Jump to content

User talk:LouisAragon: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Stop: new section
Incompetent pov pushers who can't talk like normal human people to others (see talk page of the Orontid dynasty) are not welcome here.
Line 884: Line 884:


{{You've got mail}} --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 17:45, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
{{You've got mail}} --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 17:45, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

== Stop ==

The Arshakuni kings of Armenia were only Iranian in background after Tiridates I. It's largely misleading to call them "Iranian people" when they didn't live in Iran or speak Iranian. --[[User:Steverci|Steverci]] ([[User talk:Steverci|talk]]) 15:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:44, 23 November 2015

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 (talkcontribs) 19:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rosie Malek-Yonan

I am Rosie Malek-Yonan the person this article 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)[reply]

Information icon 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 (talkcontribs) 18:18, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply] 

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]
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, AnupamTalk 20:30, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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, AnupamTalk 02:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

"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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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//Δ's/ 16:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

LouisAragon (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

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[reply]

Hello :)

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
So you have no problem I regrade this article from an "A" for WikiProject Military History? -- llywrch (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello llywrch, no, I have no objections against that. Regards. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. -- llywrch (talk) 20:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Hallo Louis, sorry for the delay! I see that the coords are there, very good! best, Alex2006 (talk) 05:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Alex, yes the coords are there now, thanks for your message! - LouisAragon (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.[reply]

Incorrect statement

"Iran, which borders Armenia to the south, is home to an estimated 70,000-90,000 ethnic Armenians" [1] 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

References

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

In need of help

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

- 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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 (talkcontribs) 14:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 (talkcontribs) 14:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.[1]
After Baha'is, Christians are by far the largest minority religion adherent,[2] mainly Armenians and Assyrians, numbering some 300,000-370,000 Christians.[3] They are recognized by the Iranian government for over a century.
After that, it's Mandeans (between 10,000 and 60,000),[4][5] Jews,[6][7] Yazidis, Yarsanis (between 1 and 3 million mainly living in Western Iran, Northern Iraq, and some scattered places in Eastern Turkey),[8] Yezidis,[9] Zoroastrians (~28,000),[10][11] etc that make up the remaining very small part. And that's where it ends.
- LouisAragon (talk) 14:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ "Christians and Christian converts, Iran, December 2014, p.9" (PDF). Retrieved 22 March 2015.
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference saving was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference alarabiya0612 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ [3]
  7. ^ "Jewish woman brutally murdered in Iran over property dispute". The Times of Israel. November 28, 2012. Retrieved Aug 16, 2014. A government census published earlier this year indicated there were a mere 8,756 Jews left in Iran
  8. ^ [4]
  9. ^ [5]
  10. ^ http://www.amar.org.ir/
  11. ^ AFP: Iran young, urbanised and educated: census

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

AWESOME!

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

OH,I lose psd file project Unfortunately!!

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

i'm done!

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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:

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.[reply]

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)[reply]

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 (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) 09:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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 (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) 10:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Armenian language

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

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

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 (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) 14:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Arran
Storming of Lankaran (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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:

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Adivasi - fringe

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

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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

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

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--SaməkTalk 23:51, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent

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

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:

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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 (talkcontribs) 10:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


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)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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 (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) 11:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

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