User talk:Golden

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an article, file or the talk page of an article or file. If you find this page on any site other than the Wikimedia Commons you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than the Wikimedia Commons itself. The original page is located at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Golden.

This is the user talk page of Golden, where you can send messages and comments to Golden.

• Be polite.
• Be friendly.
• Assume good faith.
• No personal attacks.

• Please sign and date your entries by clicking on the appropriate button or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
• Put new text under old text.
• New to Wikimedia Commons? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers as soon as possible.
• Click here to start a new topic.

Categories and subcategories

Hello @CuriousGolden: please, when you upload your pictures: Is it in the correct subcategory? In that case DO NOT put it in the higher category, too. Is it in the cat of the city? Please, do not put it in the category Rayon, too. (Maybe another special cat would be possible. For instance the type of structure.) Thank you for following Tozina (talk) 18:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Tozina: Hi. Thank you for clarifying, I've had problems with realizing what categories to include for a while. Sorry that I've created a mess for you. CuriousGolden (talk) 18:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Update map

Hi, can you update this map with Karabakh? File:Turkic Language map (without descriptions).svg --Jelican9 (talk) 06:10, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hi there. Can you edit create and upload maps of new Economic Regions of Azerbaijan. Link of info about new economic regions (in azerbaijani). I can translate if u wont understand. Wish u can do it :) Thanks -Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 10:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dr.Wiki54: Hello! Sorry for the late response. I've completed 2 maps (one with labels and one without) for the new economic division. You can find them here and here. Don't hesitate to use it on Wikipedia. I'll try to update and upload individual coloured maps of each of the regions pretty soon as well. Cheers. CuriousGolden (talk) 16:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I am so thanksfull to you! Waiting for new individual maps :):):):) - Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dr.Wiki54: I've completed the individual maps as well. You can find them on my user page here. Cheers! CuriousGolden (talk) 22:23, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Hope a good day for u!😊 - Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 10:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Idioma Azerbaijani

Hi. Sorry, this user is corrupting this map.--5.134.160.251 11:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@5.134.160.251: I've reverted the changes. Thanks for letting me know. CuriousGolden (talk) 11:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Historical maps of Azerbaijan

Hi. Please look here. Apparently, this user has a personal problem with the Azerbaijanis and does not hesitate to do anything to damage the historical or current maps of Azerbaijan. Please do not ignore this person. Thank you.--37.137.1.95 17:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Were you not banned on Wiki?

You're back here? Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, good to see you again :) I'm banned only on the English Wikipedia for suckpuppeting (which I regret), I still continue my work on other projects, like here in Commons. CuriousGolden (talk) 12:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Help

Salam. Bu fayl Bozqurd simvolunu təhqir etmək üçün yaradılıb. Həm də bu istifadəçinin fəaliyyətinə nəzər salsanız, ümumiyyətlə türklərlə şəxsi problemi olduğunu görəcəksiniz. Zəhmət olmasa bu faylı silmək və bu istifadəçini qeyri -müəyyən müddətə bağlamaq istəyi barədə idarəçilərə məlumat verin.2.190.54.220 23:12, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Idioma azerí.png

Sorry, a user reverted this image to a poor quality version.94.24.95.244 13:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Prezidentin saytından olan fotolar

Salam. president.az saytından şəkilləri yükləyəndə mənbə kimi sırf şəkillərin öz səhifəsini göstərin, sadəcə president.az səhifəsini yox. Göstərilən mənbədə həmin şəkillər olmayanda şəkillər silinə bilər. --Interfase (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Salam, bildim. Çox sağolun. CuriousGolden (talk) 20:11, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotions

Quality Image Promotion Notifications

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maralgol lake with the Kapaz mountain in the background.png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. Mild haze reduction will enhance the distant mountains. While not mandatory, it is good to include EXIF data so viewers can see the camera settings etc. --Tagooty 14:49, 3 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:36, 6 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Murovdagh - View from the Omar Pass.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Halavar 13:14, 6 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mausoleum in Damirchilar village of Qubadli District, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support The resolution is very low but I guess that it is still a QI --Poco a poco 21:16, 6 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruined home in the city of Qubadli.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 00:10, 8 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zar village, Azerbaijan 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 00:10, 8 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Road leading up to Zar village, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dəmirçi village, Shamakhi, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Please, get rid of the door on the left and the cars on the right --Poco a poco 11:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC) @Poco a poco: Done! CuriousGolden 13:54, 8 October 2021 (UTC)  Support Much better, looking again at it I'm not sure about the tilt, can you please, have a look? --Poco a poco 11:19, 9 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ağcakənd village, Kalbajar, Azerbaijan 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments * Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 14:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ağcakənd village, Kalbajar, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments * Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 14:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruined village of Khanlig in Qubadli District, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments * Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 14:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Qubadli city 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 17:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Destroyed home in Damirchilar village of Qubadli District, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --GRDN711 12:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:25, 13 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Map of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic.png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Detailed ethnic map of Nagorno-Karabakh before the First Karabakh War (with legend).png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruined memorial spring in Damirchilar village of Qubadli District, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Please, one cat about the subject --Poco a poco 17:09, 13 October 2021 (UTC)  Done CuriousGolden 17:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --George Chernilevsky 19:04, 13 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lake Göygöl.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 12:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kurmukhi church, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}} --QICbot (talk) 05:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red kurdistan 1923 1929.png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 09:13, 14 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Destroyed bridge in Khanlig, Azerbaijan 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 09:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tutqun river near Zülfüqarlı village, Kalbajar, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 09:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:44, 17 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! İmanbinəsi village, Azerbaijan 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments No metadata (EXIF-data) available. --F. Riedelio 06:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 21:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! İmanbinəsi village, Azerbaijan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 11:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC) Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Urmia Khanate.png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Steindy 13:06, 18 October 2021 (UTC) --QICbot (talk) 05:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Where is the Martuni province category in the oak image

I don't see it. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:57, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Tnrji has Category:Skhtorashen, which in itself is a subcategory of Category:Municipalities in Martuni (province) and that is a subcategory of Category:Martuni (province). So, Tnjri is already within "Martuni (province)"'s subcategories. Golden (talk) 11:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Drmbon, Nagorno-Karabakh

It's de facto in Artsakh so should use the name used by the actual residents - Drmbon. Why are you imposing Azeri names (spare me de jure stuff). Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Where did you get the "it's de facto Artsakh, so it should use its name"? Just because you moved the page on enwiki without any discussion, even though there was already an extensive discussion about it previously that had ended in "No Consensus", doesn't mean it needs to follow on Commons. All villages de jure in Azerbaijan (can't spare the most important thing in the whole conflict just because you don't like it) use Azerbaijani names on Commons for consistency. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 14:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

All populated areas in Artsakh that are still under the de facto control of the government of Artsakh now have Anglicized names. Or are on their way to getting them. This is the Wiki consensus. Commons will follow. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

And where exactly did you achieve this consensus? You've just been moving all names, common name or not, into Armenian names without any discussion. If you achieve a consensus with the community on enwiki for this change, then sure, Commons might follow. But right now you haven't even opened a discussion about these changes. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 14:58, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I know an easy way to achieve consensus - just create a load of socks. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:00, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

That's one way to do it, sure.^(sarcasm) Do inform me if you achieve that consensus, with whatever way you try. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 15:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Laurel Lodged: After rechecking the Commons policy, I've learned that the reason for your move being valid/discussed or not is irrelevant. So you can move Heyvali category back to Drmbon. Do remember though that disambiguating all of the villages with ",Nagorno-Karabakh" is unnecessary if no such village exists with that name anywhere else in the world (i.e. just "Drmbon" would be fine). — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 21:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Are you active on Azerbaijani Wikipedia

If so, could you nominate https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eablon:%C4%B0stifad%C9%99%C3%A7i_Anti_LGBT for deletion? It’s clearly just meant to spread hate, but I don’t speak Azerbaijani at all. Dronebogus (talk) 15:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dronebogus - I'm not very active on it, but I do edit Azerbaijani Wikipedia occasionally. I would nominate the userbox for deletion but half of the azwiki users who use it are admins, so I imagine that it'd likely not be deleted. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 15:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

NTM

Dear Golden, is there any valid reason for this edit? I'm not saying that I'm 100% right or you're 100% wrong, but as far as I remember from searching scholarly articles about that "national" organization:

• it's actually a one-man show, led from the Netherlands
• it has "handful" or "dozens" of followers
• their leader was paid by Armenia to hold anti-Azerbaijani conferences and giving anti-Azerbaijani statements for media

