User talk:Hessamnia

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Hessamnia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Tithe Barn, Pilton. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Rod ^talk 21:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image on Tithe Barn, Pilton

Hi, Thanks for trying to correct the spelling of the image name on Tithe Barn, Pilton, however the title of the image is "Tthe Barn Pilton interior.jpg" & if you correct it the image doesn't show, unless the image itself is renamed.— Rod ^talk 19:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of paradoxes

Thanks, I undid your change of "Mathematics" to "Mathematical" on List of paradoxes. If you'd like to discuss this, your opinion would be welcome at the talk page there. Regards, Paradoctor (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Iranian passport appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. RashersTierney (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sincere apologies for the unwarranted implication above. It was based entirely on my mis-reading of your perfectly acceptable edit. I see it has quite correctly been reapplied at the article. Again, sorry. RashersTierney (talk) 22:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had only spruced up the reference, but the deed has been done now. ;) Paradoctor (talk) 23:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So I'm no longer a vandal? =) Hessamnia

It's Vandals like you that give Wikipedia a good name. ;) Paradoctor (talk) 19:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. More sunshine! I've bookmarked that essay for future reference. RashersTierney (talk) 19:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Savoir Flair

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 Savoir Flair 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 web content, 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} 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 hang-on 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. G W… 17:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Please don't change the format of dates, as you did to Sandy Denny unless there is a valid reason to do so. In general, date formats in articles should correspond to the variety of English that the article is written in. This means that if an article is written about a British or European topic, the day-month-year format should be used, e.g., 12 December 1904. If an article is about an American topic, the month-day-year format should be used, e.g., December 12, 1904. If neither, the dates should be left in the format they were originally written in.

Please also note that Wikipedia does not use ordinal suffixes (e.g., st, nd, th), articles, or leading zeros on dates. For more information about how dates should be written on Wikipedia, please see this article.

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Hessamnia

Disambiguation link notification for November 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Khordad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tir

Mordad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tir

Shahrivar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mehr

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wagon Pars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arak. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Hi Hessamnia, thanks for dropping by my articles leaving quick edits. Cheers! Ashish Lohorung (talk) 11:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Open bowling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Carter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Open bowling

Hello, Hessamnia,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Open bowling should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open bowling .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Vanjagenije (talk) 19:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Links to countries in film articles

Hi. Please don't link to the country in the lead of the article. Please see WP:EGG and WP:OVERLINK for more. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Abbas Ghaderi

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

No assertion of independent notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Bearian (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hello, Hessamnia,

The Editing team is asking very experienced editors like you for your help with VisualEditor. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and fix these small things, too.

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Savoir Flair

Hello, Hessamnia. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Savoir Flair".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Savoir Flair}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:27, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removing context for countries: please stop

Hessamnia, I watch S. A. Andrée's Arctic Balloon Expedition of 1897, and noticed your edit here. I've reverted it, as I do think Sweden needs "placing" on the map for the reader; I bet a majority of the readers of this international encyclopedia have little idea where this small country is. Now I see that you have been systematically removing similar kinds of context from many articles. Why? It seems to me you're doing the readers a disfavor. Please stop and discuss. Bishonen | talk 09:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Hessamnia, thank you for stopping, but please respond and explain your edits or I'll have to consider rolling them all back. You were editing right up to the moment I posted the query above, so I suppose you saw it? Bishonen | talk 07:39, 13 July 2015 (UTC).[reply]

