text:
User talk:Poccil/Unverified images

The Humungous Image Tagging Project
Hi. You've helped with the WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

The image tagging project is indeed a worthy goal, but not without its drawbacks. You've picked up on an untagged image that I accidentally orphaned after replacing it with a bigger and tagged version. See User talk:Lee M. Lee M 14:39, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You picked up on ichabod.png. It is a trademark university mascot. Like every other trademark, (airline logos, corporate logo's, university mascots) it appears that they are useable under fair use, but I have no idea how to tag it, so I did the only thing I could. I put "Scanned from university brochure" which was true, and is true, and I don't know what ELSE you want me to put on it. Rick Boatright 16:54, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image tagging--no need to create nonexistent pages
I saw that you created pages for the nonexistent images Image:Irish-Wolfhound-small.jpg; these images were deleted a few months ago and the pages didn't actually exist, so when you went there and insert GFDL, it actually created pages that no longer existed & weren't needed. I'm not quite sure why those images showed up in the list of images needing attention (I'm assuming that's where you found them), but if there's no image on a page, it doesn't need a GFDL! Elf | Talk 00:41, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images
I deleted the images in question, thanks. -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]   03:42, 2004 Dec 10 (UTC)

Also under this topic, I don't know if you had a bot running or something, but you accidentally created a bunch of articles by leaving the "I" off of "Image", so that the filename reads "Mage:Imagename.jpg". I am going to speedy delete these as an obvious mistake. Postdlf 04:38, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi! THanks for letting me know about the unverified image. In the early days of my involvement with WIkipedia, i uploaded a lot of images without worrying too much about tagging them - something i now recognize as a mistake. When I get home, I'll add the appropriate tag - fair use, i think - because i downloaded it from a government source (I think) without any copyright info. attached. David Cannon 05:43, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:Ixelles.png
Hi Peter. This image comes from the French Wikipedia. Thanks. --Edcolins 07:55, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

unv.

 * Image:Iraqibaghdadi.jpg was taken from http://www.davidgalbraith.org/archives/2002_10.html where I couldn`t find any copyright information. It is actually a blog website.

[[User:Avala|Avala| ★ ]] 10:57, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

GFDL tag
Thanks for pointing out that Image:Ims_aerial.jpg had no source tag. Just an oversight; I typically tag all my images as GFDL.

Rdikeman 12:01, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Copyright tags
Sorry, there is no way I can add those tags as long as Wikipedia is so ridiculously slow and as long as I'm unable to save any pages.  17:07, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Your only reaction to my message was to send me another, longer, list of images I uploaded. I had a very similar correspondence some time ago with Infrogmation, and I'm repeating this here:

 * I uploaded most of the images in question in 2002 or so when there were no copyright tags in Wikipedia. At the time I didn't even know the meaning of "fair use" (see, for example, Talk:Sharon Tate). Some of the images I scanned from old books, book covers, cinema programmes, magazines, etc., others I took directly from the Internet. I certainly don't remember today where I got each of those pictures from. Similarly, the copyright status of some images appears vague, even to the uploader, i e me.

 * I'll try my best, but please don't send me another list for the time being. All the best,  09:31, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Image:IronMaidenNumberoftheBeastalbumcover.jpg.jpg
Thanks for bringing Image:IronMaidenNumberoftheBeastalbumcover.jpg.jpg to my attention. This image has been obsolete for a long time; I thought it had already been deleted. I've marked it and put it on the delete page. —Tkinias 18:32, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Images

 * Thanks for your work on this, feel free to add gfdl to any photos, all of the ones I uploaded were taken by me. Mark Richards 19:11, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

