User talk:Ghazaalch

Write your writing right here! Ghazaalch (talk) 04:30, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Hello, I'm Alivardi. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Ali ibn Husayn Zayn al-Abidin, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Alivardi (talk) 10:01, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style guideline about Islamic honorifics that should be followed to maintain a neutral point of view and consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style by adding honorifics disturbs uniformity among articles and should only be done with a special reason. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Alivardi (talk) 10:46, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Alivardi:. little by little i learn how it work working here. Ghazaalch (talk) 11:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Superstitions in Muslim societies for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Superstitions in Muslim societies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superstitions in Muslim societies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bookku (talk) 05:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!

	Neutrality award
	For your contributions to Criticism of Muhammad, helping make that article more neutral. VR talk 03:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Also want to connect you with @Bless sins: as he is very interested in this topic.VR _talk 03:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I thank you VR and @Bless sins: for your help. Ghazaalch (talk) 04:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Infected blood scandal (France), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consensus model. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Ghazaalch

Thank you for creating Jabir ibn Yazid al-Ju'fi.

User:Doomsdayer520, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for this new article, but note that other editors have raised issues with the way it is written. For pointers, follow the links in the notice at the top of the article. If these issues are not addressed, future editors could call for the article to be deleted.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in post-1978 Iranian politics. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in post-1978 Iranian politics. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Disambiguation link notification for February 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Muhammad al-Jawad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khorasan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Quick advice about section headings

Hi I've noticed your edits recently on the Twelver Imams and I'm seeing a couple of issues with how you've been formating section titles, as you did here. Section titles need to follow the guidance given at MOS:HEAD. For example, they should be done in sentence case, where you capitalise words like you would in a normal sentence (i.e. not write something like "Names and Epithets" instead of "Names and epithets"). Additionally, headings shouldn't redundantly refer back to the article subject (like by saying "His Family" instead of just "Family"). Hope you find this helpful.
Alivardi (talk) 10:01, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

• Thank you Alivardi. It was helpful.Ghazaalch (talk) 10:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment at RFC

This comment of yours looks unclear. I'm very frustrated with the talk page discussion too, but its important to be clear and calm in your discussions. If I can help you in any way, please ask!VR _talk 23:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

• Thank you VR. I am calm, and try to be clear. Thank you again.Ghazaalch (talk) 03:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome! Can you explain this comment a little bit? It is not clear whether you are supporting Bahar's proposal or opposing it?VR _talk 05:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Zakariya ibn Adam

The article Zakariya ibn Adam has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability is not inherited. Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Saff V. per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Saff V.. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Mz7 (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

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

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

---

Request reason:

As you could see here, the main reason I was suspected can be summarized as below:

It was Ghazaalch's use of the phrase "picking up" (to say "removing")[39] [40] that confirmed for me these are both the same user since this phrase is not used by any other editor to say "removing", and it's something that Saff V. used to say all the time at People's Mujahedin of Iran:[41][42] [43][44][45][46][47][48][49] Barca (talk) 23:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I used the phrase "picking up", just in one situation (both [1] and [2] refer to one situation), and I did not use the phrase "picking up" to say "omitting" or "removing", but used it to say that someone was picking up(by "picking up" I meant "lifting")information from its place and put it in a irrelevant place. So I thought the phrase "picking up" was more appropriate for the situation. But in other situations I usually use "Omitting" as you could see here and here.

I am working on the article People's Mujahedin of Iran, from Iran, and it is not strange if some other Iranians (such as @Saff V, whom I don't know) work on this article too, (because it is about Iran), and it is not strange if people from Iran have the Same POV emphasis on issues like sexual abuse and human rights violations at MEK, cultish characteristics of MEK, MEK link to Israel, ideological revolution at MEK and MeK as a Islamic-Marxist group. All these topics are very controversial issues in the article People's Mujahedin of Iran, and everyone who is active in the article would discuss these issues. Besides, no similarity was found between me and @Saff V, in the review conducted by check users, as they pointed it out here:

Possible. The CU logs from Saff V. show me that they're in the same geolocation and very wide range. That's all I can really say... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC) Ghazaalch (talk) 09:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Accept reason:

After reviewing this case further, I have decided to unblock Saff V. and Ghazaalch.

