User talk:Kermanshahi

This user may have left Wikipedia. Kermanshahi has not edited Wikipedia since 29 January 2014. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

This is Kermanshahi's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

---

My Contributions

---

Archives
User:Kermanshahi/archive01 User:Kermanshahi/archive02 User:Kermanshahi/archive03 User:Kermanshahi/archive04 User:Kermanshahi/archive05 User:Kermanshahi/archive06 User:Kermanshahi/archive07

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Islah (disambiguation), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/03/world/middleeast/yemens-opposition-party-islah-faces-credibility-gap.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my brother, do you speak kurdish? Would you like to help us in kurdish wikipedia about kurdish culture in Iran? --Gomada (talk) 16:40, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Islah (concept) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The corresponding Dab contains the only encyclopedia-worthy content this article has seen in its more than six years' existence. If its prose content can be expanded beyond a dictdef, it's high time to do so.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Jerzy•t 05:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC) Timestamp: 20111215044412[reply]

   Thanks for your interest in WP and your efforts.
   Please study Dab and MoSDab. I assume you care about whether you are editing constructively, and that implies that you have no idea what a Dab page is. You added a few acceptable entries to Islah‎‎ in your next-to-last edit to it, and they are appreciated; however, most of your recent editing to it will be reverted, and it's a shame to see your energy being wasted in this fashion. Thanks again.
--Jerzy•t 22:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kermanshahi. There is a response from me, below the message you left in the "Disambiguation" section of my talk page.
--Jerzy•t 07:58, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Operation Scorched Earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abu Nasir (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) 10:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note to any reviewing admin and this user: As I noted in my rationale, I am involved; WP:INVOLVED was deliberately ignored, and I've started a thread at ANI requesting review. The rationale for this block is explained in greater detail. Swarm ^X 19:47, 20 December 2011 (UTC)![reply]

(edit conflict) If you were involved, then this block is utterly inappropriate unless Kerman was being exceptionally egregious. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:00, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This block is utterly inappropriate if my involvement motivated the block in any way whatsoever—it did not, and I sincerely would hope that in my years of editing here in good faith I've garnered enough of what one might call a reputation as to not warrant such an assumption by default. Swarm ^X 20:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know, you could have also contacted me, but instead suddenly I received a 1 week block without even hearing of it. Infact I did open a thread in the Iraq War talk page, but you did not reply there. It is clear from thousands of people dying and all the ongoing violence which is reported in Iraq, that the war is not over. But instead you suddenly banned me without any notice as to censor views you disagree with.Kermanshahi (talk) 19:59, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think this is an appropriate edit? If you are unblocked, is this the sort of edit you intend to keep making? 28bytes (talk) 20:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, but the earlier "American and new Iraqi government victory" was just as bad, if not worse. But I was actually looking to find what the old outcome was (before it was vandalized in the first place) but then I was banned.Kermanshahi (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. 28bytes (talk) 20:42, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find probably to be a very convincing argument for unblocking. You either will or you will not continue making POV edits. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

^^That was actually in reference to his question: "Do you think this is an appropriate edit" - probably not. That was an edit made due to my frustration with the POV on wikipedia in the first place. Now I said it in such way (probably not) because still this my view, and a view commonly found in the media and I think it is strange how this is seen as outrageous while on the other hand the infobox of Iraq War is carefully filtered to include only information that puts the war in a positive light from US government perspective, but yes, that edit was POV and thus should not have been made (or at least it was to controversial to have been made without consensus). I doubt the guy who vandalised the article in the first place by adding American victory, was even warned for this, leave alone recieving a 1 week ban. See, that's the problem here.Kermanshahi (talk) 21:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• To be clear, neither the "American victory" or "American defeat" edits were vandalism; just both pretty flagrant violations of NPOV. I would warn the other editor for that if they were registered, but they appear to be on a possibly dynamic IP and haven't edited since yesterday. But keep in mind that other editors making unacceptably POV edits does not excuse or mitigate making unacceptably POV edits in the other direction. You seem like a reasonable person, I suspect you understand that. If you can promise to keep your frustration in check and make a serious effort to rein in the POV editing, I will be happy to recommend you be unblocked. 28bytes (talk) 21:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I apologize for what I did. But really, I try to keep my edits as NPOV as possible. I always try to find figures and claims from both sides and try to phrase everything in as neutral way as possible. Even this dispute was not because I tried to push my personal views, but resulted from technical disagreement regarding the end of the Iraq War, which simply isn't ended due to the fact that there are still many insurgents fighting with government forces, just look here.Kermanshahi (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• There is no "technical disagreement" regarding the end of the Iraq War. We operate with reliable sources here, and your removal of those sources to push your personal opinion is unacceptable. If you can clarify that you understand that, I would happily see you unblocked as well. Swarm ^X 21:42, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, removing of reliable sources is wrong and in fact I didn't want to remove the sources listed there but I didn't know exactly what to do with them. However, your sources don't prove the Iraq War is over, they only prove that US involvement in the Iraq War is over. But see, on one hand you've got reliable sources stating that in the opinion of a US official, the war is over, on the other hand we have reliable sources proving that the violence is still ongoing, therefore, unless we make a new article for post-2011 insurgency in Iraq, the conflict should not be claimed to be over. Now that being said, I should have waited for discussion on the talk page, rather than proceeding to make the same edit a second time.Kermanshahi (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Review essay: Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator Op-ed: Hchc's English Castles