For all the images I uploaded I then provided the information that they were created by myself, and a source from which I derived the image, if applicable. Since: "By uploading a file to which you hold the copyright, you agree to licence it under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License," I have implicitly already agreed to this. Thanks. Hyacinth 22:20, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:IngushetiaCoatofArms.png
Hi there! The image was taken from the Estonian article on Ingushetia. I no longer remember where they got it from, I must have merely assumed it was licensed under GFDL (which I cannot guarantee). Currently that Estonian article features a different (and much better) image of the coat of arms, stating it came from geraldika.ru. I do not know whether that would qualify as fair use, so I am leaving the decision up to you. Please let me know what you think, because most of my images (and all of the flags and coats of arms I contributed) were taken directly from Wikipedias in other languages. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 22:22, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Unverified image
That image is a modified version of an image that User:Raquel_Sama posted. WhisperToMe 23:04, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Re: Unverified images.
I do not tolerate negative criticism on my talk page, unless it has to deal with the continuance of my contributions on Wikipedia. I will follow your advice this once, but please stop leaving such messages. Denelson83 23:31, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:Irish coin 1p (1980).jpg
Yes it does have a copyright tag: Template:WorldCoin — OwenBlacker 23:49, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Unverified image
I have been asked by you to provide the licensing information and source for Image:Islamkarimov.jpg. The page already has licensing information and the source. Should I make an image copyright tag for this single image, and put the information that now is on the description page on the tag? Or should I make your work easier by simply lying that it's under CC-BY, because that is the one that comes closest? - Andre Engels 00:08, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ok, I find that there is a tag for it. Still, I find it kind of insulting to be told "Please provide licensing information as soon as possible." when I have already done so!! - Andre Engels 00:10, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Apologies accepted, but please next time look before you leap. I don't know what script you are using, but having you check the current text of the description page before slamming a notice on it would sound like a good idea. If it happens to be a script from the python wikipedia bot, I can give you an improvement in half an hour. - Andre Engels 09:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Indiana_dunes.jpg
''Giving the following message back, as it doesn't seem to be meant for me. This image predates the present upload system, so my edit to its description page apparently was the first. See its Polish equivalent to see if they know. --Brion 01:09, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)''

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

 * Image:Indiana_dunes.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 21:40, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

IgnacyJanPaderewski.jpg
Paderewski was born in 1860. He seems to be less than 40 in the picture. It follows that it was taken before 1900. Is that sufficient to assume the image is not copyrighted? Sir Paul 03:00, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Cut out the spam
You just left me a message about which you felt needed an "unverified" tag. Fix your bot or stop spamming needlessly. Dori | Talk 05:56, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

You need to take better care of your bot/script, since you don't seem to be reviewing the edits it makes (see ). If you allow it to keep running and making mistakes, I will consider this spam and won't hesitate to block it from editing until it is fixed. silsor 06:02, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Dotterel image is from 1905 and hence out of copyright, I've added clarifying comments to the other images you listed too jimfbleak 06:57, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:Dole.jpg

 * The current Image:Dole.jpg image is not mine; My original image is now at Image:Dole (Jura).jpg and is dual-licensed GFDL and CC-By-Sa Donar Reiskoffer 08:14, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:Delta_wye_circ.PNG
I scanned the image myself. You can release it under GFDL. --Prem Vilas Fortran Rara 16:08, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Image Igoware.jpg
I suppose it will need a Fair Use tag as the original source was an image on WP. I have no idea why the original is not there and am now wondering if I updated with the wrong filename back then! --PilotPrecise 22:09, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Image:Igoware.jpg

Image:DiaryofAMadBand.jpg
Poccil, Since I could not find a public domain website that had that cover image, I had to scan the image then upload it to the website. I'm not sure if that would count as free use!

I just wanted to let you know that I've removed the image from the article Diary of A Mad Band.

BigT27 01:16, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)

Non-existent dalamatian pic
Hi, Your bot said at User_talk:Nevilley:

"Unverified images Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

Image:Image:Dalamatian_b_01.jpg I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use gfdl if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, fairuse if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 21:26, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nevilley"

- but in fact this image, with the doubled (Image:Image) tag and the wrong spelling (Dalamatian) does not exist, though the correct version, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dalmatian_b_01.jpg, does and is already GFDL. I think the image:image thing was a bug that emerged after some upgrade, and the spelling was an earlier mistake of mine corrected in May. So at Image:Image:Dalamatian_b_01.jpg there should be nothing. I only mention this in case your bot is doing something you would rather it did not. Regards, ex-user Nevilley.