Therefore I believe that removed category should stay. To treat that organization as something serious, as Scottish separatism or even Lega Nord, is out of question. --Orijentolog (talk) 17:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I've already opened a discussion about this on Category talk:National Talysh Movement#Anti-Azerbaijanism. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 17:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

• File:Agdam Tea House, Air view.jpg

And also:

• File:Agdam Tea House, ground view.jpg
• File:Agdam Tea House.jpg

Yours sincerely, Dronebogus (talk) 03:25, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Qara Qoyunlu

Qara Qoyunlularin əhatə ettiyi erazileri gösteren bir xerite ceksez möhteşem olardi Wikipediyadaki coxda gözel deyil. Aydın memmedov2000 (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.png

Can you update Lachin Corridor? Also, you create very good maps! S.G ReDark (talk) 00:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Persian in Azerbaijan and Dagestan

Hi. I reverted your revert to File:Persian Language Location Map.svg. That dot in Azerbaijan must be Tat. Presumably the same reason that Persian is shown as an official language of Dagestan in File:Persian speaking world.svg. I know it looks a bit weird, but on WP-en at least we count Tat as a variety of Persian. Kwamikagami (talk) 03:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: Hello. I know it was Tat, but Azerbaijan no longer has any settlements that speak Tat. They have been assimilated to insignificance. You can read more about it on enwiki: Tat people. According to the article, "The Tat portion of the population of Azerbaijan has shrunk to insignificance, facing assimilation, either through misrepresentation, data manipulation, or simple assimilation."

PS: Even if we were to demonstrate historical Tat presence, the location of that blob would still be entirely incorrect because the Tats were in eastern and north-eastern Azerbaijan, not central. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 07:30, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I'll revert myself. Thanks! Kwamikagami (talk) 16:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

No problem! — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 19:14, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Regarding your edit summaries of "unsourced assumption", the one who is responsible for sourcing is the uploader or the one who claims that the map is accurate. 'Own work' files like this are more like a painting than a map. If you insist that these maps are accurate, provide sources for them first. Regards, HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

@HeminKurdistan: That map isn't completely unsourced, it has cited a CIA source (though not perfect for depiction on the map). Questioning the map's reliability is one thing but straight up calling it "inaccurate" based on your own assumption is another. You're free to add a disputed tag to the maps, but don't call them inaccurate unless you have a source/proof that says so. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 13:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

The CIA map is this (for your information, CIA acknowledges that the map is not authoritative) and at first glance everyone can realize that how much they are different. So that map is completely unsourced. And the duty to prove that a map has a source lies with the uploader, this is the project standard. The assumption is made by the uploader, not the one who tags a file without a source as inaccurate. HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

The absence of a source does not automatically make a file inaccurate. It may make it questionable, which is what the "disputed" tag is for. Your category would've been appropriate if it was named "Unsourced maps of ethnic groups in Iran", not "Inaccurate". — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 13:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Drawing a map

Are you interested in drawing this map (from this source: Robert Rossow, Jr., 'The Battle of Azerbaijan, 1946', Middle East Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Winter, 1956), page 33.)? I think it is historically important especially because it differs from File:Republic of mahabad and iranian azerbaijan 1945 1946.png. HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@HeminKurdistan: Sure, I'll do it when I get the time. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 15:40, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. HeminKurdistan (talk) 15:41, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Controversial image

Hello. Are such images allowed to remain on Wikipedia? Apart from the offensiveness of such images that can make the Wikipedia atmosphere tense, are such images scientific? Or are they informative and helpful to Wikipedia or not? 37.137.8.181 14:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not too familiar with Commons policies regarding this unfortunately. Commons:Help desk might be more useful. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 15:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Naming

Fine, just delete it, no problem. :) Your argument was "check the Google" and its search actually gives ten times more results for Khoda Afarin Dam than Khudafarin Dam. And virtually all results for the later are from Azerbaijani media. FYI, Khoda Afarin Dam is common name in English language for many decades (from early 70s). Native names, either in Azerbaijan or Iran, are not much relevant. For example, just several hours ago I moved an Iranian monument called Naserolhagh to Nasir al-Haqq. I know Naser is more Persian, but that's also irrelevant since there are common English names. I also opened Shatt al-Arab in Iran despite the fact they call it Arvand Rud. Again doesn't matter, because titles are English. I hope you understand. --Orijentolog (talk) 14:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: I did a Wikipedia SET check on the results for Khudafarin bridges before I did the move. I'll make sure to include the results in category talk pages next time to avoid cases like this. The search results clearly prove "Khudafarin" as the common English name for the bridges and the reservoir (it appears only the dam has "Khoda Afarin" as the common English name). Here are the results for the reservoir for your convenience:

