User talk:HistoryofIran/Archive 6

Map updates?

These three books contain maps on almost every period of history, including the Safavids, Afsharids, Zands, and Qajars. Heck even the Ghaznavids and Seljuks are covered in Axworthy's book.

• Bournoutian 2021 (Kur to the Aras... book)
• Amanat 2017 (Iran: A Modern History)
• Axworthy 2009 (Empire of the mind... book)

- LouisAragon (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Mostly in response to this edit as the new editor was right in saying that Baghdad was not annexed to the empire (he was wrong in relation to other points though, hence the revert). But yeah we need to fix almost every map when time allows. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll take a look at it in the coming days. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: You don't happen to have a file of Iran: A Modern History that show its page numbers? --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:01, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: I do have access to all individual chapters of the book through JSTOR.[1] Which in turn allows us to see every page number. Lemme know which ones you need. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:15, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Could you send the Safavid sections? They seem very useful, I would like to use it for User:HistoryofIran/Ismail I and actually finish it this time (after I'm done with Peroz I and Shahrokh Shah). Btw, think I should base the maps on the same map used in the Parthian and Sasanian Empires? --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Sent, please check your mailbox! Btw, are you able to view Bournoutians maps here? If not, I can send them to you. Should help when you're trying to draw the northwestern cities etc., both for the Safavid era as well as Qajar. And yes I think such sort of map would look great. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:51, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Got it, noice. And yes, I can see them. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: New Iranica articles btw :o [2] --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Damnnn that's great!

Btw found another Safavid map in a Brill work which depicts the Safavid borders in 1660 (its located on pp. 495-496). Sent it to your email. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Do you perhaps need this article for your work on Ismail I?[3] - LouisAragon (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Yeah that would be nice :-). --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:11, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Sent. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:21, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Btw, you don't happen to have 'Iran Under the Safavids' by Savory? --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Another one: " Iran, however, was to be the dominant influence in Armenian spiritual culture. The Orontid, Artaxiad, and Arsacid dynasties were all Iranian in origin, and the greater part of the Armenian vocabulary consists of Mid. Ir. loanwords. The Armenians preserved strong regional traditions which appear to have been incorporated into Zoroastrianism, a religion adopted by them probably in the Achaemenid period. " -- Russell, J. R. (1986). "ARMENIA AND IRAN iii. Armenian Religion". In Yarshater, Ehsan (ed.). Encyclopædia Iranica, Volume II/4: Architecture IV–Armenia and Iran IV. London and New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. pp. 438–444.[4]

@LouisAragon: I'm really bad at completing my other projects, lol (I'm almost done with the Safavid map though). Could you send me The Hazaraspid Dynasty’s Legendary Kayanid Ancestry: the Flowering of Persian Literature under the Patronage of Local Rulers in the Late Il-khanid Period? --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Sent! Please check your mailbox. As for the map(s); that's really good to hear. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Zaranj/Nad-e Ali

Hi HistoryofIran,

This is about this revision:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1006380426

I'm pretty sure Nad-e Ali mentioned there is the one in Iran. Did you look at the sources? Jeffriban54 (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You forgot to put in the source

Hi. When you created the page Azkajwar II, you listed as a source "Marshak (1994), pp. 235-236" without offering any further details for it. At Boris Marshak there are two 1994 articles listed, but none corresponds (see page numbers). Please add the source in full. Pls mind that you can use |author-link = Boris Marshak. Thanks. Arminden (talk) 06:43, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Idk, I created this article 7 years ago and barely touched it since. I'd probably take a look at it in the future. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:21, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Chronology of Parthian kings in Babylonia

Hello! I've worked extensively on, and overseen, the List of kings of Babylon for some time. This list covers rulers up until halfway or so through the Parthian period, ending with Phraates IV (numbered as Phraates III if only rulers of Babylon are considered), the last known person mentioned as king in a document from Babylon. One of the sources I used for this section is Assar's work on a revised Parthian chronology, since he went into detail on Parthian kings who controlled Babylon itself, but I saw that you've pointed out here that Assar's theories on the Parthian chronology is not accepted by a majority of scholars. The big issue here is that the Babylonian list includes an 'Arsaces XVI' per Assar, for whom we have no article on Wikipedia.