The technical evidence here is relatively inconclusive: we can only conclude from the CU data that the editors are editing from the same country. Additionally, one user has only edited from a desktop computer in the last three months and the other only from a phone.

The behavioral idiosyncrasies highlighted in the SPI were initially convincing to me and apparently several other editors. However, after more holistically examining the writing style of the two editors, I found that there are sufficient dissimilarities to raise doubt as to whether the editors are the same user. Specifically, Mhhossein correctly points out here that Ghazaalch's command of the English language appears to be stronger than Saff V.'s. You can find a few examples of this in Saff V.'s talk page archives, e.g. [3][4]. Compared with Ghazaalch, it does feel like they are different users [5][6]. In light of these concerns, it seems to me that the behavioral similarities highlighted in the SPI were merely coincidental, and I think the possibility should be seriously entertained that Ghazaalch's is another editor who merely has the same editing interests and viewpoints as Saff V.

To Ghazaalch, please accept my sincere apologies for having made this erroneous block. Welcome back, and if you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my user talk page. Mz7 (talk) 22:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Mz7. No need to apologize. I understand. Ghazaalch (talk) 10:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• Pinging the two admins @Vanamonde93: and @Blablubbs:. The evidence against Ghazaalch consists entirely of them making the typo "summery" 1 time and using the term "picking up" 2 times (out of 465 edits). If Ghazaalch is from the same part of the world as SaffV then they might use the same idiomatic expressions that might seem peculiar to others. The rest of the evidence in the SPI could just as easily apply to me as I too have made criticism of MEK along the same lines as Ghazaalch. Vanamonde's suggestion that it's not uncommon for users (many of whom do not speak English as a native language) to mimic each other's behavior is also a reasonable possibility.VR _talk 13:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

(Not an admin, just a clerk.) Vice regent, the evidence is far more than that, which Vanamonde has agreed with as well (The behavioral evidence is reasonably convincing to me, as has the blocking administrator Mz7. This is a user with the exact same level of English proficiency and writing style as the master in addition to some shared grammatical idiosyncracies, who shows up after the master has been TBANned and gone largely inactive, pushing for the inclusion of the same sort of material on the same few (talk) pages. On top of that, there's the CU result, which shows that they are in the same place and share IP ranges, meaning that they're on the same ISP. Is there some marginal possibility that these are two functionally indistinguishable, but distinct users? Sure, there always is. But the likelihood is extremely small. I am very confident that this is a good block. Blablubbs|talk 14:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Blablubbs SaffV was Tbanned in Feb 2020 but Ghazaalch didn't show up until Sept 2020. In fact, I showed up before that (July 2020) and I have been supporting the inclusion of the same sort of material on the same few (talk) pages. I think its easy to confuse distinct users who share the same views. Regarding ISP evidence, Oshwah said they're in the same geolocation and very wide range. Does that mean the possibility of them being two different people is "extremely small"? How common is it for people in Iran to share the same ISP?VR _talk 14:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Vice regent, I'm not going to relitigate the entire case here, and please do not twist my words. No, I did not say that the checkuser evidence means that the possibility is extremely small; I don't believe that picking out bits of the evidence and saying "this isn't unique" is useful in analysing SPI evidence; the question is whether there are enough similarities (be they unique on their own or not) to reasonably conclude that two accounts are being run by the same individual. In this case, that conclusion has been made – multiple people familiar with sockpuppetry cases have had their eyes on this and seem to agree that this is a fine block. If the reviewing administrator disagrees, they can say so and unblock. Blablubbs|talk 14:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I have said what I have to say at the SPI, and I'm not getting into this further. The reviewing admin can handle this as they see fit with no objections from me in either direction. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Vice regent. Ghazaalch (talk) 09:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Glad to see you're unblocked! It seems that Blablubbs also had something to do with your unblock, so thanks Blablubbs for giving it a second thought.VR _talk 18:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Blablubbs. Thanks to Vice regent, I realized that you helped me out in this case. So I thank you too. Sorry for the delay. Best. Ghazaalch (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Vice regent, and Ghazaalch, my sincere apologies that this happened. Best, Blablubbs|talk 18:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Zakariya ibn Adam moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Zakariya ibn Adam, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 21:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tay.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

