User talk:Timelesstune

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your submission has been reviewed and has been put on hold pending clarification or improvements from you or other editors. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Reza Parchizadeh. If there is no response within twenty-four hours the request may be declined; if this happens feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it (by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article) when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. Alpha Quadrant ^talk 04:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Reza Parchizadeh for deletion

The article Reza Parchizadeh is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reza Parchizadeh until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Farhikht (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed a file deletion tag from Reza Parchizadeh. When removing deletion tags, 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. Farhikht (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Login problems

If you are having trouble logging in, please see Help:Login#Login issues and problems. It is likely a cookie problem or possibly your ISP is using a transparent proxy. If it is the former, have a look here for help. If the latter, try logging in using the secure server. If neither resolves the problem, you can request assistance at the help desk. -- Rrburke (talk) 22:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded images

All content is treated presumptively as copyrighted absent explicit evidence to the contrary. Images from Mr. Parchizadeh's Facebook page are not public-domain: their copyright rests with Mr. Parchizadeh and the images cannot be used without his explicit agreement to publish them under a free license. Uploading them to Wikimedia Commons is a violation of copyright policy. Please consider requesting their immediate deletion by adding the following tag to the file description:

{{copyvio|1=I mistakenly uploaded this copyrighted image thinking it was a public-domain media file}}

-- Rrburke (talk) 03:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC) y 2011 (UTC)}}[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Timelesstune. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
Message added 16:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Timelesstune. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
Message added 21:15, 28 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Proposed deletion of Seyed Mohammad Marandi

The article Seyed Mohammad Marandi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

May not meet WP:PROD.

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stifle (talk) 10:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Timelesstune. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Seyed Mohammad Marandi

Hi this BLP that you have written has been reported to the Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Seyed_Mohammad_Marandi - perhaps you would comment or join in the discussion there - I think the main issues are the quality of the sources WP:RS and the neutrality of the overall article WP:NPOV and those issues create a violation of pour WP:BLP policy. Personally I wound say the article needs a degree of rewriting and the sourcing improving. I have also nominated the picture for deletion at commons, where did you get it? Youreallycan (talk) 22:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
Thank you very much for the notification. I will certainly join the discussion. I agree with you about rewriting the article. It is already time for that, since the article was originally written a long time ago. As regards the sources, they are quite trustworthy beyond dispute. However, I will entertain suggestions as for the overall improvement of the article. The picture is public domain, and you can find it on the net anywhere by searching for the subject's name in Persian.

Timelesstune 02:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks - can you provide a link to where the pic is stated to be public domain. You have the pic currently with this statement - I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license:w:en:Creative Commons attribution share alike This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. -

This license asserts that you are the owner of the rights ot the picture which is incorrect as per your comments you are not the owner. The picture appears to be a cropped screen grab from this video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMUF8leJ_mM - Youreallycan (talk) 01:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link: Seyed Mohammad Marandi. I am not the owner of the picture, but I remember I chose the closest option to public domain I came across. That is all.

Timelesstune 02:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link - there is a Public domain template at commons and if we can verify it we can change the template and close the deletion discussion at commons.

My Persian is zero - I have translated it to English and can't see where it says the article or the picture is Public domain? sorry to be a nuisance, can you point me to it? I am logging off now, so no hurry , no worry, the deletion discussion at commons stays open for at least seven days so we can sort in over the next few days, regards. Youreallycan (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My dear friend, as this whole project is an open one, you, or anyone else, for that matter, have a perfect right to know why I used this picture. If you studied the history of my activities on Wikipedia, you would know that the first article I created was a bio of the writer and political activist, Reza Parchizadeh, which was unfortunately deleted after a very long and strenuous discussion. During that discussion, I was forced to contact Parchizadeh to corroborate a few pieces of information on him. I have since kept in touch with him. The open letter you translated, wherein the picture is inserted, is Parchizadeh's. He in person allowed me to use the picture in this article. He also said he had no claims on it.

Timelesstune 03:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This Parchizadeh person, he is an opponent of the subject of the article, yes? Are you connected to this Parchizadeh person in a way that could be considered a WP:COI ? - you wrote an article about him, since deleted, that was described as a promotional resume and you are the main author of an article about his political opponent that has been reported as basically attacking in nature? Youreallycan (talk) 15:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To say that Parchizadeh is a political opponent of the subject of this article is not to put it accurately. He is a human rights activist, and he is opposed to the way Marandi misrepresents the events in Iran. When the protesters to the outcome of the rigged Iranian presidential election of 2009 were being executed in Iran, and when Marandi was telling the foreign news agencies that those people were saboteurs who deserved to be executed, Parchizadeh was the only one who spoke out against him. Dr. Ahmed Shaheed's recent report of the status of human rights in Iran to the UN is now evidence enough that Parchizadeh was right.

I came to know him through his many articles on the subject, and later his books, and, with regard to his humanitarian activities, thought that he deserved to have an article in Wikipedia. That is why I wrote that article, completely without his knowledge. As a matter of fact, I came in contact with him only when the article was about to be deleted. Now, I respect him, and I admire his work. Sometimes I also send him emails and ask him about things. Beyond that, there is nothing else. It is not a political campaign, I assure you.

Timelesstune 09:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is Parchizadeh's latest article on the storming of the British embassy in Tehran, “Legatration, War and Crisis Management in the Premises of the Islamic Republic”. If you are really interested in finding the truth, read it and compare it with Marandi's account of the same event. I am not necessarily talking about facts, which are there, by the way; rather, what I am talking about is the sanity of the argument.