Hello friend, I reverted this edit of yours [[3]]. As I sourced on that page and on Badr Brigade page, SIIC and Badr Brigade have split, with the latter taking its sits in the parliament. Cheers. Chaldean (talk) 14:32, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

Hi Kermanshahi,

I remember you had a lot of constructive feedback for me last October when I posted my map of Division in Yemen. I'm trying to revise the map again to reflect recent events, and I'm wondering if you have any insights. My impression is that most of the previously anti-government forces (including tribal militias and military defectors) in the Sana'a area and in the southern provinces have accepted the new transitional government, and thus are no longer "armed opposition". The obvious exceptions being AQAP/Ansar al-Sharia and possibly the Houthis and parts of the Southern Movement. However, I haven't been able to confirm this, and it would be great if you could offer any insights or information, as I haven't been able to follow developments continuously over the last four months. Thanks in advance!

Evzob (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kermanshahi, your works File:Flag of PUK.png and File:Former Flag of KDP.png has been transferred to Commons by me according to the license you stated without your permission. Thank you so much for contributions, and I suggest you could directly upload your new works to Commons from now, so that all the users around the world can use your works instead of only English users. Thank you again. --WWbread （Open Your Mouth?） 02:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces Op-ed: The Land on commemorating World War I

@Kermanshani, your unexplained reverts, and complete ingorance of my attempts to communicate are a violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:GF. Please respond or i shall be entitled to ask for arbitration.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those edits:

[4], [5] See my talk attempts here: Talk:1979 Kurdish rebellion in Iran, Template talk:Campaignbox Kurdish–Turkish conflict#Revert.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Chiang Kai-shek; Nick-D on the Falklands War Interview: Article writers discuss biographies Op-ed: Nick-D examines using news articles as sources

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Chaco War and the Bougainville Campaign Op-ed: Remembering conflict

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion Interview: Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop

Hi can you keep an eye on the article and its talkpage? I am not as active these days due to multiple reasons. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 02:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Celal Başkale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jamestown (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) 12:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the legacy of World War II Op-ed: Bomzibar on German military history

A very experienced editor and one not so experienced, but around WP for a while should know better. The discussions at Talk:Kurdish–Turkish conflict will not be productive if you continue to snipe at each other with personal jibes. Both of you have been crossing the line with mild, but never the less, personal accusations about the other’s motives. This article Kurdish–Turkish conflict is about a real world situation. All sides of the conflict have their POV and in the spirit of WP:NPOV the article should contain a balance of those views. But even more importantly, in the spirit of WP:CIVILITY all those editors who are working on the article should be unconcerned and remain quiet about other editor’s political, cultural or personal beliefs. Making anything personal within WP unless it is praise, is a no win situation and does not contribute to improving the encyclopedia. I would encourage both of you to Bite Your Tongue whenever the urge to make something personal pops into your head. Thanks. No response required as I will be looking for tangible improvement in your actions, not idle words. --Mike Cline (talk) 13:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to thank you for looking out for vandalisms in various webpages..You might want to see [[6]] and here:[7][8]..incase of future vandalisms..--108.18.145.11 (talk) 03:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: AustralianRupert on artillery in South Australia, and Nick-D on Venice's empire Op-ed: Nick-D on the "Kokoda: Beyond the Legend" conference

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; milestone for the Fortifications task force; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Hawkeye7 on mission command Op-ed: The ed17 on how The Bugle could be improved

Thanks for uploading File:Hezbollah Brigades.jpg, which you've sourced to some guy on a forum. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 18:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RESPONSE TO: "I will be keeping an eye on your edits after your anti-Kurdish vandalism against the Kurdistan Workers' Party article. Remember Wikipedia is neutral so if you hate Kurds or the PKK, you cannot say that on the articles.Kermanshahi (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2012 (UTC)"

---

I must first state that I am completely for a mutual understanding and fully acknowledge the Kurdish revolutionary movement in the middle eastern territory, thus if you wish to work together I am more than happy to resolve the issues you have with my definitions.

