User talk:Soroush83

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
Start a new talk topic.

---

My archived talk
Archive up to July 7th —

Some advice

Dear Soroush83, as you may have noticed I have had an unpleasant encounter with Siebrand whom I consider a most impertinent individual I have ever come across, not only here on these pages, but anywhere (actually this is not quite accurate, as only last week another Wikipedia operator wrote me the following: "But guess what: no one cares what the word sounds like in Persian, since the information presented is in English and only in English. And in English, incidentally, we, English-speakers, do have the word [...] and we do use it on a variety of occasions." Note the "we"s, and as though I had been communicating with this contemptible man in any other language but English! Racists the world over need only a little bit of excitement, and they invariably show their true colour --- go to a football match on a Saturday afternoon and witness it for yourself). He proved to me that he is not capable of reading a text more than three lines long, or he starts spouting his venomous racist remarks. Having been on these pages for two days, I sincerely believe that he is simply bullying people, and you seem to me to be one of his victims. He apparently enjoys his role as someone who orders people left and right (have you ever read about the `black shirts' and the `brown shirts'? I believe that Wikipedia has got its own whatever-colour-shirt bullying squad). Look at his language! Where has he got the right to refer to himself as "we"? Wikipedia belongs to all, and this forbids people from referring to themselves as "we" (incidentally, as far as I am aware, only monarchs refer to themselves as "we"; Mrs Thatcher once famously said "We have become a grandmother" and commentators refer to it as a "blatant affectation"). Anyone who does otherwise, is drawing a line between him/herself and the rest; in the case of Siebrand, he has convinced me, by the brutal language with which he responded to my message (mind you, he has even failed to apologise, not to mention that as a result of me telling him who I think he is, yesterday he marked about ten photographs uploaded by me over the past year --- two of which dating from around 1900 and one of which containing all the required details, including its source --- for removal within 48 hours; apparently he must have been in haste while trying to create for me the maximum amount of trouble, and sending me the implicit message: "never underestimate the vindictiveness of racist bigots"), that he must be considering me, and my ilk, as actually not belonging to here (our usernames give us away as being pesky little brown people who are intruding on the white-man's territory). Why are you constantly dancing to his tune? Where is your spirit to raise against such tyranny? Why do you and your friends, who appear to be his main targets, just so uncritically follow his orders? Why can't you be firm in your statements? In all sincerity, I feel ashamed.

Now, as for Hedayat's photograph, that photograph uploaded by me is taken in Tehran and dates from around 1920, five years before Hedayat left Iran for the first time for France (as it may have already occurred to you, that broken image is very symbolic of Hedayat's broken life, so that this particular photograph is one of my most cherished photographs of Hedayat). If this is not enough to establish the source of that photograph, then what is? I strongly believe that Siebrand is abusing his position for his personal gratification and should therefore be evicted from his present place. I leave the rest to you, as I do not work on Commons.Wikimedia. Good Night and Good Luck!, as Edward R. Murrow would say. Yours sincerely, --BF 14:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear BehnamFarid

You are giving me some advices to be firm to racists and you account User:Siebrand's speech offensive and call him racist!!! I don't know where you live, how you think, which kind of people you've already encounter that you think like that, but regardless of wikipedia policy(en:Wikipedia:No Personal Attack) I do not think Siebrand is a racist and I believe He has done them to keep wikipedia clean, and to remove non-free contents from wikimedia and I appreciate his endeavours in this way, however everyone may be angry sometime and say sth a little angrily. I believe, we should consider good faith. I highly have this consideration.

Secondly you told me I had reported the copyright problem of Hedayat's picture but I hadn't. I just transffered it to wiki commons to make use of it on other wikimedia projects, but if I had seen it and it had copyright problem(I would report it to some Admin to be deleted.) Take care where you are working and for which reasons you are working. There are a lot of people like me and many others on wikimedia projects(hoping, you do too)... And this is the "we" he says. For a free ecyclopedia, free contents are needed and it is required to be proved that sth is free and I'm here to counterpart in this way. Now, I really wish ,you maitain enough information needed to be maintained for pictures to be in wikimedia website. It is for this project, not for a special person. He checked the pictures I'd uploaded but I didn't get angry and even I got happy. he helped me to maintain more accurate contents for this project.

And also I think It is our problem that we do not have any active Persian Admin here to help with these matters with this critical copyright situation in Iran.