I was wondering, since you've worked extensively on the Parthians, if you would like to help me revise the table of the Parthians in the list of Babylonian kings (especially if there are other errors), or if you have suggestions for other sources that could be used to establish the line of Parthian rulers who controlled Babylon (i.e. not including usurpers/rival kings in other parts of the empire). Ichthyovenator (talk) 12:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ichthyovenator; I have to admit that my knowledge on the Parthians is a bit rusty, since I haven't really edited that area in about a year. From what I remember, Assar is barely if ever cited in many Parthian related works, such as Shayegan (Arsacids and Sasanians: Political Ideology in Post-Hellenistic and Late Antique Persia, page 197), who comments on this issue;

"Others still, while reckoning that Godarz I possibly succeeded to Mihrdad II, have put forward other rival kings, be it Sinatruces, or be it Mihrdad III, as usurpers dunng Mihrdad II's latter days, and in defiance of Godarz I's rule, in the southern or eastern provinces of the empire. These assertions, however, repose primarily upon numismatic evidence, may find scant support in the literary and documentary sources, and can be contradicted by a diverging interpretation of the period's coinage, since as Morkholm clearly has established: "the six different coinages . . . between Mithradates II and Mithradates III were all issued in Babylonia, i n Iran , and in Susa, i.e. throughout the Parthian kingdom [italics mine]," which suggests that "[t]he rulers responsible for the coinages must all have been in control of practically the entire kingdom, thus, "[t]he numismatic material provides no information on local usurpers of restricted authority [italics mine]." From a numismatic perspective therefore there is no objection against the succession of Godarz I to Mihrdad II, nor any conclusive corroboration for the rival rule of a Sinatruces or Mihrdad III."

However, he is extensively cited in the recent Reign of Arrows: The Rise of the Parthian Empire in the Hellenistic Middle East, which, however, states that Arsaces XVI was the same person as Mithridates III. This new source seems to be reliable enough, considering it is by the Oxford University. If you give me your email I can send it you.

--HistoryofIran (talk) 14:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I see - so Assar's conclusions are mainly based on coinage and may not hold up under scrutiny? That would be very nice, the email I use for Wikipedia is ichthy1994@outlook.com. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ichthyovenator That's how I've understood it yes. And sent! --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Mail

Hey, HistoryofIran, how are you doing? Thank you for giving me a hand in my search of quality sources about the Timurids. However, I have recently changed my email, and by chance, forgot to replace it in Wikipedia. Sorry to bother you, but could you please send your mail again?. Thank you in advance! --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 06:35, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Khwarazmian dynasty § Splitting proposal

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Khwarazmian dynasty § Splitting proposal. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 06:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Noureddin Kianouri

Hey, I semi-protected the article and blocked the latest IP. I wonder if it's User:Nikrouz kianouri, with a penchant for adding German translations. The article is a mess, of course, and it seems to me that the man is well worth a decent article. I cleaned up the lead a bit and made some other edits to try and bring it in line with our guidelines, but there is much more to be done, including of course adding proper citations. If you could help with that, that would be great. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

• I see you got dozens of GAs--how about this be the next? It's worth a try. Drmies (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but the modern era is not really my area of interest, at least atm. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
    • Hmm. That's not helping me much. Drmies (talk) 02:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Karim Khan Zand

Hello HistoryofIran, I noticed that you removed my edit on the Karim Khan Zand wikipedia page because the source I used, Iran at War 1500-1988 by Kaveh Farrokh, is apparently an unreliable source. Can you elaborate on that? I've looked through Perry's book on Karim Khan Zand and compared it to Kaveh Farrokh's book. It seems like they both give similar information when talking about Karim Khan Zand's rise to power. For example, here's the quote from Perry's book regarding the war between Ali Mardan Khan and Karim Khan Zand: "Meanwhile, Karim Khan harangued his lieutenants concerning Ali Mardan’s perfidy, and early in 1751 entered Isfahan at the head of his augmented army to put an end to extortion and near-anarchy. The following month he met his rival in his own Bakhtyari mountains and attacked the depleted and dispirited band." Now compare it to the quote from Kaveh Farrokh: "Karim Khan had also prepared for the final showdown. Having secured the allegiance of many powerful clans such as the Bayat and the Khodabandehlu, Karim Khan thrust straight towards Isfahan to battle Ali Mardan Khan. Karim completely defeated Ali Mardan Khan at Chaharmahal in February 1751. Shah Ismail III, now bowing to the inevitable, joined Karim Khan.26"