All-Google Search:

• "Khudafarin" about 11,200 results
• "Khoda Afarin" about 1,220 results

Google Advanced Book Search:

• "Khudafarin" 197 results
• "Khoda Afarin" 4 results

Google Scholar:

• "Khudafarin" 7 results
• "Khoda Afarin" 28 results

Google News:

• "Khudafarin" 118 results
• "Khoda Afarin" 4 results

Results for bridges:

All-Google Search:

• "Khudafarin" about 40,500 results
• "Khoda Afarin" about 3,070 results

Google Advanced Book Search:

• "Khudafarin" 269 results
• "Khoda Afarin" 219 results

Google Scholar:

• "Khudafarin" 21 results
• "Khoda Afarin" 29 results

Google News:

• "Khudafarin" 1,430 results
• "Khoda Afarin" 6 results

With the exception of Google Scholar, every Google Search has significantly more results for "Khudafarin" than "Khuda Afarin". Based on this, I am asking you to move back the reservoir and bridge categories and files to the "Khudafarin" title. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 15:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Considering bridges in English scholarly literature, in the 20th century "Khuda Afarin" was also common, but "Khoda Afarin" is found more often. It is sometimes written as "Khoda-Afarin" or "Khodaafarin", and you completely excluded the later from your search. The form "Khudafarin" was rare, it started to appear more often since the 90s. Without mentioning bridges, dam or reservoir, Google Advanced Book Search gives Khoda Afarin (586), Khudafarin (262), Khodaafarin (226), Khodafarin (217), Khuda Afarin (89) and Khudaafarin (2). Therefore, forms with "u" and one "a" are indeed more rare. Dam and reservoir should have the same title, and it's clear which form is more often in professional books and Google Scholar. Beside, you give 4 results for "Khuda Afarin Reservoir" but Google Books actually gives 197 results for "Khoda Afarin Reservoir." General Google results are not relevant, as I said virtually all is Azerbaijani English-language media and related to recent conflict. --Orijentolog (talk) 16:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: If we're listing every possible spelling, we can also include "Khudaferin", but we're not because of the fact that none of the spellings you provided yield more results than "Khudafarin" or "Khoda Afarin". We use contemporary common names, not ancient ones, so the fact that "Khudafarin" became more popular after the 1990s has no bearing on the conclusion that it is indeed more common.

Why would you search without mentioning the bridges, dam, or reservoir? Given that there is a county in Iran with the same name (with tens of villages in it), you will naturally obtain more results for Khoda Afarin this way. The misspelling "Khuda Afarin" for the Google Books result was my fault; I apologise. It returns 196 results, which is still fewer than "Khudafarin".

Do you have a valid argument backed by a Commons or Wikipedia policy to support your statements such as "General Google results are not relevant" (when it's the most common method used to identify common names in en.wiki per its own policies) or "Dam and reservoir should have the same title"? Or is it entirely a matter of personal preference? — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 17:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Khoda Afarin, Khoda-Afarin and Khodaafarin are basically the same form, all with "o" and two "a", more common than your proposal (along with its variants). You won't find much results for Khudaferin or other minor variants. Google Books gives fine scholarly books for Khoda Afarin, and for Khudafarin it gives many unprofessional publications. Usage in such works doesn't mean that it became more common, or that other terms are ancient or obsolete. Google Scholar give more results for Khoda Afarin simply because scholars use terms from scholarly works.

For me, it's quite logical that dam and reservoir have the same name, considering all (deeper) relevant publication mention both. I can not understand how can you think that thousand Azerbaijani media articles can be stronger than (even) ten research articles which use the same name from the early 1970s.

And speaking honestly, sometimes here on Commons I do ignore common names. Today's example: Persian Wikipedia have article called Amol Fire Temple, so does English and four others. Most media also call it as fire temple, even early books, but I for it opened category called Shams al-Rasul Mausoleum. Why? Because assumption of fire temple is simply wrong, outdated. --Orijentolog (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

You have failed to provide any actual statistics demonstrating that "Khoda Afarin" or another spelling is more prevalent than "Khudafarin", as I have done above. Simply asserting that scholars use it more without providing evidence isn't going to cut it. The search results being from Azerbaijani, Persian, or any other media is irrelevant to the fact that the majority of English-language media refer to the bridges and dam as "Khudafarin" (+ if you had examined the entirety of the results page, you would've noticed that the majority of the results are not from Azerbaijani media). Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "1970s publications" when both the dam and the reservoir were constructed in 2008.

