Jimbo, how much money has the Wikimedia Endowment raised so far? Where are you publishing the investment returns achieved? 47.89.49.38 (talk) 09:17, 25 July 2017 (UTC) [replaced question archived prior to response 47.89.49.38 (talk) 05:16, 28 July 2017 (UTC)][reply]

I will be having a catch-up with staff soon, and I'll let you know an update then. Ask around September 13th.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 08:19, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have a question : If I have a signature of FSM I should be blocked due to that? A user of Wikipedia has this signature (Sayyid) (User:Sa.Vakilian) but he's not blocked. There are many of his signatures here (as سید) : fa:بحث_کاربر:Sa.vakilian --IranianNationalist (talk) 08:50, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see the block log is here but I don't see a reason listed there. There are multiple noticeboard threads here. The lowest on the page led to the block, but Google Translate doesn't do a good enough job to tell how; I think there may be some word play going on with the signature but I'm not sure. This started out having something to do with Maryam Mirzakhani. [1] Also note FSM = Flying Spaghetti Monster. Wnt (talk) 11:44, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If IranianNationalist is in Iran, then this is someone with amazing courage, who I would think to be very much in danger. But please be careful! Wnt (talk) 11:27, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the EnANB to take another look to my talk page and my signature has been changed from a special point recently (previously my signature was simply IranianNationalist). To clarify it firstly I will refer to the FaANB ( here ) :

Translation of the msg by the wikifa admin مهرنگار here : "Hi Sayid, because I'm pinged I'm commenting. This user (means IranianNationalist) after receiving the warning of Mr.Arjang (ارژنگ) about not using the word La Elah Ella Hayoola (There is no god but the monster) intentionally repeated this term and even used it in his/her signature. Absolutely the encyclopedia is not a place for this actions and here is not a battlefield for war against Muslims or insult to their beliefs. If I had no conflict of interest with this user I would block him/her due to insulting Islamic beliefs ....." And My response : "The encyclopedia is not a place to use Sayid too so don't receive any insult ..."

But @Wnt (Google translate shows many things wrong eg. "Do not bite us hotly with the tune of "crackdown"" is actually "Don't make our sorrow double by using the term "firecracker-playing(ترقه‌بازی)"" referring to the term used by the Islamic supreme-leader of Iran called the Tehran terrorist attacks as "firecracker-playing")but there are no diff links about Maryam Mirzakhani to prove edit war or war by me BUT vice versa there are some difflinks bellow from Kazemita1 (Sayid and admin مهرنگار are supporting User:Kazemita1 too) to show Kazemita1's editwar (against me and User:Gharouni) and read more about what happened below.

Why مهرنگار talked about "conflict of interest" : some months ago about the article Saeed Toosi (My honesty was proved by reliable sources BBC VOA even FarsNews) but مهرنگار said in my talk page "I blocked you due to 3 reverses" my reply "I did it based on the consensus of the 3rd and 4th opinions of other experienced users in the article talk page and there were many reliable sources" and مهرنگار replied : "even if you were right you must not edit you must move the subject to the FaANB" (Note : Sayid and Kazemita1 were vs. me there) so I blocked for 3 days just due to 3 edits in 24 hours and adding more sources. Now after some months this is where the User:Kazemita1 (The same user) had 3 almost 4 similar reverses in 24 hours against User:Gharouni's edit and my edit (Kazemita1(4) against Gharouni(1) and IranianNationalist(2 edits one before Gharouni another after it)) and I noticed it in the Fa ANB/Editwar ( here ) and the diff links of Kazemita1 editwar :

• fa:Special:Diff/20134903/20134972 (Kazemita1 vs. Gharouni)
• fa:Special:Diff/20135409/20136531
• fa:Special:Diff/20141758/20142089
• and the first one fa:Special:Diff/20130258/20133089

Sayid (Sa.Vakilian) said something there to save Kazemita1 (Sayid reminded his appeal in the main ANB). Because مهرنگار knew the subject previously, I pinged him/her there and reminded his/her what he/she said months ago "even if you were right..." but مهرنگار (the admin) said "I was gonna consider this subject before you ping me but because you pinged me and reminded what I said previously I will not consider the appeal" o.O and I appealed from this admin in FaANB as partiality and discrimination (here) but the appeal stayed silenced because two users said the admin's contributions are voluntarily so مهرنگار has the option to not consider the subject. One of the users was Sunfyr who previously started a polling to censor any naked content from the WikiFa home page but another good admin Huji helped to avoid this censorship. I appreciated Huji. the polling page.

