User talk:Zmmz/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Licence tagging for Image:Oldold.jpg
Regarding Image:Oldold.jpg, you will need to show proof that the owners of the first three images have granted you permission to upload them to Wikipedia as they are copyrighted and clearly state that no reproduction is possible without permission. The fourth images is from the BBC and is not "public property for non-commercial use". The BBC website clearly states that reproduction of its images require prior written permission from the BBC [1].--210.211.233.112 21:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
I have gotten permission from them via emails, so if any party is intrested, I can forward the emails to you. Also, if you have a request like this, this sign-in with a username, instead of, an IP address, so you can put some minds at ease. Thank youZmmz 22:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- I am not the person you need to email. Please review Wikipedia policies on image uploading. Additionally, BBC images are not "public property for non-commercial use" - they require prior permission. In my experience, the BBC is very unwilling to allow its copyrighted images to be reproduced and does take legal action in the event of a copyright breach. So it is essential that you provide proof. You have uploaded a lot of images in recent days, which is admirable. But I am not convinced that you've fully understood the copyright issues. In order to ensure that your images are not deleted, please observe these basic rules: [2]--210.211.234.53 06:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Again, I am not sure who you are, and who needs the proof. I replied to your comment you left in my talk page, or at best identify yourself. If you want to be credible, you need to creat an account here in Wiki and sign in. Any admin who needs proof, can email me, and I will provide proof/permission; yes, even BBC gave me permission to use one picture, free of charge, only in this site. OK? Take-care Zmmz 06:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- There is no need to take that tone with me. I just want to ensure that your content is not deleted over copyright issues, particularly as I am a former BBC employee and perhaps have a greater insight into the process of security copyright permission from the organisation. I do not need to have an account to remind you of the rules that apply, both legally and on Wikipedia.--210.211.234.53 07:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, I am telling you how Wikipedia works. There is certain process you need to follow, not like this; you need to go directly to the picture you are concerned with, and tag it, etc., etc. I know the copyright rules. You keep leave a repetitive comment, when I have informed you, anyone concerned can email me, so I can provide proof. The email link here, is on the left side of this picture, but you need an account. You have to excuse me, I am a bit busy right at the moment. Bye nowZmmz 07:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- For your own sake, I sincerely hope the copyright rules are adhered to and am glad you have managed to get such a prompt and co-operative agreement from the BBC, which is not usually so eager to give permission.--210.211.234.53 07:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- I wrote to the owner of the Bodazey website clarifying whether he gave you permission to use images from his website and he has confirmed that he has given permission to a Wikipedia editor and gave the editor's email address (I will not republish it here) - I assume it was your email address. So, yes, I can confirm that in this case you have received the correct copyright permission, although I still have reservations about the BBC images. But in future, it would be helpful if you did not take such a combative attitude to those who are seeking to assist you as it comes across as defensiveness and raises suspicions.--210.211.233.205 10:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I have told you many times that this is not the proper procedure for you operate in Wikipedia. You need to sign in/identify yourself, and reassure others you are a productive member here, rather that use a dynamic IP address here. Secondly, once again, this is not the procedure you need to take to warn someone about an image, you need to follow the image warning policies; give a standard message and discuss this in an image designated page. And, finally, I`ll remind you one last to stay Wikipedia:Civil when you deal with others here, whether or not you do not have a username, there is absolutely no reason you should not follow the rules, and on top of that be so abrasive. Consider this a last warning, and please from now on do not leave messages on my talk pages. Zmmz 20:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Frankly speaking, I think you are the one that needs to check up on the rules. I do not need to have a username to edit Wikipedia or write comments on talk pages. I decided to approach you personally and politely questioned you, as have others on your talk page. I have not lodged any complaint against you or removed your pictures. In fact, I wrote to the website editor, got confirmation and have verified on your talk page that there is indeed permission to use images from the Bodazey website. Instead of taking this as a vindication of your own position, you "warn" me and accuse me of being "abrasive". Warn me for what? I haven't done anything wrong! I don't understand why you are taking an aggressive posture against me when I have been trying to assist you so that your collages are not deleted! I think you need to be reminded to stay Wikipedia:Civil!--210.211.234.221 10:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know what you are talking about. I did not tag your images nor did I delete them or remove them from articles. I put a polite message on your talk page, which I am entitled to do. I am a former BBC employee and it struck me as unusual that you should have received permission from the BBC for the reuse of their material - particularly as you said it was a public licence, which it is not as the BBC is not a government organisation but a corporation funded by the television licence fee (a tax on televisions). As InShaneee states, you may not have used the right tag, which has caused confusion over your image uploads - and not just by me, but many others it seems. It was probably an honest mistake by you which is now being corrected, I hope. Instead of assuming good faith, you have accused me of stalking you. I don't know about your problems with that particular user (I am not him) or your disputes in ArbCom, but perhaps if you were a bit less accusatory you might find it easier to make friends than to make enemies. And that's friendly advice.--210.211.234.221 12:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC) + 12:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
