User talk:Spahbod

.

unblock

I have been autoblocked for reason: "could be willy" for more than 24 hours.--Spahbod 09:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AOL ? --pgk^(talk) 09:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unblock

I have been autoblocked for reason: "could be willy" for more than 24 hours by CanadianCaesar, i had edited under my ip for a few days, i made a new account and edited then i got autoblocked.

IP address is 213.113.242.74. --Spahbod 09:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No not AOL --Spahbod 09:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the autoblock will say because this account has recently been used by ... Who has it recently been used by? Since this might be affecting multiple addresses I need that info, the reason on it's own doesn't help much unless I go through every autoblock looking for a matching reason. --pgk^(talk) 09:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is what it says:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by CanadianCaesar for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Spahbod". The reason given for Spahbod's block is: "could be Willy".

Your IP address is 213.113.242.74.

--Spahbod 09:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I hadn't appreciated that it was your user which had been blocked, I'm not sure what has caused the blocking admin to reach that conclusion, so I'll leave them a message and get them to look into it. --pgk^(talk) 09:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see, ok thanks for the help. --Spahbod 09:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well after seeing canadiancaesars edits, i found out that he blocked me because i sent a message to him why hes moving pages, because the sassanid empire page was gone after he moved it. Then he without discussing the matter with me blocked me for infinite time and wrote this: [1] . His reason was apparently that why i question him moving pages after only 4 edits, if he had looked into the IP he blocked he would see that i had contributed for a few days before i made this account. I really don't understand how the administrative system works around here, but i guess perhaps some users are not welcome?! --Spahbod 10:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're unblocked. The reason was because you reminded me of a banned user. Sorry for the inconvenience. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 20:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see, no problem. --Spahbod 05:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful explanation

Sometimes vandalistic people create numerous user accounts and cause all sorts of disruption that requires their many accounts to be blocked. Because your account has little history of Wikipedia editing, and you made a comment that could be perceived as hostile to an administrator who has been repeatedly dealing with such vandals, you were accidentally blocked. —Centrx→talk • 04:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you. Tājik 12:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kizilbash

It is already mentioned in the article that "Tajiks" were the Persians. For your information:

"... The non-Turkic or non-Turkish-speaking Iranian tribes among the Kizilbash were called Tājiks (meaning "Non-Turks" or "Iranians") by the Turcomans ..."

Instead of vandalizing the article, first READ it. Tājik 12:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the article is based on the Encyclopaedia of Islam which is an authoritative work! This is an encyclopaedia and not your personal blog! Tājik 15:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Durud bar shoma

Duste aziz, may i ask why you call yourself SPAHBOD while you correct "Spahsalar" to read SEPAHSALAR ? While i would also definitely pronounce it with an "e" as in English "error" , I would consequently also amend your username to contain the "e" it presently lacks! Sounds very odd: SPahbod as SPain or SPongebob???? try SEpahbod, make more sense! --Pantherarosa 18:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least all of present day Iran pronounces it Sépahbod and Sépah. Even when looking for web entries , you find a lot of different SEPAHBOD (while the odd and abnormal "Spahbod" is found repeatedly in the SAME context only) For sure NOBODY pronounces S and P together as in "SPAIN"!--Pantherarosa 19:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

line?

Sorry if I offended you for putting a line on top of my posts. I didnt mean it as an insult, and Im surprised that you took it that way. I sometimes use a horizontal line seperator only to make the posts more visible (the posts are crammed into eachother). That's all.--Zereshk 01:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parsis are Indian

Parsis are Indian. They do not speak Persian so they are no longer strictly Persian. They have mixed, read Parsi for details. Your edit should apply to other Parsis as well, or maybe you want some specific agenda with Mercury. User: Afghan Historian

Regarding your comments parsis are indian, their language does not change their ethnicity. However their mixture with indians are mild and have not changed their ethnicity either. I put it in your own words: read Parsi for details. And i advice you to refrain from accusing me of having an agenda. --Spahbod 08:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That Freddy Mercury is a Parsi (not Persian) has been discussed to death at Talk:Freddie Mercury/Archive 1. If you wish to contribute to that talk subject, then you are most welcome to reopen it. Irrespective of whether the Parsis have admixed with locals or not, the fact that they have been in a "foreign" land for over a thousand years is more than sufficient for them to be considered - and more importantly, consider themselves - sons and daughters of that land. Putative origin is only one factor in "ethnicity". I strongly suggest you carefully read the complete article at Parsi (and False friend for good measure) before asserting your POV again. -- Fullstop 17:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijani People

The article was not neutral and it was not fair. Pieces of information were deliberately left out, and the wording was also incorrect and far from neutral.Khosrow II 17:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of attempt at external mediation

You are hereby advised that Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Parsi will soon be open. -- Fullstop 08:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]