Your comments so far have demonstrated that your preference for "Khoda Afarin" over "Khudafarin" is clearly based on personal preference rather than any data and policy. It would've been better to state this from the outset rather than wasting both of our time. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 19:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

It's quite obvious that English-language Western academic publishing on uses Khoda Afarin more often, either in Google Books or Google Scholar. It's not hard for me to list it, or for you to check it. Yet, there are very strong sources for Khudafarin also, like R. N. Frye's Cambridge History of Iran (Vol 4), C. Melville's Safavid Persia (I.B. Tauris), and L. W. Adamec's Historical Gazetteer of Iran: Tehran and Northwestern Iran. The "English-language media" you're speaking about is actually Azerbaijani media on English language. Not most, virtually everything, with few exceptions of foreign media quoting Azerbaijani media. I don't understand how can you claim otherwise. If you use such argument around, you'll know what will happen, so better do not. You can mention Frye's work which is indeed one of the most reputable sources. So is Melville's. Anyway, what was the problem for you to ping several editors active in history of that area? As I said before, I have zero issues if I'm not correct, if I see strong arguments backed with sources, I'll rename pages and Wikidata items myself. But you seems to have issue about it. Why? One nice example about personal preferences would be your attempt to rename bridges according to number of arches. Such naming is common in your country, but in Iran they use "Bozorg" (Grand) and "Kuchek" (Small) as official registered names. So, instead of chosing between these two choices, I picked up the neutral version with upper and lower, which can not be wrong. I'm also not wrong about "1970s publications" regarding to the dam, see: Middle East Economic Digest (1972),Engineering News-Record (1976), Arab Oil & Gas (1976), Translations on Near East and North Africa of Joint Publications Research Service (1977). They all speak about Iranian-Soviet plans of dam construction. I don't see this discussion as time wasting, considering results are beautiful. Before our conversation, we had two pages with non-standard naming, without proper categories and infoboxes. And look at them now: Lower Khoda Afarin Bridge & Upper Khoda Afarin Bridge. :) All is organized and referenced, I also put several Azerbaijani variants in Wikidata, and tagged all photos in structural data. Now, if someone search Khoda Afarin Bridge, Khudafarin Bridge or even Onbeşaşırımlı körpü, everything relevant with jump out. --Orijentolog (talk) 13:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

It's evident you haven't been editing en.wiki in a long time if you believe pinging random editors to a discussion is a good idea (I can see why you don't understand the canvassing policy now). The article would already be on a person's watchlist if they were interested in the bridges. All of the nearly 30 people who are following the "Khodaafarin Bridges" article can see the discussion and contribute if they choose.

I don't have a problem with being corrected if it's done with the same quality that I provided by my own search data, which you haven't done so far, only stating vaguely that "books use it more" (which contradicts the actual search result data I provided). And I did not rename the specific bridge articles; rather, I returned them to their original titles and invited you to discuss them prior to move-warring. Yet you disregarded it, changed everything to what you preferred, and filled this thread with walls of text containing anything but the evidence that your preferred name is more common. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 13:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I didn't ping a "random" editor but a person who contributes a lot on Oriental art-related topics here on Commons, also on English Wiki. I know he is a bibliophile and has a tons of fine books, like I do (over 3,000). We discussed before many times. And I didn't call him to back my viewpoint but to give an opinion and possibly correct me. That hardly violates any WP:Canvassing policy, and it can not be said for your pinging Jmabel. But OK, I don't mind it.

I'm repeating it for you in a very friendly way: your suggestions for renaming based on your own search data will always fail in future (if serious editors engage) because tons of media articles are never stronger than academic publishing. Neither are non-scholarly books from Google Books like travelogues, tourist brochures, Shaffer's revisionism, books about literature (which mention Farman Karimzade's Khudafarin korpusu), and similar material. There are very few books, if none, which mention only villages in Khoda Afarin County (referring to your objection above). All of them mention dam or bridges. On the other hand, there are 40 books which mention Farman's work. So when I say "books use it more" it's nothing vague, but a plain fact.

