User talk:Mhhossein: Difference between revisions

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; s/ 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 23:47, 26 April 2017

Your GA nomination of Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists

The article Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kees08: I'm not sure why this templated message is here, because I believe that you passed this as a GA on 19th February. Is that correct? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwmhiraeth: That is accurate; legobot has been freaking out lately. I passed the article. Kees08 (talk) 18:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Demolition of al-Baqi

The article Demolition of al-Baqi you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Demolition of al-Baqi for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HaEr48 -- HaEr48 (talk) 06:23, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup-2

I regret that your new GA, Demolition of al-Baqi, does not qualify for points in this year's WikiCup. This is because you did not do the necessary substantial work on the article in 2017 before you nominated it for GAN on 22 February. In fact you did no work on it at all during that period. The relevant rule states: "All reviewed content must have been worked on significantly by you during the competition" Please see this page where the issue was discussed by another judge with another competitor. I am sorry if this seems harsh, but there is still plenty of time to score points in this round and so advance to the next. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:03, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth: Sorry, but I can't accept this claim. I did many changes and added some new paragraphs to the article. the reviewer may have things to say in this regard. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:13, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article readable prose size were 6481 characters before I start the edits aimed at promoting the article, and it's 8619 characters now. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:23, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you made changes as a result of comments made by the reviewer but you did no work in 2017 before you nominated the article at GAN, which is the requirement. Sturmvogel 66 explains this well in the link I provided above. It is the same with DYK, if you created an article or expanded it five-fold in 2016 and nominated it for DYK at the beginning of 2017, it would not be eligible for points in the 2017 WikiCup. This is explained in the general rules at the WikiCup scoring page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwmhiraeth: I started my edits after I entered WikiCup, I think it helps. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the timings

Your last edit before nominating article for GAN was 10 November 2016‎
You nominated it for GAN on 22 February 2017.‎

You did not do any work in 2017 prior to nominating it for GAN. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did the works after entering the cup. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The work was only done because of the review. I will ask another judge to consider the matter. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:07, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwmhiraeth: I reviewed the GA notification and can confirm that Mhhossein did significant amount of work as part of the GA review. Disclosure: I'm the other contestant whose points got docked by another judge in this page (linked by Cwmhiraeth above). As I explained to the judge in my talk page, I think it's unfair to introduce a new rule ("Work done after nomination don't count") midway through the competition, and then apply it retroactively after competitors did their work. The original rule only asks that the work be done during the competition, and doesn't say anything about whether the work is done before or after GAN/FAC/etc. Please reconsider these decisions. HaEr48 (talk) 00:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The other judge who I consulted confirms my view on this matter. To score points in the WikiCup, the first stage is that during the contest, an article has to be created, expanded, improved or substantially worked on before it is nominated for review. This stage was missing in this instance. The judges may need to clarify this in the rules for future contests. I am sorry if this ruling seems harsh, but several contestants were denied points during round 1 for the same reason. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:09, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Muslims Condemn

Hi, I'm Mabalu. Mhhossein, thanks for creating Muslims Condemn!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for creating this article! I am having trouble identifying good categories for it though, perhaps you can find some?

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Mabalu (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Quote

File:Musa Sadr - during hunger strike - June 1975 (Cropped).jpg

سخنی برای شما

آزادی برخلاف‌ آنچه‌ می‌گویند، هرگز محدودشدنی‌ و پایان‌یافتنی‌ نیست. در حقیقت، آزادیِ‌ کامل‌ عینِ‌ حق‌ است. حقی‌ است‌ از جانب‌ خدا و حدی‌ بر آن‌ نیست. آزادیِ‌ حقیقی دقیقاً‌ رهایی‌ از عوامل‌ فشار خارجی‌ و عوامل‌ فشار داخلی‌ است. اگر بخواهیم‌ آزادی‌ را تعریف‌ کنیم‌ باید بگوییم‌ که‌ آزادی‌ رهایی‌ از دیگران‌ و رهایی‌ از نفْس‌ است. اگر آزادی‌ را این‌گونه‌ تفسیر کنیم، دیگر معتقد به‌ حد و مرز برای‌ آزادی‌ نخواهیم‌ بود. موسی صدر ސ ޚ ލ ٰ ا (talk) 07:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Quote. I wish you could provide a ref for it?! --Mhhossein ^talk 07:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, just see this Link --ސ ޚ ލ ٰ ا (talk) 07:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thanks for removing biasness from articles and adding neutral point of views. SpidErxD (talk) 21:57, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

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

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

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 117.199.94.94 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]