Pictures
Hello peter, sorry for the inconveniece. These are all Japanese political logo. They were not taken from private websites - rather they were taken from the official website of the political party. I am posting this at myh talk too. =)

Greg

Image:driftmigration02.png is my adaptation of an eexisting wikimap. jimfbleak 06:18, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unverified image

 * Image:Indonesian_presidential_election,_2004.png

The image is originally from Adam Carr, not me. It says that on the page (see the upload comment). — Timwi 13:08, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hiya, re the images below -

 * [[Image:Ipaisley.jpg]]
 * [[media:Dresden.jpg]]
 * [[Image:DukeW 1.jpg]]

The Paisley one comes from the official parliamentary website in Northern Ireland and I believe falls under Fair Use. The other two are simply re-crops or cleaned up versions of photos already on wikipedia. I haven't the foggiest idea where the original ones came from. I simply tried to adapt them (the duke one is a cropped version of a longer photo if I remember properly) or make them cleaner. FearÉIREANN 18:31, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Image:Intlspeedlimit.png - honestly I don't remember exact place where I got it, it was a while ago, I might even created it myself because .png version was hard to find. Sorry, not much help here Vassili Nikolaev 07:22, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

OS-Tan Pictures
Sorry that I didn't notice your message on my user (just found out I get them), anyway, I got the pictures from the OS-Tan Gallery thats noted on the Article (the gallery in Japanese), the picture that I edited is in the All section of the gallery, theres also a note about it on the OS-Tan dicussion page. Here

So I'm not quite sure who made that picture in the first place, but I did make the avatar pics from that picture.

Jim-San

Just in case, User:Anthere/My pictures. By default, when I click on the save button, I also agree with a little text written just below the edit window. All what I do is under gfdl, unless otherwise mentionned. SweetLittleFluffyThing

Images
Please note the note on my discussion page before you want me to put tags on my images. Thanks :-D Earl Andrew 22:54, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I see you've tagged a number of images as speedy delete in the last few hours, but the images you've tagged have had the extension .jpg, and the images I think you mean have the extension .JPG (upper case). I'm deleting the empty image articles you're creating in this process; you may like to tag the images you really want deleted.-gadfium (talk) 01:30, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You also tagged Nehru, a redirect, when you may have meant Image:Nehru & gandhi.jpg.-gadfium (talk) 05:47, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image tag
Hi. I'm currently reviewing tags for art images. I came across a Degas' image tagged as PD by you.

But Degas has passed away less than 100 years ago. So I changed the tag into {PD-art-US} (Another choice is {PD-art-life-70} which I might decide to add later.) If that particular work is released into the public domain by the author, my change was inappropriate. I apologize.

Tomos 13:59, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Laurier photo
I am surprised that you marked Image:Laurier.JPG as nonfreedelete.

This is an old historical photo, in the public domain. See for instance: http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/key/bio.asp?lang=E&query=1876&s=M

Image:Largesovietflag2.PNG
Well, apparently it's no longer used in any articles, so you can IfD it if you want. In all honesty, I don't remember where I got it from, but it of course is public domain. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 07:09, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

About Inuyasha's relationship guide image
I made that guide myself so anyone can use it if want to. It's not under any copyright and I got most of the little pics from Inuyasha calendar 2004 and episodes screenshots. You can do whatever you want on that image or page, like some people already did. User:Raquel Sama

images
I've tagged image:Lammer.JPG, and I've added the source of image:lappetvult.jpg. I don't know what tag the latter should have though, perhaps you could add that, please. jimfbleak 07:01, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

 * Image:Large_hailstone.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,  if you wish to release your own work to the public domain,  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 21:25, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Hi Poccil

I am pretty certain that I have not uploaded this picture to the english Wikipedia. But - I think I did found the site where the picture comes from. I found it, when I used the picture on the danish Wiki. I have put the site on the page and it contains copyrigt information. My username is there because I made a link to the danish wiki uploaded picture!