However, in the process of trying to understand your POV better, it has come to my attention that your user account history is filled with unfavorable incidents which, ironically makes me question your neutrality on any middle eastern topics, of which the following message from an wikipedia admin sums up very well my point:

"Decline reason: You've been blocked for edit warring on two previous occasions this year. Despite this, you keep on edit warring and your responses to the posts below don't seem terribly regretful of this - you keep asserting that you're right."

Having lived in the middle east for more than 20 years, I find it troubling when I see groups/articles that promote organizations such as the PKK being defined according to their ideological "self-proclaimed" motives rather than their irrefutable actions (which they even claim for).

Please do not forget, my neutrality on PKK definitions can be questioned on the significance, relevance and reliability of my sources of information. However I am not going to censor the defining actions performed by the PKK group that have been internationally acknowledged and accepted by historians, even if it includes the killing of civilians and innocent people. (e.g. Pinarcik Massacre 1987 - an incident that was claimed by the PKK themselves)

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Isb.tr.43 (talk • contribs) 01:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted an edit in which you added five templates to the article Başbağlar massacre: [9]. (No references, partisan, etc). I think there may have been problems with all five, but certainly, say "No References" didn't make sense - the article was well-referenced. If you would like to discuss any of these issues with the article, please do so on the article talk page. Jd2718 (talk) 05:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thanck you to contribute for wikipedia you are very hepful, spas --Alsace38 (talk) 13:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RESPONSE TO: Whether the pinarick massacre happened or Ocalan said "Let's kill and become the authority" may have indeed been true. However, this in no way belongs in the introduction of the article, which is just basic information on the group. There is plenty of room in the article to talk about individual PKK attacks/operations.

We don't say in the introduction of this article: Mustafa Kemal Atatürk "he was notorious for massacres against Armenians," either. If I added that, I think quite a few Turks would have problems with that being POV.

---

The issue in hand here is the definition of PKK and specifically the appropriateness of certain statements in the Prelude section, also my tone.

You miserably failed in your attempt to make matters personal by bringing up an irrelevant article on Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Such a move presents nothing but your struggle in remaining neutral on this topic. If you do believe this leader was known for such an action, then please do define it with reliable sources, I on the other hand cannot say much about this leader as it is far from my points of interest. PLEASE FOCUS ON THE ISSUE HERE, I IMPLORE YOU TO REMAIN FOCUSED.

What truly troubles me is how adamant you are in defining the PKK according to ideological definitions, I on the other POV presented historical, irrefutable cases, with references completely independent from the Turkish POV, some being from the E.U., and mostly others from U.S.

Kermanshahi - please do not fall into the thinking of if you are not with the PKK you are with the Turks - there are people out there who strive for the universal truth based on irrefutable actions and are not interested in taking sides.

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Isb.tr.43 (talk • contribs) 04:36, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

---

IN RESPONSE TO: "Now you're suggestion of making the beginning of the article to be like "the evil PKK slaughtered innocent people in massacres and wants to kill people to become authority" sounds as if it's from some MHP paper rather than an encyclopedia."

Where are you getting these quotations from? Can you please be specific? - stop insinuating that my user account wrote these phrases by adding quotations to them. Your issue was tone, I eliminated all the words/phrases that may even imply that PKK was evil. But my question to you is:

1. Was not the Pinarcik Massacre 1987 held out by the PKK forces?

2. Did not the PKK self acclaim these acts? formally (not just some rumor)

3. Did not Abdullah Ocalan make significant comments regarding this attack right after it occurred?

4. Does not this event hold any MAJOR significance related to PKK and its actions?

If you are ready to discuss any of the points above, then please enlighten me, but by constantly labeling me from another so called party/group makes no sense, it is simply a waste of time and your efforts. Be specific in your points, just like you did with my tone, and I accepted my errors, you on the other hand wish to accept none of yours - this isn't what wikipedia is about.

