User talk:Khampalak

July 2007

Please do not use styles that are unusual or difficult to understand in articles, as you did to Bactria. There is a Manual of Style that should be followed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Aside from whatever dispute you are having with the article, DO NOT remove or alter links to associated language wiki's. Trusilver 02:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for Comment: Hotaki dynasty origin and ethnicity

The RFC on the origin and ethnicity of the founder of the Hotaki dynasty are being conducted on the Hotaki dynasty talk page, as that is where a lot of the discussion of this issue has appeared. Parties include Anoshirawan and User:Mirrori1. --Bejnar 16:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Disruptive behaviour

When there are Wikipedia editors who are deliberately, albeit intelligently, attempting to establish a particular point of view and eliminate all others, the best one can do as an editor is to document there misguided efforts on the various talk pages. There is no need to revert their incorrect edits every day. Placing (new) evidence on the article talk page is a good way to establish the incorrectness of their edits. When they keep restoring problem text, RFC is a good choice. Lets see how the one above works. Remember to keep all comments objective, and to ignore personal jibs. --Bejnar 17:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

You have a very good point. I will definitely change my approach accordingly. Thanks. --Khampalak 17:22, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

RFC protocol

Please remove your last edit from the Hotaki RFC. The comment area is not a place for participants to place comments. Disputants are entitled to a summary, which you provided. The comment area is for others, who are not original disputants, to comment. The RFC is not a place for us to continue the dispute, it is asking other editors for there comments and wisdom. --Bejnar 17:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry. It's more first time participtaing in an RFC. --Khampalak 18:50, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

re: Muhammad Zahir Shah

I think you could use some of your own advice and stop trying to revise history. Everyone who lived in Afghanistan knows that Zahir Shah just like his father was an ethno-fascist. Just because you are from his family doesn't mean you need to cover this up. Regardless, its sourced right there and as long as that source is there that line cannot be removed. --Behnam 19:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Calm down. You need to bottle up that energy and use it for something useful and decent. I'm sorry to say that isn't happening right now. --Khampalak 20:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Brother

it's not worth it to try to dispute with someone who is enemy of afghanistan. you should realize that there are many admininstrators who also view afghanistan as an enemy because of what happened after 9-11 and so on. this affects everything here, my friendly advice to you is to let these vandals write whatever they want. searching for trustful sources, reading and learning is the best fun. however, disputing with these people is the worst thing, it will create tension and make you very frustrated, and that is what they want you to be. i can see that you sound like a very intelligent person so don't force people to learn if they don't wanna learn. i say, let people remain stupid if that is what they want. i know these vandals from another place online, they are pure racist group, anti-afghanistan, anti-afghan, anti-pashtun, anti-karzai, anti-government of afghanistan. they are religiously "shias", one of them is crippled who rides in a wheel chair, his dad was killed in afghanistan in tha past and he is using that against afghanistan. since that one is crippled, he has nothing else in life but to stay home all the time and falsify afghanistan related articles as a way to take his personal revenge for his father.Mirrori1 22:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks

Khampalak, a post on WP:ANI has brought to administrative attention that you have been posting serious personal attacks (such as your talk page edits here and here. Referring to editors as dogs or people who are enemies/hate Afghanistan is not acceptable. Please comment on content not contributors. Such behavior may result in blocks of your account.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

i disagree with persian gal, indirectly calling someone a "dog" is not personal attack. since when did a dog become an insult word? we refer to dogs as friendly pets that we keep at home. from where did persian gal come all of a sudden? this here is the proof that vandals are supported, while enemies of afghanistan are all over. of course the enemies will never admit to this, neither do we expect them to. the message persian gal posted here is a personal attack AND a threat.Mirrori1 20:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Those who use Wikipedia for propaganda are rarely tolerated and will be dealt with appropriately. It is not your place to call any editor here a "dog." These are Wikipedia's policies, if you choose not to follow them then you would unfortunately be blocked. All I am asking is that you be civil toward your fellow editor despite their actions being wrong or right.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 19:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

you are a complete liar persian gal, if what you say is true then why don't you go fix all the vandlism and propaganda user:anoshirawan and user:beh-nam are spreading? this again proves that i am correct in what i posted above this section. persian gal came to demonstrate my point, thanks for doing that persian gal. I am afghan and we afghans are god's chosen people.Mirrori1 20:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand that things seem to have gone sour somewhere in the middle of all these disputes but I still do not see either party being at fault here. For now I'd avoid confrontations with the editors whom you are disagreeing with. Ultimately if these issues become more and more serious you can take some of the steps in the dispute resolution process.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

If you are finding the RfC's going no where then you might want to bump up to a request for mediation. The reason why your 3rr was dismissed was because the user you were reporting did not exceed the 3 revert limit. Right now I would suggest taking avenues that strictly focus on your content dispute rather than putting yourself in jeopardy of being blocked for personal attacks. As much as you feel that those who use Wikipedia for propaganda deserve no civility, there is absolutely no way this would be allowed. The civility policy is firm on Wikipedia and no matter what users we encounter whether vandal, editor, administrator, etc. all must be treated with civility.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

the fact is persian gal is wanting to block you, that's all what she wants.Mirrori1 20:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

That's an uncalled for comment Mirrori, I was warning Khampalak and he was responding back to me in a much more civil manner. There is no need to feed the flames. Anyways, I will allow you to continue your editing Khampalak. As I said, just try to avoid these confrontations. Better to benefit Wikipedia and stay on this site rather than end up being blocked due to an outburst.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

You have ignored a message left by Beh-nam on my talk page as well. It should offer a tiny bit of insight into his motivations for editing on Wikipedia.

I think you could use some of your own advice and stop trying to revise history. Everyone who lived in Afghanistan knows that Zahir Shah just like his father was an ethno-fascist. Just because you are from his family doesn't mean you need to cover this up. Regardless, its sourced right there and as long as that source is there that line cannot be removed. --Behnam 19:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I suppose you consider his bringing a person's family into the discussion a permissible act. --Khampalak 20:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course I do not. I am advising you to either avoid or seek mediation with the editors you are in dispute with.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry but such a block request is not acceptable per this policy.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Content on User:Khampalak

Khampalak please revise your the paragraph on your userpage or I will be forced to delete your userpage. What you are doing at the moment is considered much more slanderous and it is not acceptable. Also please realize that Wikipedia is not a battleground.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It is based on fact actually and you have just proven my point. --Khampalak 20:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Please revise the paragraph entirely because it is not acceptable. As a side note. Since this dispute is getting out of hand I have fully protected the Durrani Empire article for 1 week with the "History of Afghanistan" version till the editors of the article have reached a consensus.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I will blank out my entire user page. I should also say that your actions will have absolutely no effect on the users in question. Consensus has been reached by the majority of concerned editors, time and time again. But this has always been ignored. As soon as the protection expires, it will be business as usual on this and other articles. --Khampalak 20:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)