It is the automated conversionscripts fault that the original user, that uploaded it, can not be found.

Glenn 09:11, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Poccil/Unverified images


text: Talk:Qing official headwear

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Qing official headwear


text:
Talk:Newsboy cap

Brian Johnson of AC/DC is refered to in the flat cap page with a valid citation as wearing a flat cap, not a newsboy cap — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.2.87 (talk) 05:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

"It has the same overall shape and stiff peak" as WHAT? This needs to be clarifiedMalnova 21:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Chavs
Is this term appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.211.199.86 (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Fisherman's Cap
I noticed that the fisherman's cap is lumped into this article. Is this correct? The fisherman's cap has a distinct band which the newsboy cap lacks. As the fisherman's cap is somewhat of an icon of socialism and quite distinctive, shouldn't it get its own article?

The article also characterizes the newsboy cap as having a stiff peak. Shouldn't the word 'visor' be used as this cap is more traditionally American? It is obviously a close relative of the British flat cap but does have some minor distinctions. It seems that the American cap is more often paneled with a button on the crown while the British cap is, as the name suggests, usually constructed with a single piece of cloth comprising the crown and is, well, flat. It may just be that the articles need to be merged and the (minor) differences discussed there.--SEWalk (talk) 04:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Newsboy cap


text:
Talk:Chador

Untitled
Could we get a less mime-like image perhaps? Sherurcij 06:57, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Is there some reason the word Shador redirects here? Is that a common misspelling of this garment or something? I had no idea that my intarweb name had any meaning whatsoever. Shador5529 15:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

 * and a long overcoat (jilbab or manteau) became compulsory for total coverage.

The jilbab is worn over the chador? AxelBoldt 22:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, fixed article
No, so far as I know it's either chador or manteau, but not both. Jilbab is associated with Sunni Salafis, not Shi'a. Someone who was confused wrote that.

I added some material about traditional and modern dress for which I could give no references. I should look them up, and perhaps I'll have time later. I don't have any doubt that what I added is true, but it does need refs. Pictures would also be good. For the traditional costume, I can probably find some old Victorian engravings which would be public domain now. Modern pictures ... well, perhaps some Iranians could help. Zora 05:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Chador and manteau are entirely separate things. Women who wear chador do not wear manteau underneath. Chador is worn over regular (supposed to be "modest") clothes. Manteau is for women who don't wear chador. The Chador is also pre-Islamic.

 * Here is a interesting article about chador: http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0011028.html According to this article it is also worn by some Hindus. Here is another one from BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/highlights/010525_iran.shtml

 * This article could use an expert. Khorshid 09:06, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, what I wrote should make it clear that some women wear chador and some women wear scarf and manteau. Perhaps you read that too quickly?

As for the claim that only mullahs and religious people objected to the Pahlavi decree -- I don't think that's right. I've read several places that women who were used to the traditional garment were distressed by having to appear improperly clothed in public. I'm not defending the dang chador -- it must be hot as anything -- but I also think that women should be able to wear what they want, whether it's chadors or hot pants.

 * From what I read was mostly mullahs who made alot of noise. I can see "some" rural and peasant women complaining, but mullahs were definitely the spotlight of the complaints, like when they opposed voting rights for women and letting women into military and police. Chador is actually much cooler than typical manteau especially if light clothes are worn underneath, though for last ten-fifteen years very cool and light (and short) manteaus are allowed and popular. Khorshid 10:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Hindu women do NOT wear chadors. They cover their heads in temples and in the presence of elders, and they do so with the pallu of their sari, or with the dupatta of their salwar kameez. Some Muslim women in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India burqas, which are not at all the same thing as chadors. Entirely different cut. Your source is completely wrong in the assertions re Hindu women.

