User talk:Mhhossein/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Article moved

I finally got around to completing this Talk:1982_kidnapping_of_Iranian_diplomats#Moving_the_article. Thanks for reminding me. Let me know if there is anything else I can do.VR _talk 14:30, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome Vice regent and thanks for the move. More than a year and you're there to finish the job. Great, it's OK I think. Also thanks for getting involved in the MEK page and its TP. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela

Hello! Your submission of 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela 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! Yoninah (talk) 20:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 11:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:2020 Iran explosions

Hi, I'm currently constructing an article on 2020 explosions in Iran. Please feel free to participate. If you believe it is good enough feel free to move the draft into an article. IvanSidorenko1 (talk) 11:14, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as)

I see you're a member of Shia Islam taskforce. I came across this source, that says,

During the reign of the early Abbasides the Shi'a Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq preached against slavery, and his views were adopted by the Mu'tazila.

Do you have any other sources that expand on this? I would like to add the views of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) on slavery to several articles. VR _talk 15:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi VR and sorry for the late reply. Unfortunately I could not find much beyond your own source. Though there are things like this where Imam (as) is reported as suggesting to eat with the captives. Also there's Persian source from Naser Makarem Shirazi's website saying Imam (as) believed believer slaves are considered free after 7 years, regardless of the will of the owner. Let me know if I can help more. --Mhhossein ^talk 06:58, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

I added this. It would be great if you could provide the direct quote in that article (at this reference) because I'm not good at reading Persian.VR _talk 18:25, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey VR. Sorry for the belated reply, I don't know why I had missed your comment on my TP. Anyway, it's done now. Please see if there's something needs to be edited. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:29, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Mamnoon. Do you know of other shia opinions on slavery? If so, please add them directly to the article.VR _talk 22:15, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome VR. OK, I will give it a try.--Mhhossein ^talk 13:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Final call for Template:Did you know nominations/2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela

Mhhossein, you nominated this on June 4; it's been over seven weeks and you still have not done the required QPQ. If it is not done in the next couple of days, the nomination will be marked for closure. Please note that, in future, we will be much less lenient regarding QPQ delays, which should be supplied, if not when making the nomination, then within a week or two of doing so. Thank you for your attention to this. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Apologies—my Nominations page hadn't refreshed properly, so I didn't see the QPQ that you added yesterday. I'm glad to see that it's done, but I'm leaving this here so you know about the stricter time limits going forward. Best of luck with the nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

BlueMoonset Many thanks for your concern and sorrrry for being late at replying to the reviewer's comments. I made some improvements today and I hope it gets done very soon. --Mhhossein ^talk 15:08, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

IR net censorship

سلام. امیدوارم حالتان خوب باشد. در مقاله زیر که در سانسو ر_اینتر نت در جهان است بخشی با نام Shutdowns به کشور هایی که به قطع کردن اینتر نت دست زده اند پرداخته است. نام مقاله: Internet Censorship

در رابطه با قطع_اینتر نت در ایران فقط دو یا سه خط نوشته شده است.... برای بازتاب جهانی چند خط در این باره بنویسید:

http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Internet_censorship#Internet_shutdowns

روز خوبی داشته باشید Samira0808 (talk) 10:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Operation sunshine

Let me know if you need help creating that article. Then we can jointly nominate it for DYK.VR _talk 22:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey VR'. Many thanks for the suggestion. I will do it very soon and would need your assistance. I will let you know then. Thank you again. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Translation again

I asked you for translations previously User_talk:Mhhossein#Imam_Ja'far_al-Sadiq_(as) and you were quite helpful, so I'd like some help again. There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Is Nonie Darwish a reliable source? concerning the works of Ruhollah Khomeini. Darwish sources her statement to "Tahrirolvasyleh (Gom, Iran: Darol Ehn, 1990)". I'm hoping you can get access to that and translate to determine if Darwish is accurately quoting Khomeini. Someone actually tried using Google translate so I think it could be useful to get help from someone who speaks Farsi and Arabic.