IP edits
Actually, I think you're the one I need to talk to after reading that thread. There's nothing wrong with an editor editing from an IP address, even a dynamic one. If we didn't want people doing that, we would have made it impossible for them to do so (a very simple task with the Mediawiki software). Therefore, you need to treat IP editors with the same respect you'd show any other user here. --InShaneee 20:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Haha, OK; fair enough, but my concern is that the editor is not following the policies in regards to images, her or she continues to ignore the standard policies, and is too abrasive/accusatory when talking to others. That`s got to have some legitimacy. ThanksZmmz 20:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Well, short of getting into that debate, I think'd help if both of you were a little clearer on image useage policy. Unfortunaly, wikipedia no longer accepts images that we get permission to use for our site only. So, the only way we'd be able to use such an image is if the copyright holder agreed to license it under a licence such as the GFDL. If you do get them to do that, then you can tag the image as such, but also make sure to forward the email where they agreed to licence the image to permissions@wikimedia.org (just so our legal department has evidence that we believed we had the right to use it). That help any? --InShaneee 00:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
That was all done; I`ve got permissions from creators of the pics, then emailed them to Wiki.Zmmz 00:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Alright...then just make sure if you reupload it that it's tagged with the right license, and simply explain to anyone that asks that you got permission and emailed the correct people. --InShaneee 01:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I will; everybody else has done it the asked the correct way via a standard message, but that IP address is suspicious and has been using some abrasive language, as well as only, and only tagging my pics in Iranian articles. My concern is it might be Aucaman, or someone else whom I presented evidence against in ArbCom. BTW, just to vent; between you and I, I feel it is an injustice to give a user who had hit other websites recruiting help against the so called Nationalists, for the past year, a mere caution warning, and not put her in the same probation pool as others. Upon reviewing the evidence, I see no reason why Zora should be treated differently. ThanksZmmz 01:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
12:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Believe me, I understand your frustration, but it isn't my call. Either way, keep in mind that a warning from the Arbcom is a pretty strong thing, so she's not just getting off, don't worry. --InShaneee 01:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
Hey Zmmz, I just wanted to give you this to let you know that your hard work is appreciated. :) BTW, it is time to archive your talk page. —Khoikhoi 06:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
|
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| Thank you Zmmz, for your hard work to create a quality collage at the Iranian peoples page, even after it was deleted five times! —Khoikhoi 06:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC) |
Thank you; I appreciate it Khoikhoi.Zmmz 19:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- You're welcome, keep up the good work. —Khoikhoi 02:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikibreak
Have a good wikibreak Zmmz and come back soon, refreshed and energised. Green Giant 13:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Aucaman case
A very brief attempt to mediate the dispute a month ago (mostly by asking questions) does not constitute a reason to recuse; on the contrary, it provides me with valuable insight into the conflict. I discussed my attempts to mediate at length with the Arbitration Committee, and Jimbo is fully aware of it. However, please feel free to raise it with him again. Jayjg (talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
When I first read some of your comments in those articles I thought you are another user whose POV sympathizes with that of Aucaman`s. I was surprised that; nevertheless, you were an ArbCom member who had gone head-to-head with some the same editors whom you are now making proposals against? Whether or not you see it yourself, you certainly are not 100 percent neutral here (there is a conflict of interest), and you should have done the honourable thing and recused yourself, like Domini did with the case of Zora. There is no excuse for this, as the diffs showing your tilted comments are self explanatory. In fact, as another ArbCom member just indicated via vote, some of your proposals are “ overkill”. Indeed, I am looking at your admin request page right now, and upon a review, one can see that even back then many voted against your adminship on the grounds of your one-sided edits. And, despite evidence showing for the past year, user Zora had extensively lobbied outside of Wiki to recruit editors against the so called Nazi Iranians, here you failed to submit a vote on the proposals against her?