The original title was Khoda Afarin Bridges for ten years, and then some Azerbaijani editor separated it to Azerbaijani preferred individual names, which you call as "original". You don't see the issue about it, but you object to my using neutral and common English names. Very interesting. I also remember at least two attempts to rename Aras Dam to some Araz variant, thus again ignoring the fact it's an international object with common English name. From the history of Khoda Afarin Bridges, I see there was dispute regarding inserting Artsakh, as well as this edits. Truly bizarre from all three sides. I put all pages on watchlist and I assure you nothing similar will pass in future. --Orijentolog (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I'm persian and I'm sure about Khoda Afarin (Persian:خداآفرین). Khoda (Persia:خدا) meaning GOD in persian. Afarin (Persian:آفرین) meaning a creator. We don't have Khuda Afarin (Persian:خودا) in persian! So correct name for this bridge is Khoda Afarin. With regards :--Mehdi^Talk 17:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Mehdi, as I said above, that's not relevant at all. Some English common names may sound foreign for native speakers, but that's no valid reason for changing here. --Orijentolog (talk) 19:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Khoda Afarin has for long been the name of that category and it seems to be the most common transliteration in English language (and as User:Mehdi said, to the name in the language it originated from). I don't see any valid reason for replace it with what online media from the Republic of Azerbaijan tend to write. HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Simply saying it's more common doesn't make it more common. I've already proved above which name is more common both in media and in books. There is no point in engaging in pointless back and forth. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 14:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

It's more common in academic publications and you should trust me about it. Anyway dear Golden, I think you've made a mistake in English intro by separating two names as Azerbaijani and Persian, now people can assume that these two come from different languages and that you cherry-picked up one. In fact, when R. N. Frye uses Khudafarin, it's also from Persian. Analogically, English-language literature also frequently uses Qum instead of Qom, and again, both are from Persian. --Orijentolog (talk) 21:03, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: Do you have any suggestions for how to rephrase it then? — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 21:17, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

'''Khudafarin Bridges''' or '''Khoda Afarin Bridges''' ({{lang-az|Xudafərin körpüləri}}, {{lang-fa|پل خداآفرین}}), are two... --Orijentolog (talk) 21:23, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Done. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 21:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

I apologize for not answering about the dam, I was busy with other topics and also waited Ricky to respond. Anyway, I see no issues since I prefer unification in naming; there are five cats of close sites so IMHO it's better they all have the same name. Xudafərin (Cəbrayıl) and Khoda Afarin County are exceptions, but what can we do... :) --Orijentolog (talk) 07:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

All good! — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 09:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Upper_Khoda_Afarin_Bridge

Upper Khoda Afarin Bridge has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Ricky81682 (talk) 22:19, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Your recent conduct

I think you should apologize for this comment, specifically for expressing disdain and making the dispute personal. I still remember the time when you had my respect for your work. HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I made it personal? Wasn't it you who stated, "That is 'your' preference", when all I was trying to do was to align the map with the source it purportedly originated from? I won't apologise to someone who disregards my edit summaries and blatantly ignores the discrepancy between a file and its claimed source. Please review the source, examine the map, and consider my edit summaries, and then we can talk. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 15:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Azərbaycanın bütün iqtisadi bölgələri üçün location map-lər

Salam. [File:Shaki-Zagatala location map.svg Şəki-Zaqatala], [File:Karabakh location map.svg Qarabağ], [File:East Zangezur location map.svg Şərqi Zəngəzur] üçün yaratdığınız location map-ləri bütün iqtisadi bölgələr üçün yaradıb yükləmək imkanınız varmı? Təşəkkürlər--Gabbani (talk) 18:45, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Salam, Gabbani. Düzəltməyi planlaşdırıram amma təəssüf ki, bu yaxınlarda vaxtım olmayacaq. Ən tezi 3-4 aya hazırlamaq imkanım olacaq. — Golden ^talk 18:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

So you're back at it?

And not even adding the texts that you yourself agreed to? Let alone leaving the simultaneous categories as I suggested and others agreed was not a problem and there are precedents for? I'm taking this back to the pump. RaffiKojian (talk) 04:32, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I haven't created any new categories or altered the descriptions of any existing ones. I've merely added existing categories to files that were previously uncategorised. Is that the issue? — Golden ^talk 05:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)