When you respond, make sure you do after the break Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Arb_Break_(Nonie_Darwish).VR _talk 16:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear VR. Sure I will help with this. But meanwhile do you have any urls to the original Farsi content? --Mhhossein ^talk 13:44, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Grufo has posted several links at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Is Nonie Darwish a reliable source? and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Arb_Break_(Nonie_Darwish).VR _talk 13:47, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually, the discussion seems to have moved to Talk:Ruhollah_Khomeini#Darwish - and you're already active on that article. So take a look at it when you get the chance.VR _talk 14:53, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

VR: Sorry but I already made my contribution to the other board. --Mhhossein ^talk 15:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

I copied your comment to Talk:Ruhollah_Khomeini#Darwish, please discuss there.VR _talk 16:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, thank you Vice regent. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela

On 12 August 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro tweeted "Thanks Iran" after the Persian Gulf state sent the first of six oil tankers to aid Venezuela's chronic fuel shortage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Requesting help

Hello brother! Good to see you still around. I asked for your help a few years ago on the Muhammad Latif Ansari page. Just messaging now because I've incorporated some new academic research into the Wiki article but I'm having some trouble with the citations -- I don't know how to cite the same source (the Rieck book) multiple times while also changing the page number. Would you have time to help me out with this?Cuparsk | ‏الحسين‎ 20:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cuparsk: What you've done is fine, I think. There's nothing wrong with repeating a citation with just a change in the page number. Here's how you could make it look nicer: Wikipedia:Citation_templates#Using_multiple_pages_from_the_same_source. VR _talk 01:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cuparsk, nice to see you here again and sorry for the belated reply. Thank you Vice regent for replying to the query. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:26, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela

Hello! Your submission of 2020 Iran gasoline export to Venezuela 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! Yoninah (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 08:45, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Assassination of Ali

Hello, thanks for the article. I read with interest. I only had one question. The source you specified in the "Ali's prediction of his fate" section does not work. The source contains only a short text about the life of Ibn Muljam. How can this be corrected? Kind regards.--Turkmen ^talk 22:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Turkmen and thanks for your interest. The mentioned source is in fact an entry from the "Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition" and requires subscription for seeing the full version. I had access to the content at the time, but not now unfortunately. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I'm sorry, I had two more questions for you. Because this article will appear on the "Main Page" tomorrow. My first question is, is there an exact date of the assassination ? So that is a contradiction between the first sentence and the second sentence of the article. My second question is, are the termins "Kinda" and "Kindah" different or the same? Sorry for the inconvenience.--Turkmen ^talk 22:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome Turkmen. I think it's too late but as for the first question, Ali was attacked on 26 January 661 and died due to the injuries two days later on 28 January 661. As for the Kindah and Kinda, yes both are the same. Sorry for being late. --Mhhossein ^talk 11:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
• HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
• Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.

Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Adroitly rebutted

For what it is worth, I didn't see anything that "adroitly rebutted" your argument. I saw both sides posting reasonable arguments. I won't say which side I think is right, but I will say that neither side was stupid, obviously wrong, or "adroitly rebutted". --Guy Macon (talk) 22:30, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the insight Guy. Just imagine I was shocked to see "adroitly rebutted". LOL! --Mhhossein ^talk 13:02, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

2020 Iran explosions

Hello I need some help with correcting this article:

• http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/2020_Iran_explosions

In the article it is stated that the explosion took place in Parchin, however commercial satellite imagery has shown that the explosion did not take place in Parchin but in Khojir. Khojir is located near Parchin.

• https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53362127
• https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/cyber-strike-by-foreign-force-causes-iran-explosion-israeli-experts/
• https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2020/07/explosions-damage-site-at-iranian-missile-complex-and-nuclear-facility.php

FM-203030 (talk) 11:11, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

FM-203030: Hey, I just checked the sources. They seem to be contradictive. For instance, this one reports the ministry of defence as saying the explosion occurred in public area of Parchin.--Mhhossein ^talk 13:48, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 November newsletter

The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is Lee Vilenski (submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by Gog the Mild (submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points. The Rambling Man (submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with Epicgenius (submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.

The other finalists were Hog Farm (submissions), HaEr48 (submissions), Harrias (submissions) and Bloom6132 (submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for a total of 14 FAs during the course of the competition.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) win the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in round 4.
• Rhododendrites (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, for 3 FPs in round 3 and 5 overall.
• Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 23 FAC reviews in round 5.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 45 GAs in round 2 and 113 overall.
• MPJ-DK (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 33 articles in good topics in round 2.
• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, for 100 good article reviews in round 2.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 22 Did you know articles in round 4 and 94 overall.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 63 In the news articles in round 4 and 136 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:38, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

People's Mujahedin of Iran is covered by community sanctions

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.

EdJohnston (talk) 18:30, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Can I ask you a question?