As for the statement that chadors and manteaus are pre-Islamic -- that's also unsubstantiated. We know that the upper-class Achaemenids and Sassanids secluded their women, and I've found a picture of a woman with a veil wound tightly around her face. But no chadors.

 * Well the source seems legitimate. I have read before that chador is traditional Persian clothing from long before Muslim invasion, like the history of mullahs clothes which dates back to around Sasanian times. Khorshid 10:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I've found an 1885 picture of a woman in a chador, and some quotes from Plutarch and El-Guindi. More can be added to the article. Zora 10:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Plutarch was from pre-Islamic times yes? Khorshid 10:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but he describes women being carried in curtained carriages, not chadors. The Achaemenid picture I found, in Tilke, also shows a scarf rather than a chador. Too bad I can't scan and upload that picture, but copyright ...

If you can come up with some actual pictures or quotes of a pre-Islamic chador (specifically, a long semi-circular veil held closed in front -- not just any veil) then I'll of course change my mind. There's one book on the history of Middle Eastern costume I'd like to consult, but it's out of print, rare, and expensive. Not too many resources on ancient Persian women's clothing. Zora 12:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your good work on the article but I think there a couple of misconceptions, Zora. 1) The picture is a problem because it is not a chador, but a Qajar veil of Turcoman origin. For a period of time they imposed it on women in Tehran and maybe some other places. I'm not sure and I dont have a source. But also the picture is not accurate display of Qajar veil. 2) Chador (and this is important) does not have to be held closed in front. Chador is often left open over headscarf. You must have seen this before. When Shia women pray or women who typically wear chador are in the home (with guests) they leave the chador open. There are a few different ways to wear chador. Holding the black chador closed in front like we see on TV is not the traditional way. It is a complex subject. For a bit of humor, women who wear this style of wearing black chador (held closed tightly) is sometimes mockingly called "moosh-mordeh" (scared like a mouse). I think this style was brought by Khomeini, maybe inspired by the Qajar veil? Khorshid 02:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

More work on article
Korshid, what you say sounds reasonable. In such a large country as Iran, there must be (and must have been) many different styles of hijab. The problem is finding reliable sources of information. I think I've done what I can in English! There are probably more sources in Persian. What we need is a better history of Iranian women's clothing, of hijab, and PICTURES, more pictures. Old ones and new ones. Can you work on this? Do you know anyone who can? Zora 03:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Issue of Manteau under Chador
Although the statement is true at home women do typically ware the chador over the regular modest cloths when they have guests over in public outings and in the workplace women who do ware the chadore typically ware a Manteau underneath.

This is the common practice of the Islamic Republic of Iran and many picturial examples can be found on the net.

Removal of old picture, Plutarch quote
While it's fine to have a more modern picture of a chador, it wasn't necessary to remove the older one. I moved the older picture to the history section.

I also restored the quote from Plutarch. One editor took extreme umbrage at Plutarch's description of the Achaemenids as barbarous -- thereby showing a scanty knowledge of classical history and the English language. The Greeks, like many other groups, considered all non-Greeks to be uncivilized -- they didn't speak properly, in Greek, but spoke languages that sounded like "bar bar" to the supercilious Greeks. Hence "barbarians." The term "barbarian" was adopted by the Romans and from Latin, made its way into English. The Greeks, of course, would have considered the English just another kind of barbarian. The meaning has changed over time. It has always been pejorative, but now it is different sort of pejorative.

