User talk:Burtigin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Burtigin, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 03:03, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages (including user talk pages) such as Talk:Zazas ‎ are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. They are not for general discussion about the article topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Semsûrî (talk) 16:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello, I'm Maddy from Celeste. I noticed that you recently removed content from Adıyaman without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. |Madeline. 21:01, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Iranian dynasties and countries. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 19:34, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About your sources[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you posted a comment here, explaining your edits by linking to this website. I don't speak Turkish, but even from a quick glance on Google-translated version, it's pretty obvious that etnikce.com is neo-Ottoman, pan-Turkist propoganda website. So it's not even close to WP:reliable source, and can't be used to determine Kurdish population in Turkey or any other country. I hope you understand why you shouldn't use sources that call Thessaloniki, Batumi, Bahcesaray, Skopje, Nis as Turkish cities (found this BS here). Please read our guidelines about reliable sources and act accordingly. Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 11:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 11:36, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022[edit]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:22, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=1) Cimmerians title: As I wrote in the title of Cimmerians, it is not clear that the Cimmerians are Iranian, this claim stems from the Babylonian notes being called "Gimmera Sakai", but as stated in the Iranica encyclopedia, there are a few problems with it. 1-It is in the encyclopedia that the Cimmerians came to the Near East several centuries before the Scythians, but it is also written in the same encyclopedia that the Scythians adopted the ethnic names of the peoples before them, so it is not clear whether the Scythian-speaking "Cimmerians" in Anatolia were those real Cimmerians. 2-it is also written in the same encyclopedia that the Assyrians separated the Cimmerians from the Scythians. however, they say that the Cimmerians are Iranian people, as a certain information. Besides, is it reasonable to classify the Cimmerian language as Iranian when there is no definite information about the origin of the Cimmerians even under the same title on Wikipedia? 2) Xionites title: If you read the Xionites title, it says that their origin is Turko-Mongol and they later incorporated Iranian peoples, so why are they on the list like pure Iranian people? 3)Zazas title: Although the title states that the Zaza language is different from Kurdish, it is claimed that the Zazas are a Kurdish subgroup, causing the Wikipedia titles to conflict with each other. I am trying to get banned and removed from Wikipedia by some "circles" because I oppose them.}} 

Burtigin (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=I'm going to write and forward an article about the Cimmerians and I have already discussed it with Antiquistik, but he accepts some information in the Encyclopedia as correct and does not want to accept others.But the Babylonian records that put the Scythians and the Cimmerians together can be considered correct, but the various ancient Greek sources (Strabo is just one example) that put the Thracians and Cimmerians together are not. That's why I'm going to submit the article I'm going to write to another authority. "In contrast to the Babylonians, the Assyrians distinguished Cimmerians from Scythians.The only Babylonian text that refers to Sakai is the cuneiform text (CT, no. 93, line 9) from Sippar dated during the reign of Darius I, which mentions a certain Dēmiši as a “Saka” (LÚ sak-ka-a-a; Dandamayev, 1992, p. 70)." If it is not clear that the Cimmerians are Thracian, it is also not clear that they are Iranian}} [[User:Burtigin|Burtigin]] ([[User talk:Burtigin#top|talk]]) 09:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) You have opened two unblock requests, but administrators will only look at one. Please merge them together and delete the extraneous request. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me | Contributions). 09:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1) Cimmerians title: As I wrote in the title of Cimmerians, it is not clear that the Cimmerians are Iranian, this claim stems from the Babylonian notes being called "Gimmera Sakai", but as stated in the Iranica encyclopedia, there are a few problems with it. 1-It is in the encyclopedia that the Cimmerians came to the Near East several centuries before the Scythians, but it is also written in the same encyclopedia that the Scythians adopted the ethnic names of the peoples before them, so it is not clear whether the Scythian-speaking "Cimmerians" in Anatolia were those real Cimmerians. 2-it is also written in the same encyclopedia that the Assyrians separated the Cimmerians from the Scythians. however, they say that the Cimmerians are Iranian people, as a certain information. Besides, is it reasonable to classify the Cimmerian language as Iranian when there is no definite information about the origin of the Cimmerians even under the same title on Wikipedia? 2) Xionites title: If you read the Xionites title, it says that their origin is Turko-Mongol and they later incorporated Iranian peoples, so why are they on the list like pure Iranian people? 3)Zazas title: Although the title states that the Zaza language is different from Kurdish, it is claimed that the Zazas are a Kurdish subgroup, causing the Wikipedia titles to conflict with each other. I am trying to get banned and removed from Wikipedia by some "circles" because I oppose them. Ağustos 2022 This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed: Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • filter log • creation log) Request reason: 1) Cimmerians title: As I wrote in the title of Cimmerians, it is not clear that the Cimmerians are Iranian, this claim stems from the Babylonian notes being called "Gimmera Sakai", but as stated in the Iranica encyclopedia, there are a few problems with it. 1-It is in the encyclopedia that the Cimmerians came to the Near East several centuries before the Scythians, but it is also written in the same encyclopedia that the Scythians adopted the ethnic names of the peoples before them, so it is not clear whether the Scythian-speaking "Cimmerians" in Anatolia were those real Cimmerians. 2-it is also written in the same encyclopedia that the Assyrians separated the Cimmerians from the Scythians. however, they say that the Cimmerians are Iranian people, as a certain information. Besides, is it reasonable to classify the Cimmerian language as Iranian when there is no definite information about the origin of the Cimmerians even under the same title on Wikipedia? 2) Xionites title: If you read the Xionites title, it says that their origin is Turko-Mongol and they later incorporated Iranian peoples, so why are they on the list like pure Iranian people? 3)Zazas title: Although the title states that the Zaza language is different from Kurdish, it is claimed that the Zazas are a Kurdish subgroup, causing the Wikipedia titles to conflict with each other. I am trying to get banned and removed from Wikipedia by some "circles" because I oppose them. Notes: In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator. Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time. Burtigin (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC) This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed: Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • filter log • creation log) Request reason: I'm going to write and forward an article about the Cimmerians and I have already discussed it with Antiquistik, but he accepts some information in the Encyclopedia as correct and does not want to accept others.But the Babylonian records that put the Scythians and the Cimmerians together can be considered correct, but the various ancient Greek sources (Strabo is just one example) that put the Thracians and Cimmerians together are not. That's why I'm going to submit the article I'm going to write to another authority. "In contrast to the Babylonians, the Assyrians distinguished Cimmerians from Scythians.The only Babylonian text that refers to Sakai is the cuneiform text (CT, no. 93, line 9) from Sippar dated during the reign of Darius I, which mentions a certain Dēmiši as a “Saka” (LÚ sak-ka-a-a; Dandamayev, 1992, p. 70)." If it is not clear that the Cimmerians are Thracian, it is also not clear that they are Iranian please consider the last post, I combined the two