DR

Hi, thanks for participating in this discussion. I've opened up a DR request to see if it can be resolved. If you could leave a comment that would be helpful. Regards. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 15:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ansar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Levantine.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hasan ibn Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madain.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Husayn ibn Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fatima.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Missing cite in Ali ibn Husayn Zayn al-Abidin

The article cites "Chittick 2009" but no such source is listed in the bibliography. Can you please add? Also, suggest installing a script to highlight such errors in the future. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]] to your common.js page. Thanks, Renata•3 00:43, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Renata3. "Chittick 2009" refers to Imam Ali ubnal Husain (2009). Al-Saheefah Al-Sajjadiyyah Al-Kaamelah. Translated with an introduction and annotation by Willian C. Chittick with a foreword by S. H. M. Jafri. Qum, The Islamic Republic of Iran: Ansariyan Publications. I do not know how to cite it.Ghazaalch (talk) 09:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Husayn ibn Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kunya.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK

Hey Ghazaalch,

Are you familiar with WP:Did you know? If you create an article you can nominate it for that and it can get featured on the main page of wikipedia.VR _talk 01:49, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Vice regent. Is the following text good enough for the DYK?

• ... The Occupation of the American Mind shows how Israeli attacks on Palestinians provoked widespread protests around the world, while the United States remained steadfast in its support for Israel?

I don't know if that hook is good enough, but the process to start a DYK is here. I suggest you start ASAP because you should nominate within 7 days of article creation. Finally, I took a quick look and you might want to add more sources to the article. But don't delay with nominating the article.VR _talk 20:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you again Vice regent. I nominated it here yesterday. About the sources, most of news agencies I found here are not very reliable, but I will search again. Thank you very much.Ghazaalch (talk) 09:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Zakariya ibn Adam

Hello, Ghazaalch. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Zakariya ibn Adam".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:00, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

DYK for The Occupation of the American Mind

On 25 November 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Occupation of the American Mind, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Occupation of the American Mind sought to explore the United States' steadfast support for Israel in the face of the latter's controversial actions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Occupation of the American Mind. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Occupation of the American Mind), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Global arrogance

Hello Ghazaalch,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Slatersteven, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started, Global arrogance, for deletion, because there's already a page about that topic at Anti-Americanism. Please don't be discouraged; we appreciate your effort in creating new articles. To avoid this in the future, consider using the search function to find pages that already cover what you want to write about.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Slatersteven}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Slatersteven (talk) 17:10, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

Your edit to Global arrogance has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 20:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Hook

You should suggest another hook at Template:Did you know nominations/Global arrogance. VR _talk 03:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Vice regent. I thought I did not have the chance to suggest another one. Is the following 'hooky' enough?

... that the United States was first described as "the Capital of Global Arrogance" by Iranian students? Ghazaalch (talk) 10:46, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Sure, please suggest it at the nom page and be sure to ping others.VR _talk 14:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Global arrogance

Hello! Your submission of Global arrogance at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Vice regent. Do you know what kind of clarification is meant by the above comment?Ghazaalch (talk) 09:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

No, I'm confused too. BlueMoonset can you clarify what needs to be clarified? Thanks, VR _talk 09:11, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

VR, Ghazaalch, this is a boilerplate message that something has happened at the nomination that you should be aware of. Sometimes the "clarification" isn't what's needed. It didn't appear to me that Ghazaalch had been notified that a reviewer had marked the nomination for closure as unsuccessful, and should be given the opportunity to respond, since the DYK nomination could be closed at any time. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hasan ibn Ali

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hasan ibn Ali 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 Shushugah -- Shushugah (talk) 14:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hasan ibn Ali

The article Hasan ibn Ali you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Hasan ibn Ali 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 Shushugah -- Shushugah (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

• Ghazaalch I'm going ahead and rewording parts of the article to make it more readable, like this. Is it ok? I know you wrote half the article and I want to be respectful of your work. But at the same time, I think sentences should be worded differently so they are accessible to non-specialists. VR _talk 01:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• Great Vice regent. I do appreciate your help.Ghazaalch (talk) 12:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hasan ibn Ali

The article Hasan ibn Ali you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hasan ibn Ali for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shushugah -- Shushugah (talk) 13:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Shushugah. But I though you said to Vice regent that the time would extend to a double of weeks. Ghazaalch (talk) 13:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