The battle between the two did not occur in Little Luristan and did in fact occur in the Bakhtiari heartland, which is now Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province. Based on that, I believe my edit to the article was indeed correct. --Kailanmapper (talk) 16:24, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

The usage of Farrokh has been downplayed at times since he does not have the academic qualifications in history. However, since the usage of certain individuals that also do not have any academic qualifications at all have been used to write history, I believe you should take this book to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Need your attention

Hello dear, can you please take a look here and let me know what you think? Thanks in advance.--TheEagle107 (talk) 09:15, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

aimaq people

hello i have edited the aimaq people page but can i find out why it was taken back more than 450,000 kipchak origin of the aimaq so Kazakhs or Uzbeks need to be added there

Because it's WP:OR and imagine if we were to link all peoples as related because they supposedly have some genetic similarity. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

ok thank you for information.

• سلام.

لطفا در مقاله دریای عرب به واگردانی های متعدد مطالب منبع دار نگاه کنید [5] و در صورت ممکن کمک کنید که صفحه دیدگاههای مختلف را [6] در نظر بگیرد.

 02:13, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan

Hello friend, you've reverted my last edits in Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan article, notwithstanding to the changes in that party and other parties named Komalah. "Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan" has converted to social democracy from marxism-leninism till it's sixth congress, and additionally the name of the party's been changed too. Of course I have to cite my edits, but the previous information was wrong and should be changed surely. Anyway I shall change that information again of course with official sources. With respect.Paraw (talk) 20:43, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Paraw: Please do not remove/alter sourced information. This issue has already been discussed multiple times at the talk page of the article, take your concerns there. If you continue edit warring without reaching WP:CONSENSUS this will be taken to WP:ANI. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Göde Ahmed / Ahmed Beg

Hello. How are you? A question, why are you so negative about the article? I used that name because Encyclopedia of Islam used it. Every wikipedia including Persian ones used that name. Beshogur (talk) 18:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Beshogur: Not sure how I am being negative? It goes without saying that removing an article under construction is far from constructive. Why didn't you just add it there or discuss it with me first? Also, he is called Ahmad Göwde in the latest article about the Aq Qoyunlu, that is in Encyclopedia of Islam, vol 2.

Meanwhile in other places;

The Crisis of Kingship in Late Medieval Islam: Persian Emigres and the Making of Ottoman Sovereignty - Ahmad ibn Ughurlu Muhammad

Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires: The Idea of Iran Vol. 10 - Ahmad ibn Ughurlu Mohammad

The Cosmic Perils of Qadi Ḥusayn Maybudī in Fifteenth-Century Iran - Ahmad Beg

The Aq-qoyunlu and Land Reforms - Ahmad-beg

Islamica - Ahmad Beg

--HistoryofIran (talk) 18:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually I didn't knew such page exist, only redirected afterwards. For my it doesn't matter much. However, honestly I can't much agree that that page was under construction. We could move to Ahmad Beg imo. Beshogur (talk) 19:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Not sure I get your second sentence - an article under construction can take days to get completed. Because it didn't have much content doesn't validate its removal. But sure, feel free to add it to Ahmad Beg. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:05, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Must be coincidence that we made both pages today. Thought that was staying for a while. I'm copying mine to Ahmad Beg fine? Beshogur (talk) 19:10, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Great minds think alike. Yeah sure go ahead. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Peroz I

The article Peroz I you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Peroz I for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cplakidas -- Cplakidas (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Infoboxes of Savafid, Afshar, Qajar rulers

Hello, there are different successions on every ruler. Do you think we should establish something common? There are some as I see:

• 3rd Safavid Shah
• 2nd Safavid Shah of Iran
• Shahanshah of Iran
• Shah of Persia
• Shah of the Afsharid dynasty

etc What are your suggestions? Beshogur (talk) 12:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

All of them needs to be rewritten anyways. Imo it should be “Shah of Iran” or “Shahanshah of Iran” with their dynasty listed in the infobox, as they all ruled the same entity ultimately. HistoryofIran (talk)

Your GA nomination of Peroz I

The article Peroz I you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Peroz I for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cplakidas -- Cplakidas (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

==Discussion at Talk:Prithviraj Chauhan==  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Prithviraj Chauhan as a moderator. Be civil, neutral and objective on that discussion. White Horserider (talk) 00:03, 21 June 2021 (UTC) Blocked sock Chariotrider555 (talk) 21:38, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your edit

