User talk:Pejman

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Pejman! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 123 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Jalal Matini - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Fouzieh Majd - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DASHBot, I will follow the matter there! thanks!--Pejman (talk) --Pejman (talk) 21:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Iranians in the Netherlands

As you have already been warned by other users previously, please stop going around and changing terminology from "Iran" to "Persia", especially without sources. I already mentioned that "Perzische gemeenschap" is quite an uncommon term compared to "Iraanse gemeenschap" (having, for example, ZERO Google News hits, and thus being unverifiable that it is actually "found in Dutch-language media"). cab (talk) 00:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Dear Friend, Thanks for your message but it seems you have not followed the matter carefully because: 1- I did not change "Iran" to "Persia". 2- I just mntioned that "Perzische gemeenschap" is ALSO a commen term in Dutch (both media and books). Google News is temporary. You may check it here. You can easily see that it has been used in Volkskrant, Throuw, Persian Dutch Network,... and also in various other websites and books in Dutch. Thanks for your attention. --Pejman (talk) 01:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)--Pejman (talk) 01:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google News archive search is NOT temporary but goes back for decades. 55 Google hits for a term is quite unimpressive, especially compared to 16 times as many for "Iraanse gemeenschap". cab (talk) 01:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First please answer to my 1 question: Where I have changed 'Iran' to 'Persia' in this article yesterday or today? Second as I mentioned earlier I did not say "Perzische gemeenschap" is the only name of the community in Holland. I have mentioned that it's ALSO a term which has been used in notable media and many other books, articles, etc. Google is not the only source. There are many books and magazines in the libraries/archive. Meanwhile your information about "Dutch Google News" archive is not complete. Even in English section, the archive is not complete yet. In Dutch the situation is worse because the number of speakers are much less. What is really your ptoblem with this term? I am working hard to complete the page and you just take time for such bassless claims. Please be supportive and let me use the time to contribute to the page. Thank you! --Pejman (talk) 01:26, 23 July 2010 (UTC)--Pejman (talk) 01:26, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want to be accused of conflicts of interest, perhaps you should exercise more caution when editing topics to which you have a close connection. Especially since you have already been blocked once for the use of multiple sockpuppet accounts. And perhaps you would like to actually answer my question on the talk page: why do you delete the Persian piano music link? Is the picture actually at a recital of Western music? Then why do you want to confuse everyone by calling it a "Persian piano recital"? Just so you can take another opportunity to stick in the word Persian? In English people do not usually identify piano recitals by the ethnicity of the person playing them cab (call | ride) 00:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear cab, please excuse me but what you have mentioned shows your lack of knowledge in music. "Persian piano recital" means a piano recital that the pieces which will be presented are by the Persian composers or inspired from Persian music. It has nothing to do with the ethnicity of the player. Also Regarding blocking, I already mentioned that I have not two accounts but no one listened to that. It's up to them. I am continuing my contributions. Please do not create problems which are not exist! --Pejman (talk) 13:55, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite familiar with Persian piano music. Which is why I asked: why do YOU keep deleting the link to Persian piano music [1][2]? Now I am putting the link back for the third time, please stop deleting it. cab (call) 04:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I know when I have deleted the Persian piano link from this page? --Pejman (talk) 11:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)--Pejman (talk) 11:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Louvre

I have taken a look, and perceive that Assyria is represented twice, by the winged bull, and also by a rhyton in the gallery. I am willing to remove the rhyton and replace it with a suitable image of an object fom Persia. However, it won't be a side-on view of a collection of small objects. It will be a single object of great significance of which there is a very clear image. That is the format which has been applied. You picture doesn't match the format. Please look more closely at the arrangement of pictures before you add another one. Amandajm (talk) 12:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The rhyton is Persian. Amandajm (talk) 12:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Fouzieh Majd

A tag has been placed on Fouzieh Majd requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Beeshoney (talk) 21:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you man remove the delet sign :) Ref. and external links have been edded. More r coming.--Pejman (talk) 17:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock me

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pejman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Administrator, it's a long time that I am working with wiki and enjoy to share interesting info and pics with other people. You can see the list of my contributions. But it seems a few people that i have no idea who they are and what is their problem with me, try to remove me from this social network. Recently for example, on the entry "Iranians in The Netherlands" you can see on the history that how many materials and info I have created/found and added to the page to make a more informative entry but they, based on baseless ideas, accuss me for self-promotion! even when other users undo their changes, they accuss these users that they are me with another IDs!! they have also harrased me by revealing my personal ideantity (first name and last name) on the page. As far as I know Wiki usually remove such users from this network but now I have been blocked! I will be grateful if you take time to see what I have done on wiki and how muvh I have been honest and positive. Blocking me from editing is really unfair. Many thanks for your time. --Pejman (talk) 18:41, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The problem began when you made this edit, which was reverted. Multiple editors, including another account that checkuser data confirms was created by you, have since repeated this edit. So, before you can be unblocked, you'll need to address those concerns. I appreciate that you have added good material to the project in the past, but that does not impact your conduct here. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 18:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pejman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

dear Said, thanks for your quick reply. As it has been mentioned in the past, a few friends/colleagues of mine are also active in wiki. Sometimes there are issues that the group has same idea, when they react the same, it will give this impression that I have various IDs. A few years ago I was warned that I have to tell my friends/colleagues on this matter. I did but sounds like they are not convinced. The story of Islamic Republic agents in Holland that you have refered to that was one of them. Many believe that new information (such as Dutch Intellegince Service's response) should be added to the article and they wrote their reasons in the page as well but a few certain users did not try totargent the topic. They target ME! They revealed my private information in public. Why no one take it seriously? If we look at the issue, in this way every single picture or information can be promotional. For example I have got the permission from the Delft University to upload FARDAD ZAND picture to this page because what he has done here. So it should be considered as a promotional act as well? It's really disappointing. Thanks again for your time.