Timelesstune 05:27, 6 December 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

It is most unfair that when I am trying to warn Wikipedia that it is being vandalized, my own account gets suspended. The subject of this article, Seyed Mohammad Marandi, is an affiliate of the Islamic Republic with serious allegations of involvement in human rights violation in Iran. I myself am a human rights activist already familiar with the circumstances. I have pointed out his practice of mistreatment of the truth at several occasions, all through detailed documentation. Now, the user Storeylas, whose concentration since the time of creating this account has been on tampering with this article, keeps deleting documented content and adding unsubstantiated passages, all couched in foul language and imbued with abusive remarks. I do not believe that this is simply a case of difference of opinion. The conduct of this editor clearly demonstrates that he is trying to suppress evidence and cast aspersions on the sources as to the unscrupulous conduct of the subject, and thus to compromise the integrity of the article. Please do compare my last edit with the last edit of this vandal to see what I mean. As such, I demand that you or one of the administrators investigate the case. But, till then, please protect the article so that it cannot be messed up again. I am sick and tired of clearing up after this user's vandalism. Timelesstune 09:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline - one request at a time please. Peridon (talk) 09:24, 9 December 2011 (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.

December 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Seyed Mohammad Marandi. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Seyed Mohammad Marandi. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The edit-warring on Seyed Mohammad Marandi has been going on way too long, and you simply must stop. Even if you are firmly convinced you are right, edit-warring is not acceptable and just gets you blocked - as you have now discovered after ignoring my warning, above. You should discuss your dispute on the article Talk page and seek consensus, and if that is not successful, please see WP:DR for help with resolution of the dispute. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

It is most unfair that when I am trying to warn Wikipedia that it is being vandalized, my own account gets suspended. The subject of this article, Seyed Mohammad Marandi, is an affiliate of the Islamic Republic with serious allegations of involvement in human rights violation in Iran. I myself am a human rights activist already familiar with the circumstances. I have pointed out his practice of mistreatment of the truth at several occasions, all through detailed documentation. Now, the user Storeylas, whose concentration since the time of creating this account has been on tampering with this article, keeps deleting documented content and adding unsubstantiated passages, all couched in foul language and imbued with abusive remarks. I do not believe that this is simply a case of difference of opinion. The conduct of this editor clearly demonstrates that he is trying to suppress evidence and cast aspersions on the sources as to the unscrupulous conduct of the subject, and thus to compromise the integrity of the article. Please do compare my last edit with the last edit of this vandal to see what I mean. As such, I demand that you or one of the administrators investigate the case. But, till then, please protect the article so that it cannot be messed up again. I am sick and tired of clearing up after this user's vandalism. Timelesstune 09:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I agree with Boing! said Zebedee's comments above. Edit warring is the least constructive way of editing, and if you feel that there are problems with the article use the dispute resolution process or seek administrator involvement (WP:AN3 for edit warring and WP:ANI for specific problems). The amount of edit warring in this article recently is extraordinary, and you're fortunate to have only been blocked for 24 hours. Please don't edit war when this block expires. Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 9 December 2011 (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.

I have also looked more closely at the edits you have been making to the article, and they clearly breach Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy. You must not include any of your own judgments or conclusions, and the article must not be written to appear to take one side in any debate or for the article narrative itself to make editorial-style comments. For example, one of the sentences that you were warring to include was "With regard to Marandi's allegedly questionable conduct in presenting unreliable accounts of the events in Iran to the outside world" - loaded phrases like "allegedly questionable conduct" and "unreliable accounts" have no place in the narrative of an encyclopedia entry. (I appreciate they are not much different to the sentence you were replacing, but neither version of that sentence is remotely acceptable here) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Boing! said Zebedee, thank you very much for your due comments and actions. I am going to edit the article and remove the alleging or offensive commentary from it. Please supervise the edit after it is done. By the way, could you or anybody else you see fit possibly keep an eye on this article? As you see and as I explained before, the subject of this article is a controversial individual, so it is likely that the article be vandalized again. I'd much appreciate it.

Timelesstune 11:05, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The editing is done. Please see to it.

Timelesstune 12:56, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

disputed content

Hi - the repeated edit warring over this disputed content is better avoided in a BLP article about a living person. I have removed it to the talkpage for discussion and evaluation.

Talk:Seyed_Mohammad_Marandi#disputed_content_about_Parchizadeh

I have made a few comments there, please join in on the talkpage, until we have resolved this through discussion please do not replace the disputed content - thanks - Youreallycan (talk) 01:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I needed that specific source to further corroborate the facts. As far as it is logically maintained that the practice of the subject of the article with regard to the presentation of events is not in accordance with reality, it is not that important that one of the sources be left out. After all, this whole project is about telling the truth. Timelesstune 01:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, the project is *not* about truth - it is about reliably sourced verifiability and notability. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:32, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then I trust the sources included are adequate enough in the regard? Aren't they?

Timelesstune 01:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm deliberately keeping away from offering an opinion on the content and sources themselves, as I am acting only in an admin capacity here and need to avoid WP:INVOLVED. Consensus on the article Talk page is the way to decide on the reliability of the sources -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I understand what you mean. I hope what is right be done. Thank you for your impartial administration.

Timelesstune 02:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Tesla Roadster for you!

	A Tesla Roadster for you!
	Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Gg53000 (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]