I have some questions about the intersection between Zoroastrianism and Islam. Do you know much about this topic? Maqdisi117 (talk) 01:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear Maqdisi117. Thanks for seeking my comment, the answer is no. Sorry. I wonder if seyyed can help you with this. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:28, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

@Maqdisi117: Salam. Can you please explain your question.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:01, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Sa.vakilian: Wasalam. I'll post my question in the next few days, iA. Maqdisi117 (talk) 00:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Hounding

If you think a user is hounding you report it here wp:ani, do not use it as a debating tool at a talk page.Slatersteven (talk) 18:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the point but it's not a debating tool (please AGF). The user has a history of hounding me even to my WM Commons RFA. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:31, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Then sorry, reprt them.Slatersteven (talk) 18:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

That's alright Slatersteven. You're completely right. If there's something it should be reported at the ANI. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:45, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

NPOV noticeboard

I kinda get what you're trying to say at Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Clarification_please. Here's how I would say it:

Suppose for a given topic there is controversy X. In that controversy X, 10 sources take POV-A, but 5 sources take POV-B. We can agree that a section on controversy X should given POV-A twice as much weight as POV-B. But how much weight should the controversy section as a whole be given? A little weight or a lot of weight? How can that be determined?

Just a suggestion, feel free to discard it.VR _talk 03:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Vice regent. I believe the "proportion" mentioned in the policy is somehow vague. Your words are pointing to that question in a clear way. I will mention that. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:56, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Arab News and MEK

Salam Mhhossein,

Users keep citing Arab News as a reliable source on the People's Mujahedin of Iran. Given that both Arab News and MEK are funded by the Saudi government, would Arab News be considered a reliable source on the topic? If not, this will affect the RfC on cult claims that was closed as well as the current RfC where Stefka repeatedly relies on Arab News to counter claims made by scholarly sources.VR _talk 15:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

VR: WAS, thanks for pointing out this determining issue. I would say those independent scholarly sources can hardly get balanced by news sources having ties with the subject. What's your suggestion then? --Mhhossein ^talk 18:33, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

My current suggestion would be to exclude Arab News from the MEK article. Arab News is a good source on other topics (Saudi culture, Draft:Alchemiya etc) but not where there is a COI. Do you think we should get community's input at WP:RSN?VR _talk 02:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Mhhossein, reminding you to respond.VR _talk 21:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Vice regent for the delay. I am willing to give it a try. We should have feedback from uninvolved users and RSN seems a correct venue for this purpose. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021

Warning: your edit looks like a violation of the consensus required restriction on People's Mujahedin of Iran. Please self-revert and reach consensus before reinstating it. Barca (talk) 13:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Keep calm and carry on

Salam doost!

Hope you're well. I get it how the MEK talk page is so frustrating. But I think its important to keep a calm tone when discussing things. If you want to help improve things, here is what I suggest doing. Go to Vanamonde's talk page and ask him pointers on how to improve your discussion methods (like I did at User talk:Vanamonde93#Feedback). And then take his advice and commit to making a change. We can all make small improvements.VR _talk 23:27, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Salam User:Vice regent and thanks for the friendly notice. I did what per your nice suggestion. Best --Mhhossein ^talk 03:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 March newsletter

Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
• Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
• ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
• Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
• Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
• The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
• Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
• Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
• Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
• Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 May newsletter

The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:

• The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
• Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
• Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
• Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
• Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
• Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
• Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
• Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.

Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 2 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)

Xinjiang papers

Hi Mhhossein, thanks for assessing the Xinjiang papers! I'm working on elevating the article and expanding its contents, so please let me know if you have any ideas or feedback. Thanks! Couchcupcross (talk) 16:10, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

GOCE copy edit of Battle of Khorramshahr (1982)

@Dhtwiki: Many thanks for the nice job. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Help needed with possible violation. Thank you. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:52, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 July newsletter

The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:

• The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
• Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
• Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
• Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
• Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
• BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.

In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Frustrated

I'm honestly really frustrated with the discussion at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran, hence I made this somewhat desperate appeal. What do you feel is the way forward? Should there be an arbcom case?VR _talk 02:29, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

@Vice regent: Having been frustrated myself (since 2018), I completely understand what you say. I guess we are moving towards an Arbcom case. I will also reply to your comment on the article talk page. --Mhhossein ^talk 15:34, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Iranian opposition articles (People's Mujahedin of Iran) and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Idealigic (talk) 09:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 6, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 18:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Moneytrees: Ok, thank you. --Mhhossein ^talk 07:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Which one?

