User talk:Zereshk

Archive 1.
Archive 2.
Archive 3.
Archive 4.
Archive 5.

---

Ziyarat

The galleries are a great idea. However, the pictures on the side now overlap the Iran gallery. Could you put the other piccies in galleries? Zora 00:18, 1 April 2006 (UTC) P.S. Looks nice

Persian Gulf

Hey, nice bit digging up the British Residency bits - perhaps will cool off some of the other rhetoric on the page LOL (we can pray) Bridesmill 02:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:40sotoon.jpg

You can revert to your version by clicking (rev) on the image page. Already did that for you since your image looks better. SouthernComfort 07:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Greater Iran

Great work! sorry I have not been active on it.. and yeah I have put down the Dehkhoda CD on the list now! if there's anything else I should think about getting let me know, bedrud --Kash 13:25, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey I don't think the statement about Airyanem Vaejah being today Afghanistan is wrong. Land of Aryans mentioned in avesta was the Aryan/Iranian expansion (look at the topic) and there is no exact area has been identified with such name, although I have seen it on some Afghan article that its been mentioned the same stuff - but I don't think it can be claimed as such --Kash 22:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I am just saying I don't think any nations e.g. Afghanistan can claim over the Airyanem Vaejah, great work so far by the way --Kash 23:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Your dedication is inspirational :) These places are all speculations though ofcourse, another place worthy of suspicion would be arkaim, thought by some to be the "home of indo-europeans tribe before invasion".. It'd be really interesting if that theory is true, that they all lived together in a land sharing the same language, spiritual beliefs, and festivals. I am not sure if we can ever find out for sure though. In any case if "Eranvaj" of Avesta is the same thing, it'd have been "Iran" wherever it was and thats all that matters! --Kash 23:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Request

Hey Zereshk,

I was wondering if you would join in on the discussion here. There is an argument right now over whether the Pashtuns are of Iranian stock or not. Thanks. BTW, in response to your comment here, I am a bit unclear on what is supposed to be done. What exactly is it? --Khoikhoi 07:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. Wait, what links? --Khoikhoi 07:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah, the pages that link to "Fars". I don't think admin's would usually do this - you might try going to Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links or ask User:TimBentley to do it. I for one find it to be a laborious task. --Khoikhoi 07:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

If you look at TimBentley's contributions it seems that he enjoys it! You think I should give him a barnstar? --Khoikhoi 08:01, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, sure. --Khoikhoi 08:03, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. ;) --Khoikhoi 08:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, how's this? --Khoikhoi 08:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

De nada. --Khoikhoi 08:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I want to bring something to your attention

The following is directly quoted from what user:Acuman has said about Khoemani.

I had seen some literature out there suggesting that Khomenini approved of sex with children and animals. Now someone has added some of these claims into this article. I'm not going to take them out, but the article is going to receive a dispute tag until these information are verified. AucamanTalk 04:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I have just left him a message about how I beleive that the problems on the Persian Jew articles are his fault and the reaction to his attacks. This is not right. I was reading exchanges with him and I believe another user of Jewish origin that led me to check the Khomeni article. I also looked at his other articles about Iran and human right problmes there. 69.196.139.250 01:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Ayatollah Shirazi, etc.

You are related to Ayatollah Shirazi? I didnt know that! Nor did I know you had relatives with some prominence in the old government. It seems every Iranian I come in contact with in this country seems to have some connection to the old government. I'm not doubting your claim, I'm just observing this phenomena. Could you explain it to me? I have no high class relations though. I'm from a cheap, ordinary middle class Pakistani-American family, with no famous relations, unless if I'm related to like, Mahmud of Ghazni by some long shot coindence or something or some Rajput king, if I had any Hindu ancestors (which I do, but probably of a lower caste). User: Afghan Historian

Do you know Ayatollah Shirazi's opinion on "ritual purity" in Islam and weather or not it applies to Jews and Christians? --ManiF 06:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Question

Hi Zereshk, can I ask you a question? What do you think of this method of transliteration? Quite frankly, I've never seen it before, and it looks a lot more like Old English rather than what I'm used to. I may be a lot more ignorant on this than you, but I just wanted to know what you think. --Khoikhoi 23:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. You're right, I don't really mind that much either, it's just I was unsure if other's would accept it. --Khoikhoi 00:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Sialk