Have good time. Yours sincerely.--Soroush83 17:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

This site says it is taken in Paris!!! how do you say it is taken in Tehran?--Soroush83 18:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Soroush83, thank you for your three kind messages (one of which on my Wikipedia page). To begin with, I left my message on your talk page because I have no hesitation about its contents and therefore as far as I am concerned, the entire world may know about them --- I utterly dislike secrecy and lack of transparency. Moderators on Wikipedia must be polite. What kind of response was that that Siebrand left for me? Civilised societies have rules of politeness, and I expect from someone born in the country of Erasmus to be polite (Siebrand is apparently a Dutch, shaming his country of birth by writing in the way he did). When I spend my precious time (and please do not misunderstand me, I believe everyone's time is precious) to leave a message on someone's page, I do not expect to receive a loutish response, as if I were in a worm-infested gutter. If Siebrand did not mean what he wrote, why did he target all my uploads the next day? Why didn't he feel that he had to apologise? No my dear friend, Siebrand knows what he is doing, and I daresay he must even be proud of his abominable deeds. Who is he and what right does he have to write, in the way he did, to someone whom he has never written to (that was his first response to me!), never seen, never spoken to? In my experience, rude and loutish behaviour testify to one's negative inner fellings towards others. If he is so rude towards me, without ever having had any previous encounter with me, regretfully, I have no reason to revise my negative view of him.

As for the photograph of Hedayat and the web-site of which you kindly gave me the link. I have just checked the link. Well, don't you think it a bit weired that the official web-site of Sadeq Hedayat should be using a broken image? I suspect that they might even have copied that image from Wikipedia. Incidentally, my computer tells me that that site is registered in Iran (its address is "Iran, no 2 east - 6th st. saadat abad tehran 99999" --- doesn't look to me a particularly Iranian address, I mean this "99999"; the site is hosted by parspalette.com, and my computer is unable to find its registration! On the main site of parspalette.com there is no trace to be found of the organization: Who owns the site, what are the names of the people responsible for the site, etc. --- on the Sadeq Hedayat page they mention that `All rights of this site belong to the Hedayat Office' [Daftare Hedayat]; if so, where is the registration number of this Office and the name of the organisation conferring this right to them? Who runs this Office? On the page `contact us', one finds no human name --- with the exception of the name associated with the e-mail address --- and the address is a post-box address, which says nothing, as any person can get a post-box number; what is relevant, is the name of the person or organisation to which that address officially corresponds. In any case, I wish this Official Site the very best and commend their valuable services to the literature, however have zero confidence in that they might have any rights above the rights that I and you as rivate citizens already have).

Any way, this whole issue just demonstrates what I mentioned earlier in my text on the talk-page of Siebrand: common sense is the best tool that we have at our disposal. To repeat, suppose that I say "I have the photograph from X". What next? Are you going to ask where X has the photograph from? And if so, at which stage are you going to stop? Now, your citation of the above-mentioned link may satisfy Siebrand, but where is his satisfaction based on? In short, I have no patience with this whole bureaucratic attitude towards things. We must think a bit and will immediately realise that there is absolutely no problem out there worth taking so much of our times: Hedayat died more than 30 years ago, and that is the end of the story as far as his photgraphs are concerned; no endless nonsense about the source of the photograph or who took it or where it was taken; no doubt, in an appropriate context these questions might be relevant or interesting, but not in the context of considering whether Hedayat's photographs can be displayed on Wikipedia or not.

As for the photograph at issue being taken in Paris in 1307 (that is 1928 AD), I doubt it. What one sees here is not the face of a 25-year-old man; it is more the face of a 17-18-year-old man. This is in particular so when one compares this photograph with other photographs of Hedayat taken in Paris. In short, I am sceptical about whatever thing that that site claims. They give an e-mail address, so perhaps you may wish to write to them and see whether they are at least for real. If so, then you could ask them about the specifics of that photograph.

You must have misunderstood me. I never told (neither to you nor to anyone else for that matter) that you had anything to do with the marking for removal of the photographs uploaded by me. Far from it. May I therefore request you that you re-read my text so that all misunderstandings are removed?

Lastly, I entirely agree with you that an impartial Iranian moderator is sorely missing on Wikipedia --- what I mean by "Iranian" is not about this person's nationality, but about her/his knowledge of the Iranian culture and of the sensitivities of Iranians. Also that Iranian culture is less materialistic as regards such issues as photographs; copy-right on photographs of public figures looks to me like an oxymoron, and I deeply believe that most, if not all, Iranians must share my view. In a way, this 30-year limit that the Iranian law prescribes (as opposed to the 100-year period or the 70-year period after the death of the person that the photograph portrays) somehow reflects this difference in attitude and culture.