You nominated the Eid al-Ghadir for 29 july (OTD), but according to the info box of Event of Ghadir Khumm, 28 July is a date for this event on 2021.Which one is correct?Saff V. (talk) 17:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Salam Saff V.. Happy to see you around, you had not been editing for a while. I believe 29 is correct and I have changed the date in Eid al-Ghadir and nominated it for the OTD. Please correct the other paper. --Mhhossein ^talk 06:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Images

Salam, do you know where I can find images for Draft:Alchemiya that will not be considered copyright violations?VR _talk 15:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Vice regent: Salam, for this purpose I usually refer to Flickr which I think is not helpful in this case. You may also check this out. Though you may upload and use logos with the aim of using it in your article. Btw, I made a bold edit to your draft (you can revert it if you need). --Mhhossein ^talk 07:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)--Mhhossein ^talk 07:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

What's the policy on using a company's logo? If I copied their logo and uploaded it, would it count as a copyright violation?VR _talk 18:54, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Help for a Farsi speaker

Hello Mhhossein. I've been having some difficulty communicating with the user Navidarian, who has repeatedly added unsourced content to The Kabul Times. I suspect there is a language barrier... Special:CentralAuth shows that they are active on fa-wiki, so I think they a native speaker of Farsi. Would you be able to help them out? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Drm310. Sure. What do you want me to tell them specifically? I did not see a discussion on the article talk page.--Mhhossein ^talk 13:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. The discussions have been spread across their user talk page in a somewhat disorganized way.

For starters, this diff has me wondering if they're being paid by the The Kabul Times for either editing the article or taking photos for them. If true, then they must understand that full disclosure under the paid editing disclosure policy is required. That diff, this diff and all their revdel'd edits to The Kaul Times article also makes me wonder if they understand the copyright policy. I'm not an expert on it, but I know that if text or images are copyrighted, then the verified copyright owner must provide proof of their identity and formally release the work for us to accept it here.

They've also added unsourced content here and here, and used circular referencing to fa-wiki here and here. They don't seem to understand what is considered a reliable source, or that Wikipedia itself is an unreliable source because it's self-published.

It also seems that they believe that the messages we're leaving them are accusing them of acting in bad faith. We're not, but they need to understand that certain policies are pretty strict (copyright and paid editing, particularly). --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank for the explanations, Drm310. This diff further shows there is a language barrier. I guess he mistakenly used "job" for 'work', when he meant to say the pic was his own 'work'. I will tell him the rest. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:16, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate your assistance. I hope that helps him better understand English Wikipedia's labyrinth of rules. I can only imagine how challenging it is for someone for whom English isn't their first language. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:41, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome, I have left a Farsi message on their talk page conveying your main concerns. Also thanks for your understanding. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:47, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Have others commended you?

I am collecting some evidence on you for arbitration (both positive and negative). Vanamonde said you've "done a lot of decent content work with respect to Iranian topics" and El_C said Mhhossein is an editor in good standing who focuses on the WP:GS/IRANPOL topic area and vouched for your "integrity". Have others (esp admin) praised your work in post-1978 Iranian topics?VR _talk 05:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Vice regent Thanks for bringing this point to my eyes. I don't remember exactly. But I have a GA in this area with the others being of a suitable quality. I will let you know if there is anything important. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

There is also this comment from an admin, praising my works for the betterment of the encyclopedia. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Arbitration thoughts

What are your thoughts on the arbitration so far? I just wanted to bounce some ideas off of you. I hope this isn't against the rules.

I currently see two threads in arbitration, one is about civil POV-pushing, and the other seems to be about sock and meat puppetry. One on hand WP:A/G says Almost no ArbCom cases have actually required careful attention to content issues to get the necessary result. On the other hand, Vanamonde said (and I agree with him) that Determining where some users have crossed the line from reasonable exercise of judgement to POV-pushing will require examining some sources. So that leaves me a bit confused.VR _talk 18:33, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Vice regent: Sock and meat puppetry thread should be taken seriously. Btw, do we really have "ant-MEK" sock farms? I think Vanamonde's comment is in line with the A/G quote. Vanamonde was not talking about resolving a content issue, but he was talking about the editors who did not acted properly at "resolving the content issues". It was repeated over and over that Scholarly sources had to be the determining criteria. Plus, I believe there are more editing evidences which can be used to determine POV pushing. I will add them soon. --Mhhossein ^talk 05:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Policy proposals

I also wanted to bounce some policy proposals. I want some constructive criticism before I take them to arbitration.

1. A WP:ACDS that puts rules on how RfCs may be closed at contentious articles. Some rules that could be useful:

• The closure is done based entirely on strength of arguments and careful examination of sources but not on head counting. At least one RfC closure at the MEK page took into account head counting. Head counting encourages sock and meat puppetry.
• The closure is always done by an admin.

