subject." I see little apology in your explanations and more creative backstory. --JustBerry (talk) 15:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry:yes your right , but all of these mistakes were unintentional and because of we were unfamilier with wikipedia rules, and about the words good, effective and so yongue because it is written in my country published media i used them, now i am really sorry and appologize. With best RegardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry:yes your right , but all of these mistakes were unintentional and because of we were unfamilier with wikipedia rules, and about the words good, effective and so yongue because it is written in my country published media i used them, now i am really sorry and appologize. With best RegardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 17:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: Hello justberry ,I am still waitnig for your response please.I Would like to request your help ,please advise, I really like to be able to edit and write articles in wikipedia. I am trying my best to improve my skills and get familier with wiki rules, i think i need another chance.thanksShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Have you created any more socks not mentioned above? --JustBerry (talk) 17:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: No, all are those in my talk page. Please advise an helpShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 17:36, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I see a few ways we can go about this. User:MER-C seems to have reviewed your unblock request a few times, and his concern seems fairly legitimate. Although you can try to address the concerns from the previous unblock request revision in another one, I would recommend you focus on a wiki in your native language instead of the English Wikipedia. See List of Wikipedias. --JustBerry (talk) 17:57, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: I really apperecite your advices, for now i have to ask another administrator for revision of unblock request? Or it is possible for you to help me? Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to ask any specific administrator per say. Creating another unblock request just means setting up the unblock template on your talk page appropriately (like you did before). However, how do you plan to address the previously mentioned issues? Although I appreciate your enthusiasm, I am worried that the lack of competency in English will hinder your ability to contribute. As an FYI, me linking User:MER-C's talk page pings them, so they will probably review this conversation when they get a chance anyway. --JustBerry (talk) 18:22, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: Dear just berry, sure i will take your advices in my mind, i apperecite it best regards.Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 18:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 24 unblock request[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shams pasargad 2000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I tried my best to improve my language and written skills and will countinue more. I was not familier with wiki rules, but since then i read alot and i hope will be better and better. I am so intrested in writting and editting in wikipedia and i would like to ask for one more chance.Thanks a lot

Decline reason:

These repeated unblock requests don't help your case, and they don't explain why you would not use a Wikipedia in your own language. You don't appear to have the competence needed for the English Wikipedia. Since this is now your fourth unblock request and we aren't getting anywhere, I am disabling your talk page. Use WP:UTRS for any further appeals. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 13:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 18:58, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry:Hello Dear justBurry, i requested unblocking three days ago but no body concerned it. How long do you think i have to wait or i have to request again? Regards Shams pasargad 2000 (talk) 13:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I have mentioned before, making more unblock requests will not help your case. Have you found any Wikipedias from List of Wikipedias that you might be able to contribute to? --JustBerry (talk) 16:52, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JustBerry: i know wikipedia in my language but i Really liked to work in english wikipedia, i thought wikipedia is a friendly environment and editors will help new members to improve not as a criminal, i dont know what harmfull i did and without any blocking notice i was blocked, i really appereciate your help and advice but this reaction the blocker made for member like me, i think will not help wikipedia but also reduces confidence on this website. RegardsShams pasargad 2000 (talk) 17:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Previous matters[edit]

Hello, Shams pasargad 2000! I see you have run into many problems such as being blocked, which is very unfortunate. Regardless, with a new perspective on the situation, I would also like to put in my two cents. To clarify, from what I have seen thus far, you have violated multiple Wikipedia policies in the past. These include copyright issues and WP:NPOV which I assume has led you to yet another violation --- that of the sockpuppet and abusing of multiple accounts. I understand that you are learning from your mistakes and working to improve your standards as a Wikipedia editor, but in accordance with Wikimedia policy, it has been YOUR OBLIGATION to document yourself and observe said Wikipedia policies BEFORE making such edits that would normally result in a block. Seeing as how you have not followed through with that, it is only the 'right' consequence for you to have been blocked. While this is unfortunate, I would, as has been remarked, recommend you transfer to your native language's Wikipedia, where you can begin partially "fresh" and have a decent chance at being bold in your edits but not receiving negative consequences.--Whatshouldichoose (talk) 03:58, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]