That was a great revert. My bad. Though I admit that initially I had my own doubts regarding that miniature, I still dared to think that the one beside the Ilkhanate sultan Ahmed was indeed Ata Malik. In reality, yes, it was his brother, Shams al-Din. Funny, I'm pretty much sure that the outsiders, who watchlist your talkpage for different reasons, are going like:"For God's sake, what are you guys talking about?";-) Nevermind, kheili mamnoonam az shomaa. Be salaamat! --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 16:41, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

No worries, sh*t happens ^^. And khahesh mikonam. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Azerbaijani Khanates/Atabegs of Azerbaijan

Greetings, I am writing with an inquiry: on the page titled History of Azerbaijan, instead of using the valid, alternative, Azerbaijan-related names, you insist on using other specific wording. My question is: why? I don't know of any Wikipedia rule that dismisses synonyms based on the "majority" use? On the pages, you can see plenty of sources that support either wording.

If you have a template titled "the history of Azerbaijan", and you can use "Eldiguzids" or "Atabegs of Azerbaijan", either of which is perfectly valid, why would you insist on using "Eldiguzids"? - WimpyDood (talk) 17:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Those are not specific wordings, but the actual name of the articles. I'm not sure what you mean by "Azerbaijan-related"; because they have "Azerbaijan" in their names those spellings should be favoured? "Atabegs of Azerbaijan" is not even referring to Republic of Azerbaijan, but that of the historical region in Iran. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:59, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I understand that the title of the article is "Eldiguzids", but the title of the Wikipedia page for petrol is "gasoline", I think we can agree that one does not invalidate the other? Yes, I do believe that in a template titled "History of Azerbaijan", if they have "Azerbaijan" in their names those spellings should be favored; in the absence of applicable nomenclature-specific rules in this situation, wouldn't you agree that "Atabegs of Azerbaijan" seems more fitting under the "History of Azerbaijan" template? I understand your concern relating to the difference between Iranian Azerbaijan and the Republic of Azerbaijan, but I am not trying to spread any secessionist propaganda here, I believe my previous point still stands. And as for Azerbaijani Khanates, well the majority of them do seem to be within the borders of the Republic of Azerbaijan, not within Iranian Azerbaijan. Please let me know what you think. - WimpyDood (talk) 18:15, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not convinced by this argument to change the article names to their less common version just because they share a similarity with that of the country template. Imagine if we did that with all other articles, such as the Weimer Republic or Persian Empire. You might want to create a RFC or something. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:46, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Seconde Anglo-Afghan war

Hello thank you for taking the time to write to me but I think that the information on the British protectorate of Afghanistan should be corrected and replaced by the fact that Afghanistan was a protected state for several reasons the protectorates whether English or French must meet criteria I would take 2 example if you will allow me the first is the French protectorate of Morocco which consists of Morocco being under full authority while keeping the reigning French dynasty the French flag should appear on the Moroccan flag. The de facto Moroccan national anthem was the French anthem "la Marseillaise" and the official money of Morocco was the French currency and French settlers had to settle in Morocco also a French military and political presence had to appear in Morocco and to finish the morocco was considered as was in the french colonial empire now i would like to evoke afghanistan the treaty of Gandamak stipulating that afghanistan must renounce er to his foreign policy and the British Empire to give a sum of money to the emir but also there is other fact the english flag does not appear on the flag of the emirate of afghanistan the afghan national anthem was not the english national anthem the money of afghanistan was not the english money but was the rupee afghan or afghani, afghanistan was independent on its internal politics and no english politics and military were stationing in afghanistan and finally afghanistan was never part of the british colonial empire. In the "British Protectorate" page in the "list of former protected state" section there is a description that I invite you to read. Thank you for the time you give me for this dialogue and I hope that my text will be taken into account Thank you. AfghansPashtun (talk) 18:44, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but Morocco has zero relevance here. You removed sourced info, and I reverted you. It's simple as that. Take your concerns to the talk page of the article and reach WP:CONSENSUS. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

its just an example i give after if you take it as its fine AfghansPashtun (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