2. WP:ANRFC is where admins can close discussions. To do this, they have to carefully go through every single comment and then check the links to make sure the user is making a correct argument. This is, of course, time consuming. So why not instead of closing an RfC, there is request to moderate an RfC. It will also require an admin to go read everyone's comment. But if someone is on the wrong track, the admin can admonish them quickly and avoid a WP:WALLOFTEXT. There can be a WP:ACDS that an RfC on a contentious page can't start unless there's an admin willing to monitor it. It might slow things down, but WP:NODEADLINE.VR _talk 18:52, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Vice regent: I just reviewed your comment today. I would say your suggestions are quite necessary for pages like MEK. Generally I like your "monitoring" option, but for the RFCs, what if there is no admin willing to monitor the discussion? --Mhhossein ^talk 13:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Then we wait until one becomes available per WP:NODEADLINE?VR _talk 01:17, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, but it is merely an essay. I would find a way to have both 'accurate monitoring' and 'timely response'– though I know the latter is just a wish! I guess that would be possible if the articles to be monitored were limited. Generally, as I said, I support your "monitoring" suggestion. I believe that will reduce the amount of works for future. Once the users realize they can't create a support illusion by Wikilawyering, stonewalling and inviting other users, next RFCs are expected to be free of these issues. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:35, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

But WP:CRP already makes things very slow, so 'timely response' becomes less of a concern on contentious articles.VR _talk 10:23, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite, Vice Regent. In my experience there's long been a problem with stonewalling and manipulation in American politics and gun control topics that isn't easily addressed by our current DS system. Although DS theoretically allows any admin to impose sanctions at their discretion with minimal discussion, the only way for an editor to request DS action is to build a huge pile of evidence against another editor and present it at Arbitration Enforcement, creating even more drama. Admins at AE often expect the evidence to be presented as a series of diffs which they can look over instead of reading the actual discussion, which isn't easily done when it comes to stonewalling, and anything that's arguably content related is dismissed as a content dispute, often with an admonition to the filer to refrain from using AE to resolve content disputes. This system just isn't very good at addressing deeper issues beyond clear-cut personal attacks, edit warring, etc. I like the monitoring idea and would expand it to having an admin (or several) keep an eye on the entire page (or even multiple related pages) for a period of time. I think Bishonen was doing something like this with gun control articles for a while and might have some insight. The key would be to have a request system similar to WP:RFPP where an editor can make a very simple and neutral. "hey, this discussion keeps going off track, could someone take a look at it?" request that doesn't require a huge discussion. As a non-admin I realize this is a huge ask, but I hope that if something like this becomes standard procedure then more admins might be willing to participate. –dlthewave ☎ 12:42, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, dlthewave, for joining the discussion. It seems there should be a big change, but I think this change would significantly reduce the amounts of works to be done in future for a monitored discussion. Just imagine how the discussion length and consequently the closure can be boosted. Needless to mention it also reduces the stonewalling and filibustering given the fact that an admin is critically watching the whole process. The admin does not need to address every single comment, sometimes a single comment can send a clear-cut message to the participants in terms of telling them what matters most in a certain discussion. Also thank you, User:Vice regent, for your time. But, what is the first step towards this goal do you think? --Mhhossein ^talk 11:19, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure, maybe a proposal at WP:VPI? This does fit within our existing policies and guideline, especially on DS topics, so there's nothing preventing admins from monitoring discussions right now if they choose. –dlthewave ☎ 14:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Dlthewave you said about making a request "hey, this discussion keeps going off track, could someone take a look at it?". Once an admin volunteers their time, instead of wasting their time going through an off track discussion, the admin should simply close the discussion as "no consensus". The admin then starts a new discussion, watching it closely, and as soon as it starts to veer off, they immediately step in. Nobody wants to go through veered off discussions (that maybe started months ago) and thats why there is reluctance among admins to do so. Our current model (esp at WP:Closure requests) is to be reactive and I say we switch to being proactive.VR _talk 03:15, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Polite pings to @Dlthewave: and @Mhhossein:. I want to propose this at an ArbCom workshop, but before I do, do you guys have more feedback?VR _talk 16:47, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I do see the value in simply closing the discussion and starting a new, monitored one, but the idea I had in mind was more like long-term monitoring of the entire talk page. Are the same people rehashing the same arguments over and over across multiple discussions? Does one editor challenge every piece of negative (or positive) content that's added, often on a faulty premise? Is well-sourced content repeatedly being blocked because of some minor quibble over phrasing? These are patterns that can emerge over weeks or months across multiple discussions, even if the behavior in one particular discussion doesn't appear out of line. That said, this is what I've seen in US politics discussions, and it makes sense to tailor the solution to the topic at hand. –dlthewave ☎ 19:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Dlthewave I completely agree about long-term admin monitoring of the talk page. We all agree. But how do we get more admins to come and monitor?

Here is a proposal of what I want to write at ArbCom (based on above feedback):

On pages where WP:Civil POV pushing dominates over more obvious disruption, greater, long-term administrator attention is necessary. There is a need for a request system where users can neutrally request admins for such attention (similar to WP:RFPP).