We have the quote from Plutarch because, strange as it may seem, much of what we know about the Achaemenids is from Greek sources. Very very few Achaemenid texts have survived. The Greeks, however, having fought and eventually destroyed the Achaemenids, were intensely interested in them, and much of their writing has survived. Throwing out evidence because you don't like the wording used by a Greek historian of 2000 years ago is bizarre. It is very clear that this is Plutarch's statement, and not WP's belief that the Achaemenids were barbarians. It is very relevant to the topic, which is the segregation of the women of the anderun behind walls or veils. Zora 06:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Personally I hate that picture. :) Its an illustration and a wrong showing of Qajar style veil. Its like a bizarre caricature of the real thing. I suggest to remove as soon as a true photo can be found because in a way this is POV. Khorshid 09:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I can scan some old photos from one of my history books (they're old enough to be public domain) but they're very fuzzy, very bad quality. Zora 09:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I suggest we wait until we can find fair quality photos. :) I tried to find a source for the history showing differences between styles but so far I havent seen anything. There is tho a history preservation website from the Iranian government that has a ton of photos so if I can find that link there is a good chance we can get some good public domain images there. The last time I saw it it was mostly just pictures of Shah and ppl from his government so I dont know if they have anything older. Khorshid 09:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

What do you think of this picture? Zora 10:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I have no objections but your right. Its not too clear. BTW is the Qajar chador really chador or is more proper as simply "veil"? The book calls it a chador? Khorshid 23:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, book calls it a chador. The picture is from the time of Nasr-ed-din -- those are court ladies on horseback. The pictures in the book are mostly family photos from the court, and in the pictures women are wearing headscarves but no chador. That's in the house. Outside the house nothing shows but the eyes. The book I have, Crowning Anguish, credits the pictures to Dust 'Ali Khan Mo'ayyer al-Mamalek, Yad-dashtha-'i az zendagi-ye khosusi-e Naser al-Din Shah, Tehran, 1983, so if you can find that book, it may have more pictures.

History
The history section seems to be more about history of veiling in Iran rather than chador, perhaps that should be sub-sectioned to highlight this? Regards, --Rayis 10:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Chador is not exclusive of Iranian women?
if you have seen news from Iraq, you can see that many Iraqi women also wear a black veil that only shows their face and hands, isn´t that chador???Lithop 22:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I too was taken aback by this; is this really a fact or is it a sub-fact of a garment worn throughout much of the Arab work...I have even seen it worn in New York and believe it is worn in Afganistan. I came here looking to refresh my memory about an old L&L postcard. Certainly if Iranian women are among those who wear the garment they they should be added as a list as part of other countries.

By throwing Iraqi into the mix the definition of a the garment is concentrated into a part of the definition where the definition is much more generic (a full body covering garment, perhaps with slits for eyes), or am I confused? Worn in a part of the world where the sun is very bright and concentrated in certain religions. But the lead should be as generic as possible, and we are talking about the lead sentence here. [Rosebush]

Buibui
Can someone knowledgeable make a stub or redirect for buibui? It's possibly the same garment? See. Stevage 05:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

POV problems
This edit urgently needs evaluation. It introduced a pro-Islamist and anti-Shah POV not previously present in the article, and not supported by the quotes cited. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 14:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

What happened here?
Older revisions of the article have a picture - are people here saying Wikimedia Commons doesn't have one picture of a woman really wearing a bona fide chador? I'm not qualified to assess the precise fashion details myself, but that seems very unlikely. Wnt (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

updated
I've fixed some things in this article which are quite off-target! I am in Iran often and I wear chador, there and overhead abaya here in the USA and am of Persian background and I can tell you, whomeever wrote the last update was a little off target! The chador is worn by all Iranian women regardless of religious background, both sunni and shia women wear it. Its considered a Persian cultural form of hejab so yes, you dont see as many Arab Iranians or Baloochi Iranians wearing it, but some do although most wear their own cultural types of overgarments such as the overhead abaya by the Arab Iranians. Also saying that women in S. tehran wear chador for cultural reasons is a bit presumptive. My family hails from central Iran and there many women wear it for a variety of reaosns...yes some are cultural, others are religious. Its improper to be presumptive! Also before the Revolution most Iranian women of Persian background outside of the upper classes in the cities wore the chador on a daily basis. It did not go away and the revolution did not really revive it as most women wore it in their daily lives. It was really just the upper class, urban women who discarded covering and wore western clothing...again...presumptive. -Madar-e-Ebrahim, Feb 29, 2012, 9am.