Decline reason:

This is not a convincing explanation for the findings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shayan7. Sandstein 20:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pejman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not various accounts. I have ONE for Wikipedia, ONE for Wiki Commons that I uploads pics with that. Previously I myself wrote on my page that sometimes they jumnp to eachother. So before you "descover this historical fact", I meantioned PersianDutchNetwork is belong to my network. AND please note that a "NETWORK" has various members, not just one. I am not aware about holders of other accounts that you have refered in that page. I already wrote you the truth, It seems here, being active and trying to make wiki bigger and richer is a crime. I am not really into discussion on that . My identity and ideas are clear. For years I tried to support wiki both financially and for the content and I am happy to did that, but now I leave because the only thing which is not important is WHAT YOU DO. And smost most of the members just transfer negative energy. Just one point; in this issues you are not allowed to mention the real name of the persons in public. I have no problem with that, just keep that in your mind plz. Thanks.--Pejman (talk) 20:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If what you're saying is that your edits are the same as others from your location because you are coordinating your edits with others, that is also a violation of our rules against sockpuppetry. I don't feel comfortably overriding a checkuser block based on this statement.FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pejman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

original unblock reason

Decline reason:

Obviously this request has to be declined, as it gave no reason for an unblock. However, I shall also take the opportunity to say that I find your explanations unconvincing, for numerous reasons. Just to mention one: You say "a few friends/colleagues of mine are also active in wiki. Sometimes there are issues that the group has same idea ... A few years ago I was warned that I have to tell my friends/colleagues on this matter. I did ..." but when you find that is not accepted it becomes "I am not aware about holders of other accounts that you have referred in that page". That alone would be sufficient to cast doubts on your account, even without other evidence. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

you did not read my note carefully. I described that in some points we had same ideas and we disscuse the issues but we never coordinate our edits with eachother. Everyone work independently. --Pejman (talk) 00:00, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfair decision

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pejman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Nobody pay attention that how much information and pics I have added to this online encyclopedia. I have not attacked anyone and I have not added wrong information. Being active is a crime here? some of users are presenting a devil from me, also reveale my private info of me online. No one pay attention to that! It's really surprising. I already mention that I have not various accounts and it's quite normal that some various users are in contact with eachother but no one answer that and just repeate the previous points. I am warning you, if you do not remove my private info from the pages I will tale action without furture notice.

Decline reason:

There is not a chance in hell that any administrator is going to accept an unblock request with a threat in it. Smashville^talk 18:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

It isn't useful to threaten anyone, especially since as far as I can see there isn't any 'private' info on your user page. I have no idea what you're talking about, but you will certainly remain blocked while you are making threats. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

to QueenFisher

Are you kidding QueenFisher?! the user CaliforniaAlibaba has published my first and last name! check his/her notes and links. You will see. It's not treat, it's protecting my privacy. --Pejman (talk) 17:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at User:CaliforniaAlibaba and didn't see it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ok please see [[3]] page,and note to thos parts: Evidence submitted by CaliforniaAliBaba

PersianDutchNetwork: commons:User:PersianDutchNetwork uploads photos at Commons listed as "own work", relating mostly to activities of Pejman Akbarzadeh, and stating that they were taken by Pejman Akbarzadeh. So that user seems to be Mr. Akbarzadeh himself. Example: File:DeDoelenPersianProtester.JPG The others are all repeating this erroneous edit made by Pejman (which duplicates material from the preceding paragraph and adds a mention of a radio report done by Pejman Akbarzadeh which gives absolutely no new information): (and it's 100% wrong claim because Dutch Secrect Service for the first time announced what is its position) So it seems CaliforniaAlibaba has personal problem, not professional.

Also when a few users jave tried to add a picture of my recital on "Iranians in The Netherlands" he wrote in public that it's self-promotion! I do not know how it can be possible! I have uploaded the pics "Persian Irowood Tree", "Persian Restuarents", "Persian Carpet Gallery", Fardad Zand @ Delft University, etc... and many historical information from old Dutch newspapers, etc. Are they all related to me?! CaliforniaAlibaba says: "All engaged in promotion for Pejman Akbarzadeh --- filling up the Iranians in the Netherlands page with political protests, non-profit organisations, and activities he's engaged in. "It's really surpring and bassless, you please judge here. Thanks. --Pejman (talk) 19:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zamaneh Workshop 2006.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Zamaneh Workshop 2006.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Hayedeh72.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hayedeh72.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pejman The Hague.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pejman The Hague.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 21:02, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:PejmanAmsterdam.jpg.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PejmanAmsterdam.jpg.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 21:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:RZ logo.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RZ logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 19:05, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Amir (singer)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Amir (singer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Epeefleche (talk) 02:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gozaar

The article Gozaar has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Subject doesn't seem to be notable based on Google search, article was heavily edited by a user with a COI, all sources in article are primary.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Spinixster (chat!) 02:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]