Thoughts?VR _talk 14:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Looks good to me! –dlthewave ☎ 16:03, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Seems practical to me, VR. Sorry for the delay. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Re

Mhhossein if you have a proposal to make, like you said, please make it in the Proposed Final Decision section. Time is running out, so make it quick.VR _talk 13:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

VR: Thanks but I am not sure if it is a new thing. Actually I wanted to note that I had raised concern over the issues with RFCs some months ago. Do you think it can be a 'proposal'? --Mhhossein ^talk 13:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I noticed that both El_C and Vanamonde had opposed it as a proposal but nevertheless appreciated the concerns underlying it. Go maybe you can put it in the "General discussion" part of the Workshop. I still don't know how Arbitration works, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.VR _talk 13:58, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Proposed decision posted at the open Iranian politics case

In the open Iranian politics arbitration case, a number of remedies and finding of facts have been proposed, some of which relate to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 01:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Event of Mubahala

Hello Mhhossein,Article Event of Mubahala is linked to article آیه مباهله in Persian which I think is conceptually wrong.If you agree, these two articles should be two separate articles in both Persian and English wikis. Best Regards Aye1399 (talk) 08:16, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Aye1399. Do we have different pages for Mubahala in Fa wiki? Some years ago we merged the items into a wider topic. Since we have no page dedicated to the verse of Mubahala we would better keep the current links. --Mhhossein ^talk 16:56, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian politics closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• (i) The community-authorized general sanctions for post-1978 Iranian politics are hereby superseded and replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  (ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.
  (iii) Notifications issued under Post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from their date of issue, then expire.
  (iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the arbitration enforcement log.
  (v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.
  (vi) Administrators who have enforced the Post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
• Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to take appropriate actions (pursuant to the discretionary sanctions authorization) to facilitate consensus through moderation of any Requests for Comments (RfC). These actions may include, but are not limited to:
  • moratoriums up to one year on initiating RfCs on a particular dispute,
  • word and/or diff limits on all RfC participants,
  • bans on editors who have disrupted consensus-finding from participation in a particular RfC, and
  • sectioned commenting rules in RfCs.
• BarcrMac (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Idealigic (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Mhhossein (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality and further incivility.
• Mhhossein (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Stefka Bulgaria (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Vice regent (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality.

For the Arbitration Committee, GeneralNotability (talk) 16:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian politics closed

@GeneralNotability: Thanks for the note. But Are you sure I should receive both warning and a Tban? I am asking this in light of the discussions exchanged here. I think there were objections against having both. Remedy 6.2 essentially covers 6.1. --Mhhossein ^talk 05:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: Can I have your thoughts please? --Mhhossein ^talk 06:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree that it seems somewhat redundant. However, the vote totals were such that even if we discounted all of the people who had 6.1 as a second choice, it still passed. Also, some arbitrators explicitly said they were fine with both 6.1 and 6.2. I did raise this on the internal discussion list prior to the close, but that did not result in any vote changes. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:51, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@GeneralNotability: No worries. Thanks for the explanations and for addressing the issue before the closure. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I also agree it's redundant but GN is correct that this was the correct close and that there was a delay in the closing to see if anyone would change their vote. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for The Bees Army

On 22 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Bees Army, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Bees Army, a Saudi opposition movement, was supported by Jamal Khashoggi? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Bees Army. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Bees Army), 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.

MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I just saw that on the main page and I was like "cool article, let me see who created it" and I saw it was you. Mobarak!VR _talk 02:46, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Salam and thank you Vice Regent for the nice words. I was in think of creating it but did not have the chance until just recently. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:53, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Kecia Ali

Salam,

I saw you cite Kecia Ali here. Have you read her book? What did you think of it? VR _talk 18:57, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Salam User:Vice regent. I just have access to the Google book and read some of the pages in light of the move request discussion. I think she is clearly differentiating between sexual slavery and concubinage. Given her profession and expertise, I think her work should be given a due weight in the discussion. What's your opinion? --Mhhossein ^talk 19:18, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

I think it represents an interesting perspective. Her views are supported by another scholar ("concubinage is a type of marriage conducted between a Muslim man and a woman born outside the Muslim world who has been reduced to slavery"[1]). I don't agree with everything she says, but I think its interesting nonetheless.VR _talk 14:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, concubinage being compared with marriage seems to be an accurate way to explain its main differences with slavery. --Mhhossein ^talk 03:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	I think you're an excellent contributor who has grown as en editor as a result of the arbitration. Creating an article just a week after an ArbCom sanction shows your unwavering commitment to wikipedia. It took a lot to admit to your shortcomings. You once made a wish, your wish has come true. I hope I can also be as true to myself when the time comes. VR talk 00:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Vice regent. Creating new pages gives me thrilling feelings. I think you're an excellent editor, too. Best. --Mhhossein ^talk 03:50, 26 October 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) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Maximum pressure campaign