You are doing this again and without even so much as an edit summary, let alone a discussion perhaps at Wikipedia:WikiAfrica. Not everyone knows where every little country is, which is why we provide context in the lede in our global project. Please stop and start a discussion if you think removing the context is wise. Aboutmovies (talk) 16:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I consider the changes I'm making pretty uncontroversial, except from a Eurocentric standpoint. Besides, if thousands of other articles on Liberia and Nigeria can do without context, why can't these? Hessamnia (talk) 16:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, see this essay on why comparing them to other articles is not a great argument. Secondly, you have not limited this to just those two countries, as you are doing it in many parts of Africa. As to uncontroversial, the fact that this type of statement is in so many articles would tend to show it is not exactly uncontroversial to remove it. A variety of editors have found it to be useful, so at the least, there should be an edit summary, but more importantly, start a discussion on a relevant discussion board so that it is not just your opinion. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Anglo-American_focus. "The African country of X" is superfluous, just like "the North American country of the United States". Kindly reconsider. Hessamnia (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Belgium (Listeni/ˈbɛldʒəm/; Dutch: België [ˈbɛlɣijə] ( listen); French: Belgique [bɛlʒik] ( listen); German: Belgien [ˈbɛlɡin̩] ( listen)), officially the Kingdom of Belgium, is a sovereign state in Western Europe." This is not a Anglo-American bias, this is context, as many readers may not know where some of these places are. Note Belgium was just the first small European country that came to mind, but I am guess we do this with many countries (the other low countries also mention this in the lede). And the USA article also does mention the second sentence of the lede that it is mostly in North America. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:51, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this thread after reverting two further such edits from you yesterday; after having seen that multiple editors have already asked you to stop, I've reverted the remainder of your recent removals of this information. WP:CONSENSUS is not optional, and your edits are obviously controversial. To continue to make them en mass and without comment or further attempt at discussion is not acceptable. (pinging @Aboutmovies: and @Bishonen: in case they do not have this page watchlisted so they can see the issue has continued) postdlf (talk) 21:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you think you are correct that this is some sort of bias, start an RFC or even a discussion on a relevant WikiProject. Otherwise, three experienced editors have said what you are doing goes against consensus on the topic, and you appear to not want to stop and instead just pause and re-start somewhere else hoping no one will notice. That is not a good plan. Aboutmovies (talk) 21:49, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning

That's interesting, thank you postdlf. Hessamnia, I'm sure your purpose with editing is to improve Wikipedia, but this is a collaborative project. Have you ever edited an article talkpage? Going back as far as February 2016, I see no talkpage edits. The 0,7% edits to article talk that this tool credits you with are presumably mainly undiscussed moves of article talkpages. Your unwillingness to discuss shines through strongly altogether on your edit counter page. 96,2 of your article edits don't even have an edit summary — that's quite extraordinary for an experienced editor. You have been politely advised, then asked to discuss, then urged to stop, and now I'm warning you: the next time you remove context for a country without discussing with your peers first (compare Aboutmovies' suggestions) I'll block you. And for goodness' sake start using edit summaries and start editing more slowly and less like a machine (see recent timestamps), giving yourself some time to consider each edit. Compare my comments about both these things in July 2015.[1] Bishonen | talk 22:43, 16 May 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Might makes right, I suppose. Hessamnia (talk) 15:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless or unhelpful edits

Hi! Curiously, you have in quick succession edited several minor articles that I created. None of your edits seem to have been useful. In four of them you added an unnecessary comma, as here. In the other two you changed words or spelling, apparently to conform to a variety of English which is not that in use in the article – both articles are clearly tagged with {{Use British English}}, by the way. There's explanation of why not to make changes of that kind at MOS:RETAIN. If I write something about the Second World War, that's because in the kind of English I speak, that is what we call that war; you should not be attempting to change that. In general, if you don't know what you are doing, it's almost always better not to do it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Hessamnia. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Hessamnia. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hessamnia!

Hi User:Hessamnia, I'm Daniel and I'll love to cheerfully share something with you.

It is considered good practice to provide a summary for every edit, especially when reverting (undoing) the actions of other editors or deleting existing text; otherwise, people may question your motives for the edit.

Wikipedia is a team work and we need each other. We value your contributions. It's good you leave a summary so we can all know what you are contributing.

Accurate summaries help other contributors decide whether it is worthwhile for them to review an edit, and to understand the change should they choose to review it. When a major edit (e.g. deletion of a substantial amount of text, a significant addition, or a substantial rewrite) doesn't have an edit summary, there are fewer reasons you get many of the editors confused. Summaries are less important for minor changes (which means generally unchallengeable changes such as spelling or grammar corrections), but a brief note like "fixed spelling" is helpful even then.

To avoid accidentally leaving edit summaries blank, you can select "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" on the Editing tab of your user preferences

See Help:Edit_summary for more.

You are doing a great job. Danidamiobi (talk) 11:29, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I came to your talk page to ask you to please write edit summaries, and find someone else has already asked you to please do that. You didn't respond. I can't readily tell what you did at the Thomas Jefferson article. Maybe I'll just revert your edit with my own edit summary asking you to check this page. Best wishes, YoPienso (talk) 01:58, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I apologize for the oversight. I merely replaced all instances of double space with single space. Hessamnia

OK; thanks for the explanation. I'll go back and restore your edit. YoPienso (talk) 18:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's been taken care of. YoPienso (talk) 18:28, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Hessamnia. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]