User talk:Timtrent

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Click here to leave a new message, LINK to any article you want me to look at
And sign your posts using ~~~~.
I may not bother with posts where articles are not linked and posts are not signed.
I may just delete them and ignore them and you.
I do not review drafts on request, nor, normally, do I review a draft more than once, so please do not ask
If you want me to do something for you, make it easy for me, please.

This is the home account for Fiddle Faddle, which is both my nickname and my alternate account.
When you begin a new message section here, I will respond to it here. When I leave message on your Talk page, I will watch your page for your response. This maintains discussion threads and continuity. See Help:Talk page#How to keep a two-way conversation readable. If you want to use {{Talkback}} or {{ping}} to alert me about messages elsewhere, please feel free to do so.

Has this user made a silly mistake? Click on the trout to notify them!

It is 4:30 AM where this user lives. If it's the middle of the night or during the working day they may well not be online. For accurate time please purge the page

I do not remove personal attacks directed at me from this page. If you spot any, please do not remove them, even if vile, as they speak more against the attacker than against me.

SCAM WARNING! If you have been contacted or solicited by anyone asking for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article, such offers are not legitimate and you should contact paid-en-wpwikipedia.org immediately. See this page for more information.

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.

Need help

{{subst:Db-notice-multiple|User:Prem Barthasarathy/sandbox|header=1|U5|G11}} ~~~~

Prem Barthasarathy (talk) 10:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prem Barthasarathy You appear to be evading the block applied to your other account. Tell me why I should help someone who is evading a block? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prem Barthasarathy You have been blocked. Oh dear, what a pity, never mind. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:32, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

submission Iran 1981 Massacre

Dear editor, I am writing this message in relation to "he submission "I981 Iran Massacre". I would like to let you know that the entry has been drafted based on authoritative and independent scholarly and legal documents, which are referenced in the article. The sources include a recent UN-report (2024), academic journal papers, scholarly monographs, and academic databases. All sources are mentioned in the submission. However, the entry has been declined by the editor "due to lack of reliable sources". Therefore, I wonder how this issue could be resolved. I also sent a message to you earlier but have not received a response so far. I would be grateful for your help. Best, Arthatruth Link of the submission: Draft:1981 Iran massacre

Arthatruth (talk) 14:14, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Arthatruth I have again checked the references. The Taylor and Francis papers (they are each the same) are cited by no-one. ohchr.org is of interest, yet the abstract has no context. Iran.archive.com is a scanned scrap of paper. Translating Rastyad into English produces text such is this: "eople Of The People Of The People Of The Wor The Of The Of The Of The Of The Of The Shamma Mai Twanid in Kurden Bar Asami Shahr, the number of executions has been proven to " whicih appears to be mangled text.

I return you to the comment I left on the draft. I do not believe that this draft, reference ed in the manner, can be accepted as an article. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:34, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Timtrent Faddle,

Thanks for your message!

A) The academic paper you mentioned is a seminal article on the 1981 massacre and has been cited and referenced by the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Iran in his landmark UN report on the subject matter. Moreover, the paper has been cited by various scholarly publication. (Please see google scholar citations!)

B)The Rastyad.com (https://rastyad.com/en/home_en/) is the main academic database concerning the 1981 massacre and contains thousands of archival material, empirical data and primary sources for research purposes. The database has been cited and referenced in the landmark report of the UN.

C) For your reference, I added the link of the UN report on the 1981 massacre which also contains the references to the paper and the online database. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/countries/iran/20240717-SR-Iran-Findings.pdf

D) The UN report has been used as a reference for the Wikipedia entry!

E) All other references mentioned in the article are authoritative sources and cover first-hand material.

F) There is a Wikipedia-page on the 1981 Massacre in Persian which also relies on these references.

I hope this explanation is helpful. I would be grateful if you could consider this in your final evaluation.

Best, Arthatruth (talk) 16:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Arthatruth Since you are obviously sure that this passes WP:GNG I suggest you make any improvements you feel to be necessary and submit it for further review. Please be aware that fist hand reports are primary sources. Also please understand that the Persian and English language versions of Wikipedia have totally different standards for acceptance. Please let me remind you of the criteria used here:

We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

If you believe it meets the criteria please go ahead and resubmit it for further review. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. I just made a few minor changes for clarification of references and resubmitted the entry. Arthatruth (talk) 16:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Arthatruth all that you have done is added a second reference to several points from the existing pool of references. A fact you assert, once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. However, it is a lily of your creation, and you have gilded it.

You have not yet resubmitted it for review.

Were I to review this a second time my current review would stand. I will not do so. Other eyes are always useful. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, in addition to current sources, various (new) scholarly references were added to support the claims. I hope this is sufficient. Arthatruth (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Arthatruth Scholarly sources and Reliable sources are not always the same thing. I hope it is sufficient, too. Also consder your YouTube reference and read WP:YOUTUBE please 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! I removed the youtube link. Arthatruth (talk) 19:28, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to be sure I accepted article correctly

Hello! It's been a while here, please help check my AFC work, I want to be sure I accepted Ervin Theodore Blix correctly without any redirection. Tesleemah (talk) 04:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tesleemah The technical process worked. I have no idea what you mean by without any redirection because the process does, did, and should leave a redirect.

I am finding notability hard to find. Please enlighten me? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:19, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you, I want to be sure I did. What notability are you referring to? Tesleemah (talk) 09:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of the subject of the draft, now accepted article. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tesleemah Indeed, that has been flagged already by Theroadislong. I suggest that any notability has not been verified, and returning to draft kindly is appropriate. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tesleemah As kindly as I am able I have returned this to draft.

I believe you have made an honest error, something we all do. I have no quarrel with that at all. I have made a substantial number of honest errors. I may even be in error in returning this to draft. The trick is to become ever better in what we do.

I am wholly grateful for your asking me for my thoughts.

I had a look at your AFC review records. You can do that, too, by looking at the AFC participants page, finding your user id and clicking "reviews". I agree with all except two. Another editor has corrected the second. That is absolutely fine and as it should be. I am not criticising your work, I am simply providing a small course correction. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thank you, it will get better with time. Tesleemah (talk) 10:06, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]