On 24 November 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Maximum pressure campaign, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to Human Rights Watch, U.S. maximum pressure against Iran has seriously threatened Iranians' right to health and access to essential medicines including those of cancer patients? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Maximum pressure campaign. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Maximum pressure campaign), 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) 00:03, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit war

Hi Mhhossein! I'd like to ask for your help with an edit war at Talk:Ali#problematic_edits. Thanks! Albertatiran (talk) 08:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For creating 2019 U.S. airstrike in Baghuz. After reading the Times article I came here to write an article about it, and found that you had already done so :) Nothing can bring the victims back but at least their story has been told. Cerebellum (talk) 12:53, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Cerebellum for your recognition. Yes, their story is here fortunately. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:53, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cerebellum: I wonder if you are willing/have time to assist with 5xing the page so that it is qualified for a DYK. The New Your Times report [2] includes enough content for this purpose. --Mhhossein ^talk 03:40, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia (If you reside in the United States)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 16:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Your contributed article, 2021 U.S.–Iran naval incident

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, 2021 U.S.–Iran naval incident. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – November 2021 Gulf of Oman incident. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at November 2021 Gulf of Oman incident. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Fram (talk) 08:24, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Fram: Such a speedy deletion of my creation was not a good move. It could be at least get merged with the older version. Can you restore the page in a draft plz? --Mhhossein ^talk 17:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Port of Shahid Rajaee

On 30 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Port of Shahid Rajaee, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Port of Shahid Rajaee is responsible for 85 percent of the total loading and unloading carried out at Iranian ports? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Port of Shahid Rajaee. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Port of Shahid Rajaee), 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) 00:02, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Muhammad al-Mahdi

Hello, please check this article and talk page. An animate user edits this page each time with a different ID, if possible check the sources. Do you think it is possible to increase the level of protection of the article or not? M.Nadian (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Salam M.Nadian, thanks for letting me know. I just requested for page protection. --Mhhossein ^talk 03:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks 🙏 M.Nadian (talk) 08:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

M.Nadian: Hi, the IP is blocked. --Mhhossein ^talk 05:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks.M.Nadian (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Hello Mhhossein,

FYI, I've put your DYK nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/1962 Isly massacre on hold. Feel free to ping me back when the QPQ review is finished up. (Realize that it gets busy for everybody sometimes though!) SnowFire (talk) 19:41, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
• AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
• Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
• GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
• Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
• SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
• Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Cultural genocide in the United States

On 29 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cultural genocide in the United States, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the colonial enslavement of American Indians is described as a cultural genocide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cultural genocide in the United States. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cultural genocide in the United States), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

DYK for 1962 Isly massacre

On 6 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1962 Isly massacre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 2022, Emmanuel Macron recognized the 1962 Isly killings of French citizens in Algeria by the French army as a massacre? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1962 Isly massacre. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1962 Isly massacre), 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) 00:02, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 11,393 views (474.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of March 2022 – nice work!

the automation of this function is in beta testing mode—please let me know if I've screwed up! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 23:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Theleekycauldron: Thank you.--Mhhossein ^talk 01:56, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you

thank you for all of your edits on the Imam Reza shrine stabbings page, they are improving the article very much. Kelhuri (talk) 08:08, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome Kelhuri. Thanks for creating the page. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Whiteguru. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Rohingya refugees in India, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

This has been marked unreviewed as it is an article created by you. You cannot review your own article.

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

Whiteguru (talk) 09:00, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen

Hello! Your submission of U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen 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 at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! GRuban (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of ports in Iran

The article List of ports in Iran has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This list only has 3 entries in it, and is too short to be useful as its own article

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. 192.107.137.242 (talk) 17:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for United States support for Saudi Arabian–led operations in Yemen

On 29 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article United States support for Saudi Arabian–led operations in Yemen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that due to U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen, both Saudi Arabia and the United States may be held responsible for war crimes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, United States support for Saudi Arabian–led operations in Yemen), 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) 00:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Autopatrolled and unreferenced articles

There was a discussion at WT:PERM about a user whose autopatrolled flag I removed. Among other concerns, that user was creating unreferenced articles. To justify this sloppiness, the user then produced a list of unreferenced articles created by users who have the autopatrolled flag. List of ports in Iran, recently created by you, is on this list. The affair has made its way to the Administrators' noticeboard so there may be further scrutiny going forward.

