User talk:PayamAvarwand

 
   📁 Archive 1
 
 
   📁 Archive 2

 
   Write me ...

Persian Gulf

@PayamAvarwand Given your previous block, it's best not to repeat the disruptive edits that led to it. Skitash (talk) 21:15, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? Are you threatening me for trying to correct the false information? PayamAvarwand (talk) 21:25, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are being disruptive because the Wikipedia community have decided that this is the best way to refer to the alternative name in this RfC. You can't say you are not aware of this because there was a warning in the text of the article not to change the wording because of this RfC, which you ignored. So, yes, cut out this WP:TENDENTIOUS approach or you will be blocked. And to be perfectly clear, there are plenty of reliable sources that justify the statement that it is "sometimes" called the Arabian Gulf:[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. The article is rightly called Persian Gulf but you can't pretend that others, mainly Arab countries, call it by a different name, whether you like it or not. Grow up. DeCausa (talk) 22:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Tendentious editing" means bad, and that is what I am not! Probably normal for you to insult others, but please stop talk like this to me!

[16]: This book has been written 1994, it is not valid for such an old Topic.

[17]: This book has been published 2009, it is not valid for such an old Topic.

[18]: This book has been written 2005, it is not valid for such an old Topic.

[19]: This book has been published 2008, it is not valid for such an old Topic.

[20]: This has been published 2023

[21]: This has been published 2000

[22]: 2023 and just a news platform

[23]: 2025

[24]: 2024

Are you kidding me? PayamAvarwand (talk) 22:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW @PhilKnight PayamAvarwand is now copy-pasting the same message onto multiple users' talk pages, which is clearly disruptive.[25][26][27][28][29] The content they're trying to remove (which led to their block in the first place) was the subject of an RfC, and they're now restoring a vandal's edit to that same article. Skitash (talk) 22:21, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop your disruptive editing on this subject now. If you don't, I shall block you from editing. JBW (talk) 22:23, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, as you wish! I just tried to share the issue with others and consult with them. If that is false, you have right to block me. PayamAvarwand (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Email block, consequent on email abuse and unconstructive response to a message about it

I have blocked you from sending emails. You do not need to receive individual warnings about each and every kind of unacceptable action you take; any further disruptive or unconstructive actions from you may lead to being blocked, without further warning. JBW (talk) 23:20, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have removed my comment above from its original context, and placed it so that it appears to be a response to your comment above it, whereas you know full well that it was in fact posted as a response to the comment you made in answer to HistoryofIran's message about email abuse. Changing the setting of another editor's post so as to give a misleading impression of what it was about is unacceptable. Either restore my message to its proper context or remove it completely. JBW (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably we made changes at the same time!! no Idea! but I have added your comment up there, and it's correct now! PayamAvarwand (talk) 22:57, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are really pushing your luck. I see that: (1) you have decided not to comply with my request to correct the misleading impression you made; (2) you have posted nonsense about "[making] changes at the same time" and claiming to have had "no idea", which anyone who checks the editing history of this page will see is a lie. I am putting a section heading above my comment which you moved, to remove it from its misleading context, but even minor incidents like this add up, and sooner or later one of them could become the last straw on the block-camel's back. JBW (talk) 23:18, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was my free time I have tried to use it for contribution in an important topic, and this is your job to do something.

"...claiming to have had "no idea", which anyone who checks the editing history of this page"

Of course I checked, but found nothing! I still have no idea what you are talking about!

I always heard from our professors in Iran in small cities: "Do Not Trust Every Internet Pages, Especially Not Wikipedia Articles".

Imagine your weapon is the BLOCK feature, and you use it so often and so easy! Who knows what you do with a real weapon! And you are an admin in Wikipedia!

Now I am sure of his recommendation. Bye Bye PayamAvarwand (talk) 23:55, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the edit in which I posted my message about the email block: [30]. 2 hours and fifty minutes later, in this edit, you removed my message from where it was on the page and put it in another section. That was clearly a deliberate change, you were well aware of what you were doing. JBW (talk) 09:39, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

because I wanted to follow your topic in the appropriate section, not in the other one from other user! This is my talk page. But I have not removed anything, just shifted, or moved some other things to the archive, because I noticed, some people abuse my old discussions to treat me badly.--PayamAvarwand (talk) 10:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing, particularly (but not only) in refusing to accept consensus concerning the issue of names of the Persian Gulf. Almost everyone who does a substantial amount of editing will sometimes find that there is a clear consensus which they believe is wrong; those of us who accept (however reluctantly) the consensus and move on survive as editors; those of us who persist indefinitely in trying to get our own way don't.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 23:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]