He didn't do a merge, he just copied the tiny article on the Proto-Elamites into Sialk, which made for a bad join. However, I think the anonIP had a good idea, in that the old Sialk article didn't have much in the way of context. The article needs to be rewritten, that's all. Zora 23:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, here's a good precis: [1],. Based on that ref, I'd advise moving the emphasis OFF the ziggurat and instead stick to archaeological site report terminology. Site is called Sialk or Tepe Sialk, on outskirts of the city of Kashan, excavated by X, Y, and Z, now believed to have X years of occupation, from A to B, analyzed in X strata, and a section on each stratum. For a contemporary archaeologist, the ziggurat is not necessarily the most important thing. Girshmann excavated back in the bad old days, when they threw away all the evidence to get the few bits they did want: stuff like pots and statues that could be displayed in museums, inscriptions, and monumental buildings. A modern archaeologist would be just as happy with carbon from a fire or pollen grains. So modern archaeologists are revisiting old, disturbed ground to see if they can wring some evidence out of it. Zora 02:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I am down on Ghirshman (sp?) because he's an example of old-style archaeology at its worst. It has NOTHING to do with nationalism, it has to do with technique. He moved tons of earth and sifted it only for pretty museum-worthy objects. He was interested in monumental architecture and to heck with the houses of the commoners (which might tell you a lot more about the society, but he didn't know that). After he got through with a site, there wasn't all that much left for later archaeologists. Contemporary archaeologists grid, they sometimes excavate with dental picks, and they don't clear the whole site -- they assume that techniques are going to keep improving, and that future archaeologists are going to want an undisturbed section on which to practice their future magic.

For a truly grotesque example of old-style archaeology, take the excavation of Great Zimbabwe, in Rhodesia. Richard Nicklin Hall was convinced that this walled city could only have been built by white immigrants, and excavated the city down to bedrock looking for signs of the immigrants. He threw out ALL the evidence, as "kaffir occupation". We know very little about Great Zimbabwe because of his gross stupidity [2].

Unfortunately, because of wars and then the Iranian revolution, there has been too little modern scientific archaeology in Iran. Zora 21:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I would regard Ghirshman's conclusions as out-dated. Not necessarily reliable. Too bad there is so little to put his theories in perspective. Zora 22:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Khalid ibn al-Walid

Hi Zereshk,

I thought you and/or someone you know might have some input on the life and career of Khalid ibn al-Walid.

Timothy Usher 06:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Al-Karaji

I'm rather confused by you last revert at Al-Karaji. Did you even look at the article before reverting it? Not only does your edit summary make little sense, but it reintroduce an error which I'll leave as an excercise to to you to spot (and it remvoed some additional material, unrelated to his etnicity, which added, but I guess that's warranted when fighting of Arab nationalists</sarcasm>). —Ruud 23:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Persian Alphabet

Hi Zereshk!

I've noticed that you're a native Persian speaker, and I was wonderingif you could help me out with the names of the letters of the Persian alphabet here. conio.h • talk 13:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

There is new activities brewing, user:Acuman is trying to mobilize Arab editors against Iranian editors

Here is a direct quote: Watchlist this article and follow some of the things in the discussion page. Same with Persian Gulf naming dispute. AucamanTalk 06:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Also here quotes by user:Ahwaz talking to the same editor Acuman is trying to control;

If you get into any dispute with the Persian chauvinist gang over content, they will not compromise and start making allegations, the favourite being: anti-Iranian, anti-Persian, Jew, Israeli, separatist, terrorist, "want to break up Iran", and all that crap. They are free to say this without any admin interference. When I tell someone to blow their nose, there is a big furore and the admins take action. Wikipedia is a pile of rubbish and the people that run it are donkeys. The code of conduct is there for powerful gangs to impose their agendas. If five people are against two or three, it does not matter how many times you revert they will always have their point of view imposed on articles. Why spend time on this nonsense? Even the media is now showing up Wikipedia's failings. No serious academic is involved (oh, there's the "genius" Zereshk, who knows everything about nuclear engineering, quantum physics, architecture, philosophy, poetry, religion, linguistics, medicine - you name it, he is the self-appointed expert - and he still finds time to run edit wars and insult people). Ask yourself why. Because no serious academic takes it seriously. It is rubbish.--Ahwaz 11:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

69.196.139.250 00:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)