New additions to the "Great Seljuk Empire" page

Hi there! How have you been? You have probably detected by now tons of new information I had added to the above-mentioned page, and shortly, I'm looking for your expertise on those additions. I'm convinced that this topic is not a dime a dozen for you and that it interests you a lot. Moreover, I utilised those really absorbing materials you had kindly shared with me last time, so I think this should be fun. Thank you! --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 12:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Certainly an improvement, well done. I'm glad that the sources were of use - imho Peacock is currently one of the best historians in Seljuk-related stuff. If there's any other topic/subtopic you feel like you're lacking in sources, feel free to ask. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:23, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate that. Thank you! --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 15:33, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

About a source

Hi, what's up? I just wanted to ask about a source you've used in Berkyaruq. Source 11 (Cahen 1960) has no page specified, do you know which page it is? A reviewer asked about it here, so I thought I should ask you about it in the first place. --► Sincerely: Solavirum 20:37, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hiya, Kansas Bear just fixed it. HistoryofIran (talk)

Poetry

Hi there! Long time, no see! How's everything? Sorry to disturb you yet again, but I won't forgive myself if I don't at least ask you - Don't you by chance have PDF books of classical Persian poetry? Doesn't matter if it's written with Persian script or transliterated into Latin (though Latin is preferable). I've been jonesing for these books and looking for them on the web for the last couple of days, but could only find those translated into other languages. So I am a bit down in the dumps right now. Take a quick look at this (masterpiece from Saadi), isn't this cray?:

hājat-e gūš o gardan-at nīst be zarr o zīvar-ī

yā be xezāb o sorme-'ī yā be 'abīr o 'ambar-ī

Hope you can help just like the last time. Please hit me up if you find something. Stay safe and strong! --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 13:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Im good thanks, and no worries, always happy to help.

Unfortunately not. I do however possess a few sources about Persian poetry and the writers themselves if that can be of any help. I’m home on the 28th July, so I will be able to send them then. And ngl, I barely understand the poem x). I suck at poetic Persian. HistoryofIran (talk)

Sure, that'll do nicely! Thank you as always for your time and assistance. --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 04:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anushtegin Gharchai

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anushtegin Gharchai you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 11:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The Valued Contributor Award

	Valued Contributor Award
	You have been identified as a valued contributor and your efforts are appreciated. We are honored to present you with the Valued Contributor Award and we thank you for donating your time, expertise and effort to Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. Thanks. (more details)

Jerm (talk) 06:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

My pleasure, thanks :) --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:55, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Abu Mansur Wahsudan

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Abu Mansur Wahsudan has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the GAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Noice, thank you very much :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

پیام سپاسگزاری

درود بر شما همکار گرامی، از شما بابت گسترش مقالات در مورد تاریخ و فرهنگ ایران سپاسگزارم. با مهر Fakhravar jam (talk) 17:53, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

My pleasure :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anushtegin Gharchai

The article Anushtegin Gharchai you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Anushtegin Gharchai for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 12:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anushtegin Gharchai

The article Anushtegin Gharchai you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anushtegin Gharchai for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 14:21, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Dangling ref

Hi HistoryofIran, I have been working on fixing dangling references that have no corresponding sources, and it appears you added a ref to Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar in this edit. Do you know the source? For now, I have hidden the ref. Let me know if you need any assistance if you do know the source! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 04:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Aussie Article Writer:, the source is from here [7] --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:39, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 10:43, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Iranian politics evidence

I moved your response to Vice regent to the Evidence page's talk page. I explain a bit further there, please keep to your own section. Thank you, Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 00:12, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Right, just please leave me out of this. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:15, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI

Not that I am surprised or anything. See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Varsken

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Varsken you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 21:41, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Abu Mansur Wahsudan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Abu Mansur Wahsudan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Varsken

The article Varsken you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Varsken for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 12:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Varsken

The article Varsken you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Varsken for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 12:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Abu Mansur Wahsudan

The article Abu Mansur Wahsudan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Abu Mansur Wahsudan for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Abu Mansur Wahsudan

The article Abu Mansur Wahsudan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Abu Mansur Wahsudan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 15:41, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Qatran Tabrizi

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Qatran Tabrizi you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 00:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nezam al-Din Ahmad Gilani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Honorific title.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Arsakes Ist of Parthia

Good evening,

In the page talking about Arsakes I I corrected a mistake saying that the inscription below the bow of the coin figuring on top was in aramaic. This correction was deleted so I will explain the reason of my action and why it is correct.