---

please stop your stupid turkish propagands, oki? you cannot make something else? can you speak on armenian genocide, ataturk was gay, you can contribute here no?? --Alsace38 (talk) 13:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel_66, AustralianRupert, and Nick-D look at ships, soldiers, and railways Op-ed: Nick-D on navigating the FA and A-Class review processes

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Simon Harley on British battleships and Nick-D on the French Resistance Interview: Five editors discuss some less-represented areas of military history Op-ed: Ian Rose looks back on 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Mongol naval power Op-ed: Crisco 1492 on war films

at Fifth-generation jet fighter were not supported by the refs. It is also highly unlikely that a country's first and recent aircraft is a fifth gen. So i have removed that. If you think i have made a mistake and you can cite reliable references, feel free to revert me. Thanks! Anir1uph | talk | contrib 15:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at US Army leadership since World War II

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at refugees during the Battle of France Interview: Editors discuss writing articles about the former Yugoslavia Op-ed: Prioryman on German V-weapon sites and the historian's responsibility

I just looked at your profile and saw that you were an Kurd, just wanted to say hello, it's always nice to see a fellow Iranian :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War Op-ed: ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Dumelow on the French Foreign Legion and Nick-D on New Zealand military history Op-ed: Nick-D on military history tourism

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Works on the RNZAF, World War I in the Baltic, and British battleship construction Op-ed: Anchors Aweigh for the Majestic Titans

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars Interview: What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

Hi!

I'm currently making a List of wars involving Iran. This is a quite comprehensive task, and I'm in no way an expert on Iranian history. If you have the time and willingness, your help would be really appreciated.

Best, --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 22:31, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hezbollah Brigades.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 04:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 18:08, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the American Civil War

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks Austro-Hungarian battleships of World War I Op-ed: Advice on reviewing Featured and A-Class articles

You are on 3RR over there, also stop calling editors propaganda writers for terrorists. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Kermanshahi reported by User:Darkness Shines (Result: ). Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you hate Iranians, but your pro-terrorist edits are unacceptable and blatantly POV. You should not try to push your anti-Iranian POV on wikipedia, instead just treat MKO like every other terrorist organization.Kermanshahi (talk) 12:43, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Iran–Israel proxy conflict, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jundullah (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) 09:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at US industry in World War II Op-ed: AustralianRupert offers a soldier's perspective on editing Wikipedia

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Carcharoth and Hawkeye7 look at World War I cemeteries and the British Army in World War II Interview: Less-represented areas of military history – part 2 Op-ed: TomStar81 and Nick-D look back on 2013 and ahead to 2014

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Syrian Kurdish–Islamist conflict (2013-present), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Afrin (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) 09:00, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D, Zawed and Hawkeye7 look at recent releases

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2013 Camp Ashraf massacre. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

From an outside view (Darkness Shines despises me), I cannot fathom how you consider your article moves and move-warring to be anywhere in line with "general Wikipedia policies" such as WP:CONSENSUS and edit-warring. You might want to read WP:NOTTHEM prior to your instant unblock decline, and address you failure to abide by WP:BRD ASAP ES&L 13:36, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to discuss, he said I was unworthy of response. He reverts edits constantly, but when anyone reverts his he reports to administrators as if I'm the bad guy. I always try to assume good faith, but it's become painfully clear there is no good faith in this guy. It's a difficult type of troll to deal with, he doesn't want to reason or accept sourced information, refuses to discuss and instead just reverts and tries to get you banned. What can you do with such type of guy?Kermanshahi (talk) 13:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Rabaul in World War II and Australia in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 on military command and Nick-D on F-111s in combat

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at Britain's War Machine Interview: Article writers discuss German military history

Hi, as the number of casualties in Dammaj in 2013 were far more greater than in 2011, and due to the fact that Dammaj was finally taken over by the Houthis, a new article about the late 2013-early 2014 events must be made. Could you help on that?. Regards, --HCPUNXKID 22:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at The Lost Boys of Anzac Op-ed: Peacemaker67 on Featured Articles involving Yugoslavia in World War II

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at life aboard a US aircraft carrier and Hawkeye7 considers the role of food in World War II

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Jonas Vinther and Nick-D look at examples of electronic media Op-ed: TomStar81 on the shot heard around the world

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Wrap-up of some recent external reviews Interview: World War I editors Op-ed: TomStar81 on the outbreak of World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at the military history of Austria-Hungary Timeleine: This month in World War I

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Nick-D on Britain in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D on Britain in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Nazi Germany's Eastern Front allies Op-ed: TomStar81 on the origins and legacy of trench warfare Timeline: This month in World War I

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.