Please let me give a reminder what autopatrolled is for: this is a flag given to users who consistently create clean articles that do not require review by others. Should maintenance flags like "unreferenced" be required, this does not meet the requirements for autopatrolled. Could I thus ask you that you go please back to articles that you have recently created with a view of ensuring that any issues raised in maintenance tags (whether placed already or potentially needed) be addressed? And going forward, that you please ensure that new articles are clean so that they don't require review by others? Please feel free to ask questions. Here's good; please ping me if you do. Schwede66 23:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Imam Reza shrine stabbings

On 3 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Imam Reza shrine stabbings, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Iranian Sunni scholars condemned the Imam Reza shrine stabbings carried out by a Takfiri extremist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Imam Reza shrine stabbings. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Imam Reza shrine stabbings), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

US copyright tags

Salam!

How do I add US copyright tags to images? For example, this image has a Croatian tag but not a US one. This is the last hurdle for the GA nom Talk:Mehmed Handžić/GA2.VR _talk 20:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Salam VR! Hope your are fine and sorry for the delay. For the purpose of your question, you may notice my explanations here. Best. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 July newsletter

The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• BennyOnTheLoose, with 746 points, a tally built both on snooker and other sports topics, and on more general subjects.
• Bloom6132, with 683 points, garnered mostly from "In the news" items and related DYKs.
• Sammi Brie, with 527, from a variety of submissions related to radio and television stations.

Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article nomination, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. WikiCup judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Mediation?

Salam Mhhossein! Do you happen to have any advice for me on how to handle this dispute about unreliable content? It's a stalemate currently. Thanks!

Salam again! This is probably less urgent now. Vice Regent got back to me in the meantime and said he'd look into the dispute next week. Albertatiran (talk) 07:54, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Salam Albertatiran, thanks for reaching out to me. Nice to see VR is willing to help. --Mhhossein ^talk 10:55, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Ongoing discussion

Hi, Mhhossein! Hope all is well with you. This proposal to rename Fatimah might be of interest to you. Please consider participating in it. If you happen to know someone else who'd support the proposal, please also let them know. Thanks! Albertatiran (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Hey Albertatiran, I was following the discussion. Btw, asking others whom we think would 'support' a discussion constitutes inappropriate canvassing. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK for The Scent of Joseph's Shirt

On 10 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Scent of Joseph's Shirt, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Scent of Joseph's Shirt was said by Iranian director and screenwriter Ebrahim Hatamikia to reflect his perception of waiting for Imam Mahdi? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Scent of Joseph's Shirt. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Scent of Joseph's Shirt), 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) 00:02, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Humanitarian impacts of U.S. sanctions against Iran

On 13 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Humanitarian impacts of U.S. sanctions against Iran, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that U.S. sanctions against Iran have adversely impacted Iranian children with epidermolysis bullosa, among other patients? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Humanitarian impacts of U.S. sanctions against Iran. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Humanitarian impacts of U.S. sanctions against Iran), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

New spin-off article

Hi, fellow editor! I'm going "door to door" to bring this proposal to the editors' attention. Please consider posting your view. Thanks! Albertatiran (talk) 07:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping Albertatiran. I have just conveyed my voice. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 September newsletter

The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

At this stage, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For the remaining competitors, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Reverting page moves

Hello. I took care of your request at WP:RM/TR, but just wanted you to know, in case you don't already, that you should be able to do these kinds of moves yourself. As long as there is not more than one edit at the redirect that points back to the article to be moved, any autoconfirmed editor should be able to move the article over the redirect. Station1 (talk) 05:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear Station1, I had a failed attempt before bringing the case to the WP:RM/TR. Thanks for your comment. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Operation Tariq al-Qods

On 10 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Operation Tariq al-Qods, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Iranian operation to liberate the town of Bostan during the Iran–Iraq War was described by Ruhollah Khomeini, then Supreme Leader of Iran, as "the victory of victories"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Operation Tariq al-Qods. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Operation Tariq al-Qods), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Bombing of Mokha

On 5 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bombing of Mokha, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the bombing of Mokha was described as one of the deadliest attacks by the Saudi Arabian–led coalition against Yemen, leaving between 65 and 120 dead, including 10 children? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bombing of Mokha. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bombing of Mokha), 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) 00:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry

It seems that Wikiaviani did make personal attacks against you. I didn't check all the diffs before I made the comments over at WP:ANI. Sorry. Quandarie 16:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

@Quandarie: don't worry about it. I was actually seeking mutual respect by the ANI report. --Mhhossein ^talk 07:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@Quandarie: I don't know if you are willing to respond to the user's allegations. Just meant to let you know. Best. --Mhhossein ^talk 08:04, 7 October 2022 (UTC)