This is the reason of "conflict of interest". مهرنگار in another article fa:آزاده نامداری (Azade Namdari) removed another source I had another appeal of مهرنگار in ANB as Wikipedia:Harassment (because same as the Saeed Toosi this was another controversial news about Azade Namdari who was the symbol of Hijab in Iran who criticizing less-veiled artisits but her video without any veil in public locations in Switzerland drinking beer became hot and viral all over the network but we couldn't add the news to a live-person article). Anyway the last subject ( most important ) was an old article edit ( here ) (PLEASE LOOK THE SOURCES BBC , WIKILEAKS , presidency.ucsb.edu and .....) but the user سیمرغ was deleting all sources without any talk about the bbc or California university. So I waited some weeks or one month for him to calm down the controversy and I added the sources again and I reminded the WP:Is not a censorship in the talk page. Next Sayid appealed from me in FaANB and there I used لااله‌الاهیولا at the end of my only one comments (my mistype it was one comment there) as a kidding. The admin became bothered and warned me to not use this phrase and I added it to my signature and I have been blocked.

Conclusion if u believe in FSM and you do 3 edits in 24 hours you will be blocked and if you believe in Islam you will not even by 4 edits. If you use there is no god but the monster in your signature you will be blocked but if you use Sayid (the descendant of the prophet) you will be appreciated even if you remove any reliable sources or make a vast WP:Canvassing about the "criticism of Quran" (But if I do I will be blocked immediately). I think it's a good point for Mr.Wales to be careful because he may be blocked too :D

It is said to "be bold" but the admin asked me why "do you added the news about Azade Namdari to the life person article , if you do similar thing again I will block you" Arjang ارژنگ said in my talk page and I repeated لااله‌الاهیولا. --IranianNationalist (talk) 19:51, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I found the article in BBC about Azadeh Namdari. As far as Google can tell me, the Iranians are doing a sort of censorship that should be familiar from en.wikipedia, where people cite WP:BLP and say that drinking beer abroad is a very serious allegation needing more proof than ... whatever you have. To be strictly fair, the BBC says that "the video shows her" drinking beer, which isn't absolutely precisely saying that she was drinking beer, since the video might be fake, the bottle might have been carefully washed and refilled with apple juice, it might be near beer or non-alcoholic beer (not that I have any idea if that is legal in Islam anyway)... they didn't give us a brand name. That said, obviously the allegation is notable WP:WELLKNOWN anyway. The BBC cites Young Journalists' Club [2] - I don't know if they have the video up because there's no way I'm enabling scripts on an Iranian site just to see a video I won't understand a word of, but if someone is feeling brave do tell us. Wnt (talk) 00:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my late answer, I just wanna to add two notes : The text I added to Azadeh Namdari's article was not about drinking beer but it was about her veil (after the photos and after Namdari's replying video there was another VIDEO from her in the public park having no veil https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0wNO0Zf5_8 is any thing unclear? ) BUT the Note2 this is not the reason of blocking me because I had only one edit there talking about her veil not her drink. But the actual trace of the FaANB the sources of Iran Revolution 1979 were completely reliable :

1. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=39296
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vs4d8_cElE&feature=youtu.be (The relative video about the above source)
3. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2002/carter-facts.html
4. http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/35-years-ago-an-iranian-revolution-thanks-to-jimmy-carter

BUT the appeal caused me to be block is that I said DON'T CENSOR THESE SOURCES
Another note is that I advocate for democracy and democrats (not as a party member but as someone attracted to the most of their slogans also their Freemason and secular roots) so if my edits in fa:انقلاب_۱۳۵۷_ایران had some problem I should not criticize Jimmy Carter (from a democratic party).
BUT ANYWAY CLEARLY THE REASON OF BLOCK WAS NOTHING MORE THAN MY SIGNATURE. (it is clear in HERE FaANB by ارژنگ admin)

This was my old huge edit in fa article of freemasonry thanked by an old good admin so it's impossible for me to be partial in the article revolution 1979. Ow I forgot to change my signature same as wikifa (Should I be blocked in WikiEn now? I don't think so) --No god but the monster (Welcome) 07:27, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are pushing a boundary here. Wikipedia should always avoid censorship, but at the same time it is defined by its purpose. Spamming a five-page essay about your politics in every signature would not be allowed, no matter what your politics. The purpose of a signature is basically to identify the editor - any random personal flair added is an indulgence. Personally, I am skeptical of even allowing editors to alter the text displayed by the signature, since it leads to endless confusion and a need to hunt back to see the real username to ping, for example.

You're pushing for a right to say "no god but the monster" on every post, so I have to ask: what do other religious zealots get away with on Iranian Wikipedia? I mean, do you see a lot of signatures like "no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet"? Are there signatures like "death to the infidel" or Sunnis or Christians or whatever? What is their existing limit?