I possibly misunderstand what on hold means, but I think we mean the same thing. After 2 weeks, I’ll give a conclusive review. In the meantime improvements can be made etc… I didn’t mean to convey anything else. Kind regards

Edit; ah the one week notice is from the bot. I am sticking with 2 weeks as communicated earlier ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 13:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hasan ibn Ali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nass.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia Islamica

@Ghazaalch: Hi! First off, thank you for your work on Hasan ibn Ali. Second, the following source, which is behind a paywall, has been used in Hasan ibn Ali and I wonder if you might have a copy of this article that you'd be willing to share with me. Thanks. Paktchi, Ahmad; Tareh, Masoud; Haj-Manouchehri, Faramarz; Masoudi Arani, Abdullah (2013). Mousavi-Bojnourdi, Mohammad-Kazem (ed.). Hassan (AS), Imam (in Persian). Tehran: Encyclopaedia Islamica. pp. 532–565. ISBN 978-600-6326-19-1. Albertatiran (talk) 19:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Albertatiran. Thanks for you good help. How can I send it to you? Ghazaalch (talk) 07:58, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Please use this file-sharing website, which seems very easy to use: https://www.file.io/ Have a nice day! Albertatiran (talk) 08:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you again Albertatiran. I guess you can download the file from Here. Please let me know if there is any problem.Ghazaalch (talk) 09:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

It seems that your file was deleted before I could download it. I should have mentioned that any uploaded file there is automatically deleted immediately after the first download. Could you give it one last try, please? Sorry for the trouble :) Albertatiran (talk) 09:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the inconvenience Albertatiran. Here it is again.Ghazaalch (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Global arrogance

Thank you Baffle gab1978. I appreciate your help. Ghazaalch (talk) 13:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Wait a bit?

Hi! Thanks for your recent edits to Hasan's article. Could you give me one more day to finish and publish my second round of copy-edits? Then the article is all yours :) Albertatiran (talk) 09:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Albertatiran. That was all I wanted to add to the article. Feel free to modify it using other sources.Ghazaalch (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of United States hypocrisy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article United States hypocrisy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States hypocrisy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

CUPIDICAE💕 14:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Perceptions of the United States sanctions copy-edit request

Hi Ghazaalch; there's a discussion about your GOCE copy-edit request for the above merged and redirected article here. Please feel free to comment there. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 20:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

United_States_sanctions#Perceptions

Hi Ghazaalch, I've copy-edited the section. I found several examples of weasel words related to time, which I've marked with {{when}}, and I found an uncited direct quotation in the final paragraph, which I've marked with {{cn}}. Otherwise I think it's an improvement. Good luck with the article and cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC).

Thank you Baffle gab1978. I appreciate your help. Ghazaalch (talk) 03:30, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Please self-revert

Hi, you made many reverts within the space of 24 hours to an article with WP:1RR restrictions. This diff , this diff, and this diff, and this diff, and this diff. This is a clear breach of the WP:1RR restrictions on the page. I would kindly request that you self-revert. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:47, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Fad Ariff. I did not know about the restrictions. Ghazaalch (talk) 14:33, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Please read carefully my last comment. You made a total of 5 reverts in 24hrs. After my comment, you only self-reverted twice. The article says 1 revert per 24hrs, so you need to self-revert 2 more times in order not to breach the WP:1RR restrictions on the page. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:04, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Three edits in a row counts as a single one as you probably know. Ghazaalch (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Hasan ibn Ali copyedit

Thank you Miniapolis. I do appreciate your help. Ghazaalch (talk) 05:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hasan ibn Ali GAN

Hi Ghazaalch,

Thanks for the ping. I had a cursory look at the article and it seems to have undergone significant transformation and there have been numerous deletions and additions of material. Some sources that I suggested to be removed in the pre-GAN review have been reinserted. I've also changed my opinion on Jafarian and I don't consider him RS. If you still think I should review the nomination, I will do. But it will be a lot of work for you I guess. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 22:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you again AhmadLX. No problem. I have enough time to work on it. Please go ahead and start the review. Ghazaalch (talk) 09:01, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

. Fad Ariff (talk) 11:09, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Political hypocrisy

Hello, Ghazaalch, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Hawkeye7, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Political hypocrisy, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political hypocrisy .