More updating
About my recent edits:
 * Quote from Plutarch is removed because it's irrelevant by all means. It's quoted from Briant's History of Persian Empire (p. 284.) which doesn't deal with clothing but about existance of concubines and harems. Author is very doubtful about Greek sources (beside it, Plutarch lived 400 years after described period) and reject claims of segregation, but even if it's true it has nothing to do with clothing, only perhaps purdah.
 * Islam-related categories, portals and similar doesn't belong here. Both historically and geographically, chador belongs to both pre-Islamic and Islamic periods and only to Iranian World.
 * Claims like "There is no pictorial evidence for the chador before Islamic times" or "there's evidence for veiling but not chador" are nonsense. Reliable sources as Iranica show both pictorial evidence from Achaemenid period descibed as chador, and references about chadors in Ancient Zoroastrian Pahlavi texts (6th century) . Any further babbling about "mullahs", "pro-Islamist" and "anti-Shah" edits is ridiculous. Irony in all story is that older Pahlavi has banned garments dated from Achaemenids (even worn by ancient shahs) for the purpose of "invoking glorious ancient identity". More irony can be see from above because such charlatan claims (about "Islamic/Arabic" chador) even today comes from self-represented "modern" and "educated" Iranians who actually have no clue about own history and culture. --HistorNE (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

pic of young girl of Ahwaz
that pic is not Chador, it is Arabian Chador (i mean Abaa).so i change it.Sonia Sevilla (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Chadori.jpg

title: Talk:Chador


text:
Microcosm (CERN)

Microcosm or CERN Museum was an interactive exhibition presenting the work of the CERN particle physics laboratory and its flagship accelerator the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). It first opened to the public in 1990 and closed permanently in September 2022, to be replaced by the Science Gateway in 2023. The final version of the exhibition opened in January 2016, developed by CERN in collaboration with Spanish design team Indissoluble.

History
The project was approved by the CERN Directorate in February 1988. The initial construction, to a large extent completed in 1989, was financed through contributions from the Canton of Geneva, the Swiss Confederation, neighbouring France, banks, and industrial firms.

Main exhibits
The exhibition displayed many real objects, taking visitors on a journey through CERN's key installations, from the hydrogen bottle, source of the protons that are injected into the LHC, through the first step in the accelerator chain, the linac, on to a model of a section of the Large Hadron Collider including elements from the superconducting magnets. Visitors could interact with the displays to try their hand at the controls of a particle accelerator – simulating the acceleration of protons in the LHC and bringing them into collision inside the experiments.

The exhibition contained a 1:1 scale model of a complete slice through the CMS experiment at the LHC. The computing section displayed some of the Oracle data tapes used to store the 30-40 petabytes of data produced yearly by the experiments, made available for analysis using the LHC Computing GRID. The annex to the exhibition contained other historical artifacts such as the central tracker from the UA1 detector, which ran at the Super Proton Synchrotron at CERN from 1981 to 1984, and helped discover the W and Z bosons.

Special projects
A project began in 2013 to preserve the original hardware and software associated with the birth of the World Wide Web. Some of the original code resides on Tim Berners-Lee's NeXT Computer in the CERN museum and has not been recovered due to the computer's status as a historical artifact. This effort coincided with the 20th anniversary of the research center giving the web to the world.

Microcosm garden
The Microcosm garden is named Léon Van Hove Square in honour of CERN's Research Director-General from 1976 to 1980. The garden features several large components of old CERN experiments.

Location
Microcosm was located at CERN in the Canton of Geneva, Switzerland, near the town of Meyrin. Entrance was free, without reservation, open 6 days a week.

title: Microcosm (CERN)