On English Wikipedia, WP:Signature guides signatures; in one of the earlier sections it references WP:Username policy, which prohibits usernames (and hence signatures) that offend other contributors, making harmonious editing difficult or impossible; e.g., by containing profanities or referencing controversies, or seem intended to provoke emotional reaction ("trolling"). I think this policy is overly subjective and detailed; for example, I can't really predict whether it would be applied against your signature here or not. I think the more restrictive policy I suggested above would be less censorious by being more predictable. Wnt (talk) 09:57, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for having a rational talking (nowadays it is rare in wikifa). About the first note, as it is clearly visible in my talk page my signature was same as my username since I'm in wiki but I suggest to redirect the first note to "purpose of a signature is basically to identify the editor" to User:Sa.Vakilian having signature of Sayyid (He's trying to spam his politics in his signature) (You asked about "other religious zealots" simply they are doing this now there is no difference between "Sayyid" and "no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet". Additionally the لااله‌الاهیولا is shorter than the English version too same as سید). About the second note too : Sayyid is controversial and in opposite to "containing profanities or referencing controversies, or seem intended to provoke emotional reaction" Sayyid means some people are descendant of Muhammad so having a higher rank against others (Arabicly :D Sayyid means Sir thus سیدی means "My sir"). There are some questions :

1. What is the discrimination between Sayyid and FSM?
2. More important : Should admins ask him to change his signature before blocking him?
3. How many days he must be blocked due to using Sayyid as his signature?

• Also there is an important note about : "Wikipedia should always avoid censorship, but at the same time it is defined by its purpose. Spamming a five-page ...". It is about mixing TWO ABSOLUTELY DIFFERENT SUBJECTS we must be moderated in our personal user accounts (Sayyid must be too) but it doesn't mean to CENSOR articles such as criticism of Quran or the sources of revolution 1979.

So What should admins do with a user (or some users are increasing in their numbers) always they try to remove (CENSOR) OR SIMPLY VANDAL in Wikipedia? During the year 2016, I had multiple appeals in this Mr. Wales talk page (More appeals in FaANB) about the users vandalizing to censor articles but admins just don't even warn them to avoid vandalism but some admins such as مهرنگار or ارژنگ even support them. If we don't control the vandalizers other users will do similar such as a nuclear bomb in articles (Thanks the monster I always showed the problems using the talk pages because if we don't respect to the law it is time-wasting to contribute to Wiki). I appealed about the discrimination multiple times (and no one consider) seemingly the WikiPolicies are only for the non-Muslim users if so ... say us to avoid contribution and we don't waste time to be easily censored. ONLY ONE CLEAR SAMPLE OF CENSORSHIP HAD NO ADMIN REACTION IN ANB : search in the page for the link http://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-features-38152216 and similar sources such as http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=39296 in those two sections of the article) :

1. Sample1
2. Sample2

There are many other samples in other articles but Why I used this article? because this article was the subject of the appeal by Sayyid just used to say that IranianNationalist misused censorship so IranianNationalist must be block and for this reason I said no god but the monster. SO THE CONCLUSION IS THE VANDALIZER IS NOT BLOCKED BUT IranianNationalist IS BLOCKED BECAUSE SAID DON'T CENSOR. --IranianNationalist (Welcome) 07:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of concepts that remain uncovered in non-English wikipedias, as well as vice versa with many concets remaining blank in English. Should wikipedia institute a bot to mass-translate all pages that are covered by more than 10 wikidata articles accross several language pedias? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.64.52 (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bot creation of articles is contentious and individual Wikipedia communities have very different policies on it. Bot translation isn't good enough for article creation yet, and no-one knows when it will be good enough. When it is we need to make some big decisions, and the likely result might not be batch creation of articles but translation on the fly so that when someone searches in language A for a topic they get a translation of the latest version of the article in language B. As for prioritising articles that exist in ten languages, I can see that being easily gamed and not entirely helpful. An article about an obscure sportsperson who played in a sport that is followed in ten languages might have little interest beyond those ten languages. There are other metrics such as common search terms that would be better if we have to prioritise. ϢereSpielChequers 10:58, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@92.2.64.52: Also see MW:Extension:ArticlePlaceholder which is another possible solution, but that must be enabled for that Wiki by someone who handles its configuration for it to work. —PaleoNeonate - 00:44, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... I was told to come here to you after posting in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#How to handel abuse from editors and admins.3F I was honest to god just trying to help, I followed up with what's written below. Whoa stop and everyone calm down. I was in no way stating legal threats, I was pointing out the routes that people choose to go through instead of here or straight to the source. Not in any way threating anyone! I do apologize if anyone found my this as a threat, or whining. I was merly attempting to show people the proper route that's it! Also as I stated on my talk page "just because my username is different then it was in 2011 does not mean that I did not join in 2011. I don't have the slightest clue what my username was that long ago, I don't even remember what all I did yesterday much less 6 years ago! So I had to start from scratch!" I truly apologize for anyone thinking I had melicous intent. There's no need to get offensive and state I'm whining. I'm acting in good faith so please refrain from assuming something different. Thanks for your time2602:306:CD6A:5E30:5A6:A9CB:5002:C4B4 (talk) 05:53, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]