User talk:Khorshid
300 Edits
Voting hasn't ended, and any reasonable person would be able to see that. In fact, no one but me has ever sugggested any specific date to the end of the vote. You will recall that you specifically rejected every part of that. The voting hasn't been ended. If you need to discuss this further, feel free. However, you do not get to act until the vote is complete, or consensus is found (anmd not, w don't have consensus yet). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arcayne (talk • contribs)
- Voting ended long time ago buddy. Khorshid 03:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- If voting ended, then it ended wit hteh vast majority supporting version #7, which was arcayne's edit. I see youv'e decided to disregard the consensus. Unfortunately, that's against Wikipedia's policies. Please abide by consensus. Thank you. ThuranX 03:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, Khorshid, you are mistaken, voting has not ended. Mardavich clearly stated that the vote would end when "ALL votes cast by ALL the registered users will be counted, and there will be no expectations whatsoever. --Mardavich 22:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)". I think that expecting the entirety of the English language wiki to weigh in is a tad unreasonable, but I think that more time is needed. After all, it will give all those folks who voted right at the beginning of their Wikipedia careers to build up their edit counts. You may recall that I was the only person who suggested calling an end to the vote, and such was vociferously rejected. So, we wait until a consensus emerges, or we find an alternative, or until we agree on when the voting ends. Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's the 24th of April. Consensus was reached days ago, for #7. There is no precedents here for continuing this kind of thing. You will never be able to categorise this film as "historical fiction" if that is what you are still pushing for. Khorshid 06:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, Khorshid, you are mistaken, voting has not ended. Mardavich clearly stated that the vote would end when "ALL votes cast by ALL the registered users will be counted, and there will be no expectations whatsoever. --Mardavich 22:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)". I think that expecting the entirety of the English language wiki to weigh in is a tad unreasonable, but I think that more time is needed. After all, it will give all those folks who voted right at the beginning of their Wikipedia careers to build up their edit counts. You may recall that I was the only person who suggested calling an end to the vote, and such was vociferously rejected. So, we wait until a consensus emerges, or we find an alternative, or until we agree on when the voting ends. Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- If voting ended, then it ended wit hteh vast majority supporting version #7, which was arcayne's edit. I see youv'e decided to disregard the consensus. Unfortunately, that's against Wikipedia's policies. Please abide by consensus. Thank you. ThuranX 03:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
You said that you were in favour of "Redirect and merge" on that AfD. For procedural purposes, it would make it easier for an admin to to recognise that if you add the word "delete" before that (read: "Delete, redirect and merge"). A change would be appreciated ASAP, as the AfD will close soon, and it would be a shame if you were misunderstood. Cheers, TewfikTalk 23:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Iranian revolution
I replaced what had written in Iran#Iranian Revolution and Iran-Iraq War (1979 – 1988) and looked like OR with referenced text. This text is the lead of Iranian revolution. I want to get a wikibreak and you could speak with Leroy if you opposed with it. God bless you.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 04:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Request for mediation
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Shatt al-Arab (Arvand Rud), and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. -- tariqabjotu 14:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Exciting new article!
Political thought and legacy of Khomeini --Leroy65X 18:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
a story about a cleric who once approached Khomeini
Salam, It is a very illuminating story. If you have a source we could put it in the Khomeini article or the thought and legacy article. Have a nice day --Leroy65X 22:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
welcome back
--alidoostzadeh 03:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- yeah thankfully there is not too much problem in the wiki-world. The outcome of the armenia-azerbaijan Arbcomm II injunctions was excellent and they will force users (even Iranian ones and Turkish users) to behave! So as Darius I the great said: "I do not lose my temper". On the other hand, there is much work to be done.. There are at least 5000+ Persian poets from the classical period and there is much to contribute to Iran related articles in terms of arts, science, literature and etc. --alidoostzadeh 00:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you are talking about. But thanks for welcoming me back, but i am not here all the time like before. Khorshid 09:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Khomeini
Is this the book?
- Author Nasr, Seyyed Vali Reza, 1960-
- Title The Shia revival : how conflicts within Islam will shape the future / Vali Nasr.
- Imprint New York : Norton, c2006.
- Edition 1st ed.
Maybe Political and religious thought of Khomeini? --Leroy65X 14:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)