Arsakes took the title of "Autokrator". On the coin, which has not been struck correctly, but is a little shifted to the left, just figure the letters "okrator" of the genitive form "autokratoros" accorded with "arsakou" (==>[coin] of arsakes autokrator]). If you look just up the bow you can see the "T" of [au]tokrator[os] damaged by time and hands. So no, these letters aren't aramaic but correspond to the graphic style of near eastern coins (compare with the seleucid coins from the same period). Furthermore voyels are very rare in aramaic and if it were that idiom you shall not find an "O" and a "A" in a single word of that lenght.

All best,

TrebonianusGallus TrebonianusGallus (talk) 23:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Fair enough - thanks for explaining. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:22, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

علت خنثی سازی ویرایش شما

درود، برشما بنده ویرایش شما را در جعبه اطلاعات فرعون خنثی سازی کردم ویرایش های من در جعبه اطلاعات فرعون برای هماهنگی با سایر الگو های مشابه بود Hello, I canceled your edit in the Infobox pharaoh . My edits were in the Infobox pharaoh to match other similar templates. Parsbod (talk) 19:47, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

They dont have to look like other infoboxes, please take your concerns to the talk page. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Qatran Tabrizi

The article Qatran Tabrizi you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Qatran Tabrizi 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 Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 21:41, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

I apologize

Sorry about fussing over the parentage of Artabanus II and Vonones II, I really didn't mean to cause conflict. Last time I checked, the links I provided were fully active, or that could be just because of the browsers I use. Lastly, I didn't mean to remove any vital links out of vandalism, I just thought I'd spruce up the pages in relation to the new information I provided, even if it meant deleting some information in place of new ones. Sorry for the trouble and I hope we can come to an understanding. --GOMUL13 (talk) 14:00, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, but those sources are not WP:RS (the source apparently 'specializes' in Bible related stuff) nor are they even accessible. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:04, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

(King of Kings) or (shahanshah)

Hi, do you think it is not better to mention the Persianized word King of Kings which is like this (Shahanshah) which is in the infobox of Sassanid kings in the parameter [succession] section instead of the [title] parameter because the word (shahansha) It is an honorary title used even by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, while Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was not really King of Kings, but Sassanid kings like the Achaemenid kings were really king of Kings in the true sense of the word. (Shahansha) in the parameter [title] and the title of King of Kings in the parameter (succession)To be mentioned.
Sardar ^talk 12:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi. No, the word 'shah' and 'shahanshah' are regularly used in WP:RS sources, thus I see no reason to omit them. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was just as much a King of Kings as the Sasanians, as they both used the title; the size of the kingdom is irrelevant. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:17, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer Sardar ^talk 12:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Alexander the Great

@HistoryofIran:Hi, recently in the article of Alexander the Great, two new titles have been added to the Infobox article "The Liberator" and "King of the World", which I think these two titles have nothing to do with Alexander, if possible, Check out Sardar ^talk 22:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Dunno if Alexander actually used those titles, but I do know that the sources that were cited to support the claim were certainly not WP:RS (reliable), thus removed. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Avicenna Query

I'm thrilled to see you working on Avicenna's article! You probably saw that another user rewrote Averroes a few months ago and since then I've always that Avicenna was lacking in comparison. If its a topic you find less interest in, I would be happy to contribute a small music section on music theory Avicenna's article—do let me know. Best – Aza24 (talk) 18:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes I actually got inspired by that article and even used it as a model for the article lol. Unfortunately I don't think I'm gonna expand much more in the Avicenna article as of right now least. Maybe a bit more in his life section but that's about it. Of course, go ahead if you feel like it. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:17, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Ah! Here I was, thinking that I was about to score a collaboration with HistoryofIran! I will certainly add it to my to do list. Aza24 (talk) 22:50, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mirkhvand

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mirkhvand you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 19:40, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mirkhvand

The article Mirkhvand you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mirkhvand for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 22:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mirkhvand

The article Mirkhvand you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mirkhvand for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Turan (Sasanian province)