In regards to the situation, there is just a geo-political climate around that can easily be seen in Wiki as well, in that certain ethnic groups are trying to dismember a country like Iran, and all these editors came in to try to defend the accuracy of their heritage. Many average Joes like Zora are being manipulated into falsehoods by paid authors and/or native political activists on Wiki for example, that are sympathizers with terrorist groups like Al-Ahwaz that are fighting to detach an ancient Persian province from Iran due to its rich petroleum productivity. Under the name of human rights, even people like Zora are tricked into believing the province belongs to Arabs (which was Zora`s first dispute a year ago in the Ahvaz article; i.e. she was disputing the etymology by saying it is Arabic, while she had no idea it is historically inaccurate; yet, she realized it herself later: the whole thing was suggest to her by a now gone/banned user named…yes, Ahwaz). In the mean time these Persian editors are labeled fascists, nationalists etc….which really isn` t true, specially, in the case of users like Southerncomfort. Incidentally, the geo-political issues are not limited to a volatile country like Iran; indeed, Greeks too are finding themselves defending the Hellenistic past (Bosnia, now renamed for some reason Macedonia, is claiming Alexander was not Greek?). These are all brainchild products of Petroleum Politics my dear sir.
At any rate, I have no more time to spend on Wiki, but just for your own sake, please recuse/rescind yourself from this case. This issue is very close to be discussed with Jimbo directly, and you may very well be the bully-pulpit who broke the camel’s back here. Give me one last reply within two hours of getting this note. Thank you kindlyZmmz 17:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- As I said above, a brief Talk: page discussion in which I was mostly asking questions and looking up references does not constitute grounds for recusal. I can't really comment on the rest. Cheers. Jayjg (talk) 18:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Alright.Zmmz 19:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Unblock
To the admins:
I have no idea what this is all about, or even a mistake. I was not given any warnings, nor know exactly what caused this. I am involved in an ArbCom case, and tonight I asked two users[3] that had grievances against an involved party, namely Zora, to voice their concerns in the case. This was done because the users had left messages on her talk page complaining of incivilities by Zora. This is the only reason I can think of for being blocked. If this is the case, and it is against policies, why hasn’t the admin warned me about this beforehands? BTW, in my requests, I was very civil and to the point. Thank youZmmz 03:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
InShaneee, if you get this; it came out of nowhere, no warning or anything, this is odd. Do you feel I was inappropriately blocked, and if so can you please unblock me? I thought it was legitimate to let two users that complained about Zora`s rudness to other admins and herself, know there is a case against her. I told them their voices will be heard in the ArbCom if they wished to leave comments there. I honestly had no idea this was illegitimate, as Zora for example herself had asked other editors to help her in the case.Zmmz 03:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
There may be a glitch because I am still blocked. ThanksZmmz 07:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Unblocking
I have unblocked you, so you can work on your ArbCom case. Please be extra-cautious to obey WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA and other wikipedia guidelines abakharev 07:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Alex, I am still blocked, there may be a glitch. And, of course, but so you know, I have not been uncivil, I don`t know why I was blocked. Thank youZmmz 07:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Help
Can you help undo the vandalism in Ajith to this version? Zora has asked for support from Ganesh to revert the article to her version (as she herself has been cautioned not to engage in revert wars). The links to songs and trailers to copyright-free IPRS licensed websites have been blanked summarily. I have already reverted twice. Ganesh has been reported for 3RR. Anwar saadat 11:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
This arbitration case is now closed and the decision is published.
For the Arbitration Committee. --14:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
FYI...