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hawkeye7}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Ghazaalch. Thank you.

Please self-revert

You just reinstated two of your edits edits which I had reverted, which is breaking the article's "All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion)"s rule:

• 04:20, 11 June 2022 [7] you add this to the article

“Abrahamian in his book The Iranian Mojahedin, describes the group as a cult that worships its leader, and writes that the Mojahedin were labeled a cult for both internal and external reasons: political and geographical isolation, the disappearance of the veteran leadership, the marriage of Maryam and Massoud, the prevention of internal critique (members' criticism), and a propaganda war against external critique, even if directed by the organization's members.”

• 15:51, 14 June 2022 [8] you add this to the article

"According to the RAND report, former MeK members and detractors are accused of being Iranian agents or dupes, however, interviews with US military and civilian authorities, information volunteered by former MeK members at the ARC, and visits to Camp Ashraf, indicate that these denials are untrue."

• 12:01, 17 June 2022 [9] I reverted those two edits (and made other edits)

• 18:06, 17 June 2022 [10] You reverted my edit, but by doing this you also reinstated content that I had objected in the talk page [11].

Since this is breaking the article's "All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion)"s rule, then please self-revert. Fad Ariff (talk) 11:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Fad Ariff: Maybe this has something to do with you mixing new edits with old in revisions. Why would you do that unless you are intentionally trying to manipulate the rules? Iskandar323 (talk) 06:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Fad Ariff: Unless you stop making these blended edits I will 100% be raise a fresh case against you at AE/revive the old one, and I'm sure Ghazaalch will back me up on this. This material is contentious. Make simple, well explained edits. Your long edits, mixing new and old, tendentious or not, not explained but then with some flippant note like: "see talk" is clearly not in the interest of clarity. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:36, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for informing me. Ghazaalch (talk) 05:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Please self revert (3)

You just reinstated one of your edits edits which I had reverted. This is breaking the article's "All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversions)" rule:

• 04:20, 11 June 2022 [12] you add this to the article

"Abrahamian in his book The Iranian Mojahedin, describes the group as a cult that worships its leader, and writes that the Mojahedin were labeled a cult for both internal and external reasons: political and geographical isolation, the disappearance of the veteran leadership, the marriage of Maryam and Massoud, the prevention of internal critique (members' criticism), and a propaganda war against external critique, even if directed by the organization's members."

• 12:01, 17 June 2022 [13] I reverted that content

• 18:06, 17 June 2022 [14] You reinstated that content

• 11:53, 18 June 2022 [15] I informed you that you needed to self-revert since this is breaking the article’s rule

• 05:59, 19 June 2022 [16] You self reverted this content

• 04:42, 21 June 2022 [17] Then you asked me why I had removed this content

• 12:42, 21 June 2022 [18] I answered you

• 04:03, 22 June 2022 [19] You reinstated the content anyway (without consensus)

Since this is breaking the article's "All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversions)" rule, then please self-revert.

Also this is the third time I had to explain this rule to you. Either if it’s a Wikipedia:Competence is required or Wikipedia:Gaming the system problem, at any rate it is becoming a problem. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:04, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Fad Ariff: He has agreement from me to include the content, and it is reliably sourced. What exactly is your objection, based on policy? I don't want links, but an answer. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I had also answered about that content here [20], but if you want more explanation, I will respond in the talk page. Ghazaalch, please respond to this notification of your violation. Fad Ariff (talk) 09:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

So what? The content is too long? You only like Abrahamaian when it suits you? Not when he says things you don't like: then he's not neutral and has to be shortened? Iskandar323 (talk) 10:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

It is useless to discuss with you Fad Ariff, because as I said previously [21][22] you do not discuss to reach consensus but you discuss to justify your reverts and to show that there is no consensus on restoring the reverts. I would explain your Gaming the system in details where I know there are some admins watching and moderating our discussions.Ghazaalch (talk) 05:53, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Final warning

About your edits @ People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (making aspersions, edit-warring, tampering RFCs, etc.). Please respect policy, discussions, and other editors. This is a final warning. Iraniangal777 (talk) 17:35, 6 July 2022 (UTC)