Would you mind explaining the issue with linking the "Indians" part of the article to the broadly South Asian peoples page rather than "Indian people"? Have you bothered checking the lede of the Indian people page? My recent edit did not even change the wording of the article, keeping at "Indians" as it was, but rather than linking it to the page about the citizens of India as it is today, I linked it to the more appropriate page. Context matters. The edit summary you had written appears to either have been written in haste in an attempt to quickly revert an edit of another user without checking the substance of the rationale behind the edit or it may have simply been fraudulent. Foxhound03 (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Would you mind explaining how linking 'South Asian' or 'Sindhi' is better than 'Indian people'? Have you bothered reading the two other articles? Also, don't cast Wikipedia:ASPERSIONS, I don't care what you think about me, keep it to yourself. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:40, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

For the simple reason that it's an unrelated article. Turan is no way near the modern boundaries of the Republic of India so why should you link the ancient Indians of there to the modern day Indian citizens? Where as South Asian encompasses all the peoples of the Indian subcontinent - which by the way had clear historical and geographical boundaries - rather than the nation state of India today. I've already conceded Indian is fine to be left in the text but what linking to Indian people entails in that case is at best dishonest. We wouldn't link lower Kingdom Egypt or Hellenic dynasties in the post Yugoslav republics to the "Egyptian citizens" or "Greek citizens" pages, would we? Also I'm not trying to make any personal attacks here, when you deal with South Asian IP user spamming on unprotected pages on how Afghanistan to Myanmar are all Indian you can get drained. I apologise for any offence I may have caused and it wasn't my intention to argue with you. Foxhound03 (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

South Asian ethnic groups also include people who are not Indian. While 'Indian' is currently used to refer to any citizen living in India, that clearly wasn't the case not so long ago, as can be seen in its History section and whatnot. If anything, it seems like the lead of Indian people is lacking. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:39, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree, the addition of South Asia can be problematic due to the inclusion of Afghanistan in that page and most Wikipedia articles. The Indians page makes some mention of the people of the Indian subcontinent as a whole but no doubt its centred around the nationality and not the usage in a historical sense, so would you think its best to link it to the subcontinent page instead since it comprises most of what was historically considered India? Foxhound03 (talk) 11:19, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I was about to say agree to disagree, but then I looked at Indian subcontinent and it has even less relevant information. So I gotta say I'm against this suggestion, as linking to that article is certainly not an improvement. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:47, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Fat fingered at Heraclius

Accidentally rolled back your edit, my apologies. I restored it. Jip Orlando (talk) 19:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

No worries mate. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Firaz

It seems that the editor has a case, it's found on page 108 (not 180) here. Is there a particular reason you believe this is not a reliable source? Now, I need to go to the other editor and give a very stern warning regarding personal attacks, which I'm sorry you had to endure. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Is R.G. Grant specialized in Islamic history, Sasanian history, Late Antiquity? His writing(s) appear to be generalized, lacking any real specialization. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@78.26: Author has no expertise in the subject and his work (which seems to be a very basic, general work) does not seem to be cited by any reliable, academic source. I don't have the time to find the primary source right now, but it looks like the author simply directly quoted the very numbers mentioned in Islamic text(s). Which are not to be trusted, because of WP:PSTS and other things; "Islamic texts usually report the number of the Persian soldiers to have been in the hundreds or tens of thousands and several times larger than the Arab armies. This is pure fiction and it is boastful literature which aims to aggrandize Arab Muslim achievement, which may be compared to the Greek accounts of the Greco-Persian wars." - Sasanian Persia: The Rise and Fall of an Empire, Daryaee, page 37. While I certainly wasn't fond of the tone of the IP, I do understand that it looks sus when a user named 'HistoryofIran' reverts something that is not "in favour" of Iran - especially when I could have been more thorough, which to be frank, I couldn't be bothered with, because these type of edits happen every now and then. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

That is an excellent explanation. There's nothing inherently wrong with coffee table books, but certainly they are an inferior source to academic sources. So, I think it would be best if you put this information on the article talk page, then when you make a revert to a new user, you can point to your well-explained reasoning. Otherwise it looks like you're munching on newbies. . All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:57, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

TrueImperial might be back

See Dinobba (talk · contribs), what do you think? Beshogur (talk) 11:19, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

What ? Dinobba (talk) 11:20, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I suggest making a WP:SPI. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Cyrus the Great Day

Congratulations on the day of commemoration of Cyrus the Great Sardar (talk) 19:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you and likewise :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:22, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Mount Nemrut

I have joined the discussion if you wish to be included. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Ishaq al-Mawsili