You know you're only banned from Persian people and Iranian peoples, right? Look at this. —Khoikhoi 22:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, and I will not be around Wiki any longer, but good luck to you and others.Zmmz 22:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm, may I kindly ask why? :( —Khoikhoi 23:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I have other real life stuff to take care of; plus....my job of bringing normalcy back to certain articles is done. One last thing I suggest though is; human nature is addictive and combative, so try to waste time by doing less editing...less...instead, read more, more....more is better. Now, this time I mean it; bye.Zmmz 23:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi there, The Islam template is used in all Islam related articles and it carries an image of the mosque, if you take a close look at the other religion templates they all carry an icon that actually symbolizes the particular religion. The question is what symbolizes Islam? As a muslim you would agree that we cannot Idolize any symbol as sacred as it would be Shirk. So the next question is what kind of icon would correctly represent Islam and Muslims? It is undoubtedly the Shahada, because without it we wouldn't be muslims. So I have suggested to change the template image from a masjid to a Masjid with the Shahada in it. In order to have the image in the template I need build some consense, could you kindly visit the talk page (Template_talk:Islam) and make your suggestion, lets have the template change so it will correctly represent Islam. (You do not have to support it if you dont like it). thanks in advance. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T) 11:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Goleyaas.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Goleyaas.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Golden_Rhyton.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Golden_Rhyton.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Founding_1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Founding_1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Persian_Empire-_Mastiff.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persian_Empire-_Mastiff.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Oneintwo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Oneintwo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Persepolis_Ruins.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persepolis_Ruins.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Copyright problems with Image:Gggg.jpg
DopefishJustin 07:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Image:Afghanisjews.jpg listed for deletion
Two Articles in need of your attention
There are two entries at Wikipedia, which have falsely created -- they are Turco-Persian and Turko-Persian Tradition. Both entries are factitious. I have requested the entries to be deleted. My reasons are:
- The term Turko-Persian Tradition (or Turco-Persian) does not exists academically and it is a factitious entry! Check the Encyclopaedia Iranica to confirm -- The correct name for that culture is the Persianate culture not the "Turko-Persian". Turkophones (mostly of mixed race and Persianized in culture) only spoke in Turkic dialects and were in the military. That is not enough participation in creating and forming the culture to deserve the name "Turko-Persian Tradition" – This is misinformation. All the elements in that area, which have to do with tradition and culture, were drawn from the Iranian culture (Persian, Kurdish, Azari, Baluchi, Tajik, Luri, Gilaki, Talishi, Mazandarani, etc.), and the Islamic faith, not much Turkic elements (like shamanism, yurts etc.) were incorporated in. That is what makes the name "Turko-Persian" an imaginary one and therefore the entry should be deleted.
Any contributions would greatly appreciate – please add your comments, whether you agree with the deletion, or otherwise to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turco-Persian as well as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turko-Persian Tradition. Bā Sepās Surena 02:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Nnbritish.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Nnbritish.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ed g2s • talk 01:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Rmmtk.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Rmmtk.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 17:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Persepolis_-_The_Sculptures_2.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Persepolis_-_The_Sculptures_2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Jusjih 00:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Persian local woman.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Persian local woman.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Persepolis - The Sculptures 3.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Persepolis - The Sculptures 3.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Tochal Mountain.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Tochal Mountain.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:Ferdowsi.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ferdowsi.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Abce.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Abce.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:Persepolis_engraving.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Persepolis_engraving.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Persepolis Columns.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Persepolis Columns.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:25, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Persepolis - The Gate of Xerxes.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Persepolis - The Gate of Xerxes.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Rukh.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Rukh.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Embbleemm.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Embbleemm.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Persian Horse from Persepolis.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Persian Horse from Persepolis.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Naghsh-e Rostam.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Naghsh-e Rostam.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Naghsh-e Rostam 2.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Naghsh-e Rostam 2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Faraavahaar.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Faraavahaar.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:01-08-14-6581-iran-tehran-azadi-shahyad-0640.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:01-08-14-6581-iran-tehran-azadi-shahyad-0640.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:02-01-13-x-0094-iran-tehran-tochal-ski-skiing-0640.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:02-01-13-x-0094-iran-tehran-tochal-ski-skiing-0640.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Yaas.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Yaas.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
File:Yasmine lebonthree copy.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yasmine lebonthree copy.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
File:Lebonyasmin copy.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lebonyasmin copy.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:Persepolis engraving.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Persepolis engraving.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:20, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Survey vote request
Please vote in survey over whether to include text in History of the the Islamic Republic of Iran
Text and dispute is at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran&diff=274961453&oldid=274952179
Arguements
found in edit summary and at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran#Deletion_by_KneeJuan
Thank you --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)