Decline reason:

This is wildly abusive. You had three (!!!) open unblock requests. One at a time, please. And this is just a WP:WALLOFTEXT, amounting to just short of 1000 words. I'm declining this unread. If you are unable to make your case in 100 words, there's no reasonable chance anyone will consider unblocking you. See WP:GAB for some suggestions. Yamla (talk) 10:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The sources shown that the Cimmerians are Iranian are from Encyclopedia Iranica, but there is no such phrase in Encyclopedia."As the Cimmerians cannot be differentiated archeologically from the Scythians, it is possible to speculate about their Iranian origins. In the Babylonian texts (according to D’yakonov, including at least some of the Assyrian texts in Babylonian dialect) Gimirri and similar forms designate the Scythians and Saka, reflecting the perception among inhabitants of Mesopotamia that Cimmerians and Scythians represented a single group (D’yakonov, 1981, pp. 118ff.; Dandamayev, pp. 95-105). Unfortunately, the proposed etymologies of the names of Cimmerian kings—­Teušpa, Tug/k/Dúg/k-dam-mì-i, and Sa-an-dak-KUR-ru (read Sandakšatru?)—are not completely reliable, though they could be Iranian (D’yakonov, 1981, pp. 112 n. 20, 116-17 n. 30; cf. Mayrhofer, pp. 187ff.). The ingenious etymology proposed for the ethnonym itself, from Iranian *gāmīra-/*gmīra- “mobile unit” (D’yakonov, 1981, pp. 131-32), cannot be verified, but no other satisfactory suggestion has been put forward." the encyclopedia don't talk about a definite judgment, on the contrary, it talks about one of the possibilities, there are explanations about the possibility of not being there,activate so that I can show with proof about title

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 20:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My request was denied by some circles because I denied that the sources shown on the Cimmerians page conflicted with the information given (the Cimmerians are Iranian), and despite warning about false information, they were rejected by the authorities named Antiquistik and Historyofiran because it was not suitable for their political views. The sources shown are inconsistent with the information written in Wikipedia, my account was banned by some circles because I said this, I demand the necessary action.

Decline reason:

Well, at least this one's short enough to finish reading before Christmas. However, ranting about other people and "demanding the necessary action" is a sure way to not get unblocked. If you keep up like this we will revoke access to the page so we don't have to deal with this anymore. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:26, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Burtigin (talk) 21:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Aug 31, 2022[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

You asked me to briefly describe the event, so I did, that's why I was blocked.The sources shown on the page and the information written contradict each other, I was blocked for arguing for changing it and then reverting the changes in the discussion thread

Decline reason:

Unfortunately, you've not addressed the reasons for your block Please describe how your edits merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you'd make. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Burtigin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will simply tell you, While the source shown in the title of Cimmerians does not contain any information that they are definitely Iranian, it is written in the title as if it is certain that the Cimmerians spoke Iranian language. They say that the reason for this is that the names of the kings of the Cimmerians are generally explained in Iranian languages ​​and that the most convincing theory is that. But we do not see the Huns being recorded as a definite Turkic people, although the most convincing theory about their origin in the same title Huns is that they were Turks. Then, according to the most convincing theory, if we say Cimmerians are Iranian, then a Wikipedia page should be edited for Huns as Turks. I was blocked because I was against it, that is, because the sources and the ones on the Wikipedia page are inconsistent. For this reason, please activate my account, if you are not going to activate it, edit the Cimmerians page as I said. Burtigin (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's not why you were blocked. Since you don't seem to be hearing us, I am declining this request and removing talk page access. When you are prepared to actually tell us why you were blocked, you may use WP:UTRS for further appeals. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Friendly advice[edit]

(Non-administrator comment) Your block was about behavior, not content. If you wish to be unblocked, I suggest you address the behavior, as per the guide to being unblocked. —Matuko (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have written in detail about behavior before, I edited it, but it was withdrawn, they cannot claim that I used profanity, insults, hate speech because there is no such thing.

They just blocked me because they didn't like me to warn that the source and the content don't match. 

Burtigin (talk) 22:59, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Burtigin&oldid=1108424460"