Hey HistoryofIran, I hope all is well. I finally finished Barbad for the most part and put it up for GAN. I'm turning some attention to Ishaq al-Mawsili and wondered if you had access to this Encyclopaedia of Islam article? If so, would it be possible to send it to me? I recall you using their articles in the past, which is why I'm reaching out. Best – Aza24 (talk) 22:29, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, if I might ask your advice, a Grove article calls Ishaq "the foremost composer and performer of his day". Since the Grove article is on Arab music, there is no need to specify that this in the context of the Middle East. However, on Wikipedia there seems to be a need to a do so. How would I go about this? Since he is an Arab of Persian origin it feels incorrect to say he was the "leading Arab (or 'Persian') musician of his time"; maybe "leading Islamic musician..." or "leading Abbasid musician..."?—though both seem awkward still. Aza24 (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

@Aza24: Unfortunately I don't possess the source, which is rather awkward because I did have access to EI3 recently and thought I downloaded everything I needed from it. As for your other question, this is a very good question and I do think about it myself from time to time. This is generally my go to in articles:

I'm not fond of saying, say 'Ishaq was a Abbasid/Safavid/Sasanian person etc etc, because that could technically imply that he was from the royal family, and imo can just be worded in better, less confusing ways.

If Arab/insert other ethnicity here was not the nationality (i.e. the designation of the citizens under said empire/dynasty) of the lifetime of x person, then I would not mention it, like 'Ishaq was a Arab/Swedish/x person.

Thus I would personally go for 'Ishaq was a Persian musician active in the Abbasid Caliphate (or something like that). Someone like this; [8] [9] --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for all of this!! Your plans to work on Badi' al-Zaman al-Hamadani (re the library desk) sound exciting. I know its a big topic but if you ever take Khosrow II to GAN, I would be happy to contribute a new/more-comprehensive music section... Aza24 (talk) 00:28, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@Aza24: Ops, thought I had already replied to this comment. I kind changed my mind a bit for the expansion of Badi' al-Zaman al-Hamadani, but it will deffo be on my do to list. Yeah I really want to make Khosrow II, but it's just sooo much work lel. I'm not too big on making big articles GA because with all that time I could make several, smaller articles GA. But that is deffo on my to do list as well. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

The 'make many small vs one big GAs' is a very familiar sentiment to me as well, if my work on musicians like Barbad and Ishaq is any evidence. I find that adopting 'long term' projects is a remedy for this, so I've been chipping away at the History of music for a while now. I figure that if editors like us don't do it, no one will...! Before I got to this history of music article, there was virtually nothing of substance or quality outside some bloated and uncited sections on Western classical music. Such a predicament is even more ridiculous when considering that Wikipedia just celebrated its 20 year anniversary... Aza24 (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

@Aza24: True that. Well, tbf, I'm lowkey just hoping someone takes my place lol. Not that are not loads of experienced editors who edit around the same areas as me, many of them which are much better, but yeh. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Deleting new changes without any valid ground

I have added some very crucial informations to the shaybanids article recently but you have removed my changes by claiming due to "disruption, addition of unsourced material + improperly and obscure cited sources". I sincerely sure that my sources were reliable. I didn't add sources for some of the infos i added because they are already well-known and common. If you wish, i can also add for them. Please take the removal back/let me edit again or state the reason of not doing. Ultimete (talk) 07:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Ultimete: Please see [10] --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:47, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Orontes I, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salamis.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Re: Reverting my most recent edits

My most recent edits on the House of Suren and House of Spandiyadh have been reverted. You sent me a message concerning that, saying that "did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines". I did not violate any Wikipedia policies, the content was adequately sourced (reliable sources), not copied, and no spelling or grammatical mistakes. Why did my edits get reverted then?

Pls I dank memer (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2021 (UTC)Pls I dank memer (talk)

@Pls I dank memer: Please see my edit summaries on those reverts. You continued doing the same kind of edits, hence the message. I know your edits are done in good faith, of course. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:12, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Query

@HistoryofIran: Hi! I realize that you might haven't had the time yet but I hope I'd be able to receive a response from you on the Battle of Nahrawan's talk page :) Thanks!

Hi Albertatiran. I believe you might want to address the points made by AhmadLX in his edit summaries and then ping him. Sources such as Rogerson and Hazleton (who both are not even historians) are not WP:RS. -HistoryofIran (talk) 17:24, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the input. Albertatiran (talk) 19:52, 22 November 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)