With kind regards, --BF 21:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Sorousg83, I just had a close look into the contents of the above-mentioned "Official Site" and it seems that it is a very respectable one. They also have a relatively large collection of photographs. I had never seen this site before and consequently never earlier had looked through their collection of photographs. It may be worth writing to them and asking whether some of their photographs could be transferred to Wikipedia (although I doubt that they may respond; right now people in Iran must be afraid of responding to unsolicited e-mails from abroad for the fear of being accused of ....). If they do not wish that the contents of their pages be copied, they should also be given the advice that they should add some legal texts in English to their pages (also that they may take some technical measures for preventing those parts of their pages that they do not wish copied, such as the photographs, are also prevented from being copied). They should also clearly state the basis on which their claim of being the "Official Site" rests (the word "official" is not a legally-protected term; the word is only meaningful if they are granted the exclusive use of the word by a department of the state, such as the culture ministry, in which case they must clearly present the appropriate reference numbers). As it stands, the entire web-site is legally based on a very shaky ground (for instance, they ask for voluntary financial contributions, however no one in his of her right mind contributes to an organisation which has no official registration number --- either they are extremely naive, or they are simply some people of good will who are bypassing the prevailing laws which ban print publication of Hedayat's works in Iran --- this may clarify why one cannot find the name of a human being (except that of Sadeq Hedayat) on their site; also why the internet company which hosts the site looks so shabby and opaque). Kind regards, --BF 00:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear BehnamFarid

• I wish you wrote your message shorter and others possibly do.
• Death of Sadeq Hedayat is not important for copyright of that image. Date of publication of Image is important... Read copyright law of Iran...
• I do not mean active Persian Admin is needed for Iran's culture. It is needed because he would be more familiar with copyright law in Iran and knows Persian language.
• The images you had uploaded might have had some problems with sources or... so it is wrong of you not Siebrand. The uploader must do them.
• you do not need to contact the site. All images of Sadeq Hedayat which haven't been changed are in PD and no one can put them in their site and claim the right. if one of his images was on the ground, you can take a picture of it and publish here in PD.

nice wishes.--Soroush83 14:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Soroush83, I shall be short: (1) No comment. (2) With due respect, in my opinion you are also speaking the language of a bureaucrat: If someone has died in year N, no photograph of him or her, portraying him or her alive, can have been taken in year N+1. Now you may have a point when it comes to an unknown individual whose photograph has been published in year N+M but has died in year in N; in such case one should perhaps start counting from year N+M. Sadeq Hedayat was not an unknown person, but a public literary figure. Further, so long as anyone can remember, the photographs of Sadeq Hedayat have been around. Are we going to wait another 60 years before we can declare his photographs as PD? We may do so, but in the meantime the humanity outside these pages is unlocking the genome of all the species roaming around, and before long is going to send people to the Mars, and of course we Wikipedians may sit waiting in the safe knowledge that in 60 years time the photographs of Hedayat will be declared PD and finally approved by Siebrand. It is said: Haft Share Eshq ra Attar Gasht, Ma Hanus Andar Khame yek Koche-im. (3) No comment (I believe that I had already understood you correctly). (4) I am aware of what people who upload photographs are supposed to do. My point is, and always has been, that progress is only possible when people use their common sense; otherwise things just get congested. My fear is that Wikipedia will suffer internal suffocation through the pedantry of some of its administrators. Please ponder on this: it is by no means given that Wikipedia will survive; it can collapse under its own weight and through lack of flexibility and imagination. You should consider the following: those individuals who are capable enough to make major contributions to the contents of Wikipedia will not tolerate being pushed around by people like Siebrand. Believe me, I know what I am talking about: major and well-funded universities have serious problems attracting good people and maintaining them in their positions. In the case of Wikipedia, if someone is a real expert in a subject, why should he or she tolerate such people like Siebrand; to be threatened that he or she will be banned from Wikipedia because Siebrand deems that a particular photograph shows no source? I know of some of the best and most original contributors who have left Wikipedia because they are not prepared to be pushed around for a work that they do out of sheer idealism and good will, and for which they receive neither payment nor official recognition. One has to be serious and think seriously; Wikipedia cannot survive if it ends up as a site with well-documented photographs but no serious contributor to update and modify its contents. (5) At present I do not need to contact any site, but thank you for your advice.

Finally, I leave these pages now, most probably for good. Wish you all the very best, --BF 17:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

And finallly. User:Soroush83/Copyright law of Iran might be usefull for you too. However reading it is not necessary for working here.--Soroush83 11:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

File:Attar_statue-1.jpg

File:Attar_statue-1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

  ■ MMXX  ^talk  20:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Amin_Eslami_Garden_in_Neyshabur.JPG

File:Amin_Eslami_Garden_in_Neyshabur.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

AMERICOPHILE 11:11, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

File:HellmutRitter_statue.jpg

File:HellmutRitter_statue.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

AMERICOPHILE 11:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Imamzadeh Mahruq mosque.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Imamzadeh Mahruq mosque.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Imamzadeh Mahruq mosque.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

—LX (talk, contribs) 21:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Khayam mausoleum.jpg

File:Khayam mausoleum.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Taivo (talk) 11:24, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Khayam.jpg

File:Khayam.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Taivo (talk) 11:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC)