User talk:Khoikhoi/Archive 25

MHP, Kurds and book of Mustafa Akyol

Turkish journalist wrote a book about Kurdish issue. In this book he writes about MHP's politics about Kurdish issue. I'll translate them. Türkeş says "Today, in East Anatolia there are people who speak an artifical language called Kurdish, but they are not a seperate nation or race. If they were a seperate nation we should stuggle to prevent them to come to positions in the government that represents Turk. We would strongly oppose this. For the future of our government and nation, for the proud and honour of Turk, we would make this struggle. Why did not we do this? Because, these people are pure Turkish people. They can be governor, minister or president as any Turk can."[1] As you can see these speech is different than "Turks do not have any friend or ally other than other Turks. Turks! Turn to your roots. Our words are to those that have Turkish ancestry and are Turks.... Those that have torn down this nation (referring to the Ottoman Empire) are Greek, Armenian and Jew traitors, and Kurdish, Bosnian and Albanians... How can you, as a Turk, tolerate these dirty minorities. Remove from within the Armenians and Kurds and all Turkish enemies. " in style. Therefore, MHP does not see Kurds as an enemy. They see Kurds as pure Turks. Other than being enemy to Turks, Kurds are ethnically Turks according to MHP.

But, there is also Nihal Atsız in this ideology. These words in this article can belong to him. I did not heard these words, but it is near to his style of writing. Once he said,"We should make the same things to Kurds as we did to their brothers, Armenians". But, Turkeş's style is more moderate as seen above.

Now, MHP's leader is Bahçeli and he declared all citizens of Turkey is Turkish regardless of race according to the constitution. Ümit Ozdağ, unsuccessful candidate for MHP leadership rejected this policy. He said this is Türkiyecilik(Turkeyism) other than Türkçülük (Turkism).

Article is in error because these fascist words do not belong to Türkeş but it can belong to Atsız. MHP is influenced by Atsız but MHP has some different views than Atsız. For example, Atsız is shamanist but only some of MHP politicians support Shamanism, while many of them support Islam.

Türkeş's views are different than Atsız in many issues. MHP can be accused with denial of existence of Kurdish poeple but cannot be accused with wanting to remove to Kurds from Turkey. (The last view can belong to Atsız, but MHP sometimes does not follow Atsız as in religion issue and Kurdish issue.) We should only write MHP's views about Kurdish issue.

Reference: 1. Mustafa Akyol, Kürt Sorununu Yeniden Düşünmek, Doğan Kitap Paparokan 12:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Name

I think your name should be related to Indo-European languages and people regarding your contributions. I don't think you are interested in Khoikhoi languages.Paparokan 00:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Turkish Coffee

You should consider deleting the Greek bogus of coffee in 1475. I added further information supporting the fact that there was no coffee culture before the 16th century by a Harvard historian Kafadar. If you doubt the authenticity of Pecevi, I can happily email you an article on coffee based on Pecevi. This is not about Greek-Turkish. I can't remain silent to misinformation. If you show me a credible peer-reviewed paper on the 1475 bogus I will not pursue this further.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Csunsay (talk • contribs) 21:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Mywayyy

Hmm, perhaps it would be better if we extended VoAbot protection to all the articles first? In the interest of "DENY". I'm not sure he's ever really felt the frustration of running up against a bot without us even moving a finger... Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hey there Khoikhoi, how you keeping- looks like adminship is keeping you pretty busy! Just dropping by to say thanks for your encouragement & endorsement on my RfA, which has now completed successfully. I can't promise to be as productive as you with the tools, but will do what I can. Thanks again, and take care, --cjllw | TALK 06:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit Reversal

Dear Khoikhoi. The edit's that I've placed on the page were relevant references that reflect a diversity in political as well as academic opinions. Some of the references were mere citations to government records, which are quite relevant to the article.

Also, some of the wording that was used in the article were nonacademic and have strong biased connotations. I believe the changes were quite relevant there as well.

What's the point of Wiki if you'll reverse the 'relevant' edit's with no justification?

Regards,

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.146.170.71 (talk) 07:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

I agree that the links were not neutral. In highly polarized issues, as the article in question, any statement will reflect one sides opinion. My aim was to reflect the not represented side with relevant references. I believe it's not Wikipedia's objective to reflect the language and arguments of one side with no references (i.e, the numbers of citizens quoted: needs credible references, biased language like "forced march=biased" instead of "relocation=neutral", "jingoistic support=biased" instead of "support") as if they were facts. Editing for unbiased language/references should be consistent and unbiased!

3RR report

I hope you don't mind me letting that TedBlack guy off with a warning for now, he's a newbie. - Another thing I always wanted to ask you, why do you have that "plainlinks" in your sig? It doesn't seem to be doing anything, does it, and it clogs up the code? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

M.E.Rasulzade

Khoikhoi, could you please take a look at the Rasulzade page, since you've edited it too, about a week ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammed_Amin_Rasulzade

I've left extensive comments in the Talk page before any changes, but user Azerbaijani, and what appears his socketpuppet Pejman47, made 3 or more reverts. Whilst they have a point that I, along with improving spelling and general flow of the article, as well as improving references by providing exact quotes, am removing "sourced information", it is nevertheless not fair, since a quote by, for example, T.Goltz, is not very precise (he gets a few facts wrong, as outlined), whilst T.Atabaki's quote is outright very misleading (which is fault of Atabaki, not any Wiki user). Also, the biographic page should be just that, not dwelling into some complex details. Otherwise, there is plenty of materials from T.Swietochowki and A.Altstadt books, for example, to start quoting as well, and then the page would bloat and well beyond the intended biographical page. --AdilBaguirov 00:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, please see the talk page, Adil deleted a whole well referenced paragraph! Goltz is a very reliable source, as is Atabaki. Adil just posted a huge POV and OR paragraph and he claims that he can take out whatever he wants. He has unilaterally removed a whole well referenced paragraph. Please see the talk page of that article.Azerbaijani 00:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, I've done exhaustive research, presented more quotes and sources than anyone before, have pointed out mistakes and inconsistencies with the Rasulzade page -- and have done all this on the Talk page before making any changes. However, user "Azerbaijani" prefers to ignore everything, make accusations, and constantly revert the page. He already was blocked by Dmcdevit on 15 January [1] for making 4 reverts in a day -- and this was BEFORE I even got involved on the page. Now he is using his socketpuppet "Pejman47" for reverts:

1) Pejman47 never edited the page before - didn't have it on his "watch";

2) Pejman47 made the revert virtually the same time (23:29, January 24, 2007), as user Azerbaijani posted to my Talk page with a "warning" not to get involved;

3) Neither one ever left any comments in the Talk page, despite obviously needing to do that. Nor did he justify why he rv to any particular version.

This user, Azerbaijani, is doing the same on a different page, History of the name Azerbaijan [2]. Please investigate the socketpuppet by checking their IP addresses, and review the pages to see that exhaustive evidence has been presented, and user Azerbaijani (and/or his alter ego Pejman47) should either agree to remove the offending and misplaced quotes, or agree to incorporate all the quotes and arguments I have presented over the past days. Thank you. --AdilBaguirov 03:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I have told you this before, OR and POV do not count on Wikipedia, I have told you again and again to read Wikipedia policy before you edit, but you refuse. As far as me and Pejman go, you have no evidence, check Pejman's contributions, what do they have to do with me? Your claim is unfounded.Azerbaijani 05:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Accusing someone of POV and OR is easy, but substantiating is hard. Compare my contributions to this topic, and yours, and then check your record of violations, and mine -- and it all would be clear. Yes, you and Pejman47 definitely appear to be one and the same, and an investigation of this is most welcome, to clarify it. If you are not -- then you have nothing to worry about. --AdilBaguirov 05:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Not really, you have made many POV and OR comments and I can prove it (thanks to your long posts), but here is not the place and this isnt the time for it. Ok, keep insisting that me and Pejman are the same, it doesnt matter to me because I know we are two different people.Azerbaijani 05:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Strange logic, but it's OK. Yes, my "long posts" consist of facts that are fully cited in accordance with academic requirements -- a concept apparently unknown to some. My "long posts" also expose the mistakes and poorly done citations -- that doesn't make it either POV or OR -- perhaps you need to re-read what all this means. And don't ever involve your alter ego Pejman47 or any other socketpuppet for that matter. --AdilBaguirov 06:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Urartu Military image

Please unlock page, I want to add Urartu military image in the Urartu section Angine 07:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol its obviously ararat. Nareklm 07:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

(Removed Anon entry that contained a personal attack, See diff)

Protected your talk page

Khoikhoi, I've protected your page. Two people have alternated edits at least 25 times each (they're not all straight reverts) and I have no idea what this is about. Please review the history and unprotect the page when you get back online. Thanks. Grandmasterka 08:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Republic of Abkhazia

Dear Khoi, I have to ask you to mediate on this User:Sephia karta/Republic of Abkhazia, its definitely a strong POV article and plus redundancy. Why do we need three separate articles on Abkhazia? have a look, Abkhazia, and User:Sephia karta/Republic of Abkhazia and User:Sephia karta/Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia ? Well unfortunately as i see it will cause dispute so I would need your skills to mediate on this issue. Thanks in advance. Best. Ldingley 21:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

oops sorry i didn't read this one :)[3] Ldingley 22:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Sock of indef-blocked user

There is a new user, User:Hassifnajima who appears to be a sock of someone you indef-blocked a week ago, User:Najimahassif. The former just created a page called The WikiVandals, stating 'both' users to be members, but the page was quickly deleted. I didn't know of a page to report suspected malicious socks, so I mention it to you as the blocking admin. Cheers, Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 14:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Proof

I have proof Dacy is using sock puppets to maintain his propaganda on wikipedia, See this he dacy always claims that Armenians moved on later and heres an ip addition to that, [4] not to mention adil and he's moves were the same. Also right after the anon entry he appears, [5], this user adds something, [6] i revert it and dacy comes out of nowhere, [7], Also on [8] both of them appear to be editing peacefully, while he always reverts other users edits. Not to mention that Adil and dacy here appear to put there thoughts right after each other. See [9] and [10] they always edit right after each other also. Nareklm 16:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

It is countless allegations. Please check SilkTork talk page - archive [11]. I believe he checked it already and found this allegations groundless. Check please ips - and the country of origin and whatever else necessary.

Also please note that Nareklm removed a big chunk of quotes and references on page March Days. It is vandalism--Dacy69 17:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't listen to him he removed a part on the Armenian and Azeri part and he is adding bias opinions from Russian references. Nareklm 17:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

March Days is now considered with third opinion involved. Pls. see talk page. [12]

Vladimir Tismăneanu revisited

Hi, man. Thanks for the feedback on Greier's socks and good riddance to all of them. I need an admin's intervention on this page. At the moment, templates are used to hold the article at ransom. One of them alleges that the article was written according to my POV, but there is no comment on the talk page as to this being the case - just an abuse of tags because I have added fully sourced information that contradicts what those users think about Tismăneanu (not what they can prove or even theorize). The other one implies that certain information is "irrelevant" - one of the users has used the talk page to ask why one should provide details about the circumstances of Tismăneanu's defection from Romania, even though this looks like essential biographical context about a mejor aspect of his life, even though Tismăneanu himself has placed stress on the events in several instances, and even though allegations that he had defected under different circumstances form a large part of the libel that was previously pushed on the page. In fact, at least one of the comments in the article's "Controversy" sections, currently sourced, details a POV claim about the circumstances of his defection, and erasing the info would lead to dropping Tismăneanu's own version of events (which should at least be present, if not take priority). That section also details all sorts of trivial attacks on Tismăneanu, but the other users have no objection for them to be featured there (which, if other parts of the text are to be dropped, constitutes undue weight). Furthermore, the contested account of the I have also asked for the others to look into FAs for comparison of what is acceptable biographical detail, and to make note of the fact that such details are by no means considered trivial. Also, the details of his defection cite the fact that, even though he accompqanied his mother to Spain, she returned; further down in the text, I have added Tismăneanu's statement that his mother was targeted by the Securitate after that date, which would be rendered absurd if one is not to mention that she returned. Currently, two users back each other in placing and replacing the tags without feeling they are accountable for it. One of them has in the past simply erased the sourced information, citing that he finds it "inaccurate", even though it is sourced from two-three sources (you may check out his claim on the talk page, which is that he has personally known Tismăneanu for 35 years...). May I ask that you have a look at the page and weigh in the situation? (Granted, it is a complicated issue, and I thank you in advance for your patience.) Dahn 20:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I have started adding tags today simply because you haven't solved your disputes with Vintila Barbu in the talk page (the relevance one, on the other one I argued myself and he conceded with only a slight rephrasing). Also I've noticed many of the past disputes you were involved were "solved" actually when a side abandoned rather than conceded (and unlike you most people do not use tags to express their disagreement, even when a Wiki policy is involved). I've also tried to modify bits of sentences (like "full endorsement" to "endorsement") and I had to struggle much for it (though I must admit, occassionaly I encountered no difficulty, like today when I corrected one of his books to actually be a PhD thesis). I don't even want to imagine how is like to change a larger phrase/paragraph like on Paul Goma. That article is almost a pain to contribute to and in my opinion you're carrying the biggest part of the guilt (though I admit you are the autor of the largest part of the content). Daizus 21:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Whatever is the past POV pushing of an editor, even when that's true, I suggest to limit the discussion only to this article. Specifically, I suggested in the talk page to split the last section into three smaller, each of which should have a clear begining and end, understandable for an outside reader, not an aglomeration of citations and contraditions of contraditions of contraditions of contradictions of whoever knows who said and did what. With such a tactics one might be able even to white-wash Hitler. An article must be TRUTHFUL, presented in neutral tone, but not middle point between the truth and lie. :Dc76 22:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The main contributors to the article have agreed to discussing their objections, and I have sandboxed the article to solve our differences. However, the text is currently undergoing pushing and pulling from two other editors: one moves content around according to his POV, the other simply vandalizes it. Could you protect the article to my last version, which was more or less the product of consensus? Dahn 16:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

more or less is a form of speech, it might mean concessus on one issue and disagreement on another. I am sorry, Dahn, but these are not diplomatic negociations: the article and its components is not the property of any of the editors. But fair enough, let's ask all editors to this article for the last 1 month to say: 1) Do they want to protect the article or do they want to discuss with unprotected article? 2) If yes to 1), then which version is to be frized on? And, please, comment on issues, not on actions of other people. Your actions, Dahn, are very non-friendly, but people talk with you about issues not about you as a person. If your arguments would be sounder, the others would conceide even when holding different oppinions, but when they are weak, of course people discard them. If some of your edits are good, don;t expect anyone to prase you, but if they are wrong, expect to be criticized (pointwise, not personally as you do) :Dc76 18:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

This article reflects 70% user Dahn's POV. Khoikhoi, you "restored" the article by removing my work, without any explanation; I hope this was a one-time blunder. Let me give just 2 examples of the huge bias contained in Dahn's reconstruction of the article: 1) Hermina T. was a Party activist along with her husband. They fought together in the International Red Brigades in Spain, they ran the Romanian-language broadcast of Radio Moskow during WWII and they both had politically supported activist positions in Romania after 1948. Dahn knows this but chose to remove the information each time I add it. 2) Vladimir T. wrote several printed papers of communist propaganda, praising Marx, Lenin, Ceausescu and the Party. This fact is beyond doubt and it lasted for 10 years. But user Dahn insists on using the term "alleged communist convictions" instead of "activity as a communist propagandist". (Icar 20:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC))

Re: Request

I am not gonna do anything regarding placenames today, as I was requested:). We will find a solution in the near future, if, this time, all the involved parties will participate. Apart from the "names in the lead" position, which I have explained in detail, be sure that I am not gonna step back from my position to have the turkish name in the arabic script in related articles (id est all, except Western Thrace). If the Greek name has to be in polytonic in Anatolian placenames, I can't see how someone can say that i am wrong or POV-pushing... Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a sandbox for anachronistic propaganda... Regards and be OK:) Hectorian 01:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice:). But I expect from the Turkish wikipedians to provide each name in Ottoman Turkish. I can provide each name in Greek polytonic script, as almost every Greek wikipedian can. If the names in the Ottoman arabic script will not be provided within "a reasonable amount of time", I will remove these names... I suppose I am not wrong; the names the way they are now, are not historical, but modern ones, and it is unencyclopedic, if not POV-pushing, to have them there. They were never used officially and never used by the local population-absolute contrast to Gdańsk's spirit. I find it pointless to make a relevancy with Greek placenames in articles other than Greece-related... U know well, that the polytonic script is used there, and no Greek user ever seemed to complain about. If the Turkish users do not want to remember that their language was written in the arabic script, this is certainly not my concern... Hectorian 02:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

There have been reforms in the Greek language, from ancient times till now. The last reform happened in 1982, when monotonic orthography was adopted. All these reforms were minor, even if u compare modern Greek with Homerus's works-the average Greek will understand more than 50% if someone reads to him a part, and even more if he sees it written. For the Bible, the percentage increases. so, properly speaking, most Greeks do not only understand modern Greek... I guess u meant to write it is really possible... instead of it's not really possible, considering the fact that they're both written in the same script:). I am not accusing modern Turkish people for not knowing to write in Ottoman Turkish... Quite the contrary; it is others that I could accuse for that... The thing is that since we are talking about historical names, we should not use modern names. So simple. The Latin name is used for places that had been parts of the Roman Empire, not a name in a Neo-Latin language; the Greek name in polytonic is used for places that had been part of Greek states, not a name in modern Greek; so, the Turkish name in the Arabic script should be used for places that had been under the Ottoman Empire. And if I am able to find the names in the arabic script, i guess it is much easier for the turkish users, who can search in turkish webpages. thus, i will remove the turkish names if (and only if) they are not in the arabic script. Hectorian 03:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Sömbeki will be either سومبكى ("Sömbeki") or سونبكى ("Sönbeki"), with the latter for preference inasmuch as the former is just using an "m" to assimilate with the "b" (just like the Persian penbe, meaning "pink", has become pembe in modern Turkish). Taşöz will be طاشوز. Istanbulya will be استانبوليه. I haven't verified these with any direct references (and the Piri Reis maps you referred Hectorian to are, alas, too small to read), but these are basically the only ways these words can be spelled in the Ottoman script (there are a few variations possible for "Istanbulya" based on different spellings of "Istanbul", but the one provided is by far the most common). Cheers. —Saposcat 09:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to add to Saposcat's post. First of all, I confirmed in a dictionary that سومبكى is correct for Sömbeki. As for Taşöz, I have a feeling that طاشوز might not be correct. My rational is that although Taşöz is evidently a rendering of the Greek Thasos, it also looks like a compoud made of two Turkish words, 'taş' and 'öz'. Put togerther, Taşöz doesn't conform to Turkish vowel harmony rules and therefore, Ottoman orthography is difficult to apply. Normally an internal, 'ö' or 'o' is simply written with the Arabic letter و but in this case I have a feeling that it should retain its initial form, او. Another compound place name, Beyoğlu is similarly formed: بگ اوغلى (note the medial ا). My suggestion is, therefore, طاش اوز. Finally, I concur with Saposcat in that Istanbulya is probably استانبوليه. Normally Greek names borrowed into follow this pattern (Turkish 'ıstakoz', "lobster" is spelt استاقوز). Is it certain that the Turkish name begins with the letter 'I' and not 'İ'? It could be that the second letter is, in fact, ص. Until someone checks an Ottoman source, I don't think we can be absolutely certain about the last two. All the best, Xemxi 17:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I added the correct Ottoman names for Ioannina and Samos Island, but I can only guess at Ballıbadra: بالليباطره (possibly بالليبادره). I'll slowly start working on the list of names you mentioned to me. Regards, Xemxi 09:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the recognition Khoikhoi. I've just added a few more: Thessaloniki, Crete, Lesbos Island, Chios and Alexandroupoli. Xemxi 10:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't entirely sure where to write this note, but this seems like the best place. I noticed that the modern Turkish have been removed from the Greek places when the Ottoman version have been provided. I understand the argument against using modern Turkish names when we are giving historical information for places outside Turkey. My concern is that by not using the accented letters of the modern Turkish alphabet (ç ı ğ ö ş ü), we are abandoning the generally accepted means of transliterating Ottoman Turkish into the Latin script. Saying that سومبكى is Sombeki (and so on) is confusing because elsewhere in Wikipedia a consistent scheme is being used. For articles which contain names in Greek and other languages, non-English accented letters are used because that is the proper way to transliterate those languages. (see Baghdad, Istanbul/Constantinople or Trabzon for example). Would it be suitable to do something like: "Ottoman Turkish سومبكى [Sömbeki]" in these cases?

Concerning the removal of the names in the modern Turkish spelling: the names provided are in the arabic script, since this is the script used in Ottoman times. The modern Turkish transliteration does not have any reason to be there. Correct me if i am wrong, but i doubt if an english speaking person would ever spell the ottoman name like this. Unless, I am also free to write, e.g. Edirne: Attic Greek: Ἁδριανούπολις Hadrianoúpolis, [Αδριανούπολη, Adrianoúpoli]; so as to provide the exact pronouncation of the Greek name in English (though I still fail to do it, and i should use IPA instead ɐðɾjɐˈnupɔʎi. The important thing is how these names are transliterated in English, not how modern Turkish speakers pronounce them... Hectorian 03:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It must had been during this... Since Hemingway covered the war. An article about the Greek refugees is in my to do list. I had forgotten what Hemingway had written, but there are so many sources, that I do not know where to begin from... Hectorian 04:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I wish this were on one page (and not necessarily Khoikhoi's talk page), but since this is where it is...

1. What is Ottoman Turkish? Osmanli Turkish is what is used in Turkey today, and during Ottoman rule. By Ottoman Turkish we mean modern Turkish written in a previous alphabet????
2. The voices of those not here to argue, they should be at least considered. The refugees exiled from these places, what's the chance they wrote the name? They said it. I know less about the literacy rates in Turkish of the Turcophone Anatolian Christians who came to these places, but many kept their language even after WWII, and a few even to this day.
3. Modern Turkish and "Ottoman Turkish" are one language, written in different scripts. There is no reason to establish an alternate transliteration scheme, when the standard works just fine.

I object strongly to introducing Turkish names in Arabic script, if the goal is to delete the Turkish names in Latin script, making the names hard to read for Anglophone Wikipedians.

It is the historical names. Thus, they should be on that script, the one used at that time. BTW, to which Turcophone Anatolian Christians u are referring to? in which places u say they went? and who are those and which language have they kept even to this day?

Once more, the historical Greek placenames are in polytonic, simply because they are historical. The same pattern should be used for all historical names. The Greek alphabet is also not easy to be read by the Anglophone wikipedians, but this does not give us the right to insert anachronistic spellings. Hectorian 05:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

If we are going to use the Arabic script, then a transliteration should be provided (we agree on this right?). The most accepted transliteration system for Ottoman is based on modern Turkish. There is another one (see Ottoman Turkish language) which could be used, but writing 'Sonbeki' is not transliterating just as writing 'Trebizond' is not transliterating Τραπεζούντα. Books on Ottoman history, geography, etc. use a standard and I do not understand why Wikipedia would wish to break from it. I suggested wrting the tranliteration after the Ottoman in parentheses because this is not a means to force modern Turkish names on Greek places. Places in Turkey include names in other languages, and you can see a multitude of transliteration schemes for these (see Diyarbakır or Euphrates for a mix of different systems). Xemxi 12:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I just looked at the ALA-LC system for Ottoman Turkish. It is very similar to modern Turkish but using diacritics to separate consonants which are pronounced the same but spelt different differently in Ottoman (س and ص are both pronounced 's' by the Turks, but in this system these letters are s and ṣ respectively). The other system is mentioned on the Ottoman Turkish language page. It further distinguishes the differences between vowels (u ü ū for example). Xemxi 08:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The template for Ottoman Turkish works, thanks for that. For those who wish to use this shorthand, {{lang-ota|ردوس}} produces Ottoman Turkish: ردوس. Xemxi 09:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Constantinopolitan Office Of Liberation

Looks like I accidentally recreated it by tagging just at the exact second you were deleting it. I've seen this before, where at a certain split-second it will recreate without a warning prompt. Fan-1967 02:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Usually you get a warning that says "This page was deleted while you were editing it. Do you want to recreate?" with deleter's name and reason. Very rarely there's no message, and it just recreates. I'm convinced it's a split-second timing issue when the delete and the save are almost simultaneous. Fan-1967 02:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Greater Iran vs. Iran

Hi, could you please have a look at this: [13] Tājik 02:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Aram Andonian

The first edit removed important info which was that they were used in Talaat's trial. The second edit I have no objections to although its much better to have it a citation rather than mentioning Professor x, a general nobody in the scholarly community and and one of your general run-of-the-mill Genocide deniers. The third edit in Talaat Pasha's page seems OK also but its interesting to note that their authenticity was never questioned during Tehlerian's trial and that the British themselves intercepted numerous telegrams detailing exchanges between Talaat and other Turkish officials, directly incriminating them.--MarshallBagramyan 04:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Just stopped by to thank you for your welcome and the links you provided. I'm still learning the ropes around here, so they're a big help to me. Thanks again and feel free to drop by anytime! --Ann Stouter 07:12, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Getae template tags

You have reverted an earlier edit in order to place two template tags - on relevance and on original research. Unfortunately you provided no reason for your edit, and as the page has a RfC on this issue I'd appreciate if you can bring arguments to support your actions and eventually to drop some comments in the RfC section. Thank you. Daizus 09:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Armenakan & Ramgavar party

Hello there it's me again. Me, Fedayee and OttomanReference decided that we should merge these two articels since they are the same party. I added all the information in the Armenakan articel from the Ramgavar party, but I need your help in deleting the Ramgavar articel and addind all the articel links from Ramgavar party to the Armenakan party. Thanks in advance. ROOB323 09:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. ROOB323 10:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

PGG resolution attempt

Hi Khoikoi, an attempt has just begun to resolve the Pontian Greek Genocide dispute through an arbitration committee. Since you have mediated there before, could you please voice your support or objection to such a measure here. Thanks, --A.Garnet 16:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Khoikoi, please check your e-mail. --Mardavich 06:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

oh

Oh sorry I thought that that was on the main page. For the Aniu people.~~Magistrand~~ 00:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Public domain

If we have images that are in the Public domain or published before 1923 etc. do we need sources? Nareklm 02:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Nareklm 03:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

That angine shes obviously here to support Ararat arev which is not going to happen. Nareklm 03:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

So far the Urartu image and the language. Nareklm 03:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I meant the image sorry, its been added here, Military history of Armenia after Ararat requested it with his anon I.P to another user. I probably got confused with this, [14] Nareklm 03:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there anyway to get rid of this guy? wow man. Nareklm 05:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

But thats still not going to help right? Nareklm 05:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Spelling

Hello Khoikoi. Thanks for the clarification. I was actually aware of the acceptability of both spellings. What a wonderful and fluid language English has become! Being a citizen of both the UK and US, I have developed a rather split personality regarding spelling, metric equivalents and the 24 hour clock, along with an understanding of a lot of the subtle differences in usage (e.g. Cel phone vs. Mobile). I have added the English spellings to the (semi-robotic) spelling application on my trusty Mac. I have been an avid user of Wikipedia since its inception, but only in the last few months have I jumped into the editing. Thanks for your contributions.cp 03:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Adana Massacre

Hi, I offered the article to WP:DYK, per your encouragement. Hope I've properly added it to WPDYK, didn't really realize how that stuff works. Thanks!DBaba 08:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Urartu

User:TigranTheGreat has changed the wording on Uratu page in the section of the Ethnic Composition - he referred to "weasel word". Sources are mentioned and thorougly debated - so this justification is groundless. Well, this section was exstensively debated with the assistance of third party - SilkTork - pls. see discussion page [15]+[16] + [17]+ [18]. I don't think that each time we should resume debate if someone wants to change the wording to his liking. And the last edit was by dab--Dacy69 18:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC) + Also I wonder how TigranTheGreat managed to make edit after your protection.

Thanks. About your questions - on TalkPage you can find a lot of references - 1. Encyclopedia Britannica 2 Columbia Encyclopedia 3 The works of prominent historians (urartologists) I.Diakonov, B.Piotrovky and many others. And here is the reference to almost exact phrase It is generally agreed that the Urartians arose from the Hurrians- [19]. This phrase was later slightly modified by Dbachmann. Urartu-Hurrians links is quite mainstream opinion and not weasel word. (So, let's say that it is is generally agreed that Columbus opened America - though some other people (eg, vikings) perhaps traveled to the new world before) We had exstensive discussion about that on talkpage. You can view whole discussion. Somehow we agreed on that though some users who opposed it, tried to give different version. And it is actually incorporated in the section (reference to Ivanov-Gamkrelidze theory), though it is tiny minority of academicians who support alternative theory. But the problem is that TigranTheGreat should perhaps - I agree with you - to discuss his changes prior editing. We had third party involvement about that. I don't know - should we start all this dispute again - it was a quite lengthy on talkpage. --Dacy69 01:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Pls. Look at Urartu talkpage and make your judgment - Dbachmann has also expressed his view on the last edit. TigranTheGreat reverted to his version again and nobody except you can edit since it is proteceted.--Dacy69 15:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Socks

I thought you should know that User:Al-Munthir is using two obvious new socks, User:Creeta and User:Wacat, to evade his block. --Mardavich 19:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit: I suspect that all the above users are actually related to User:MARVEL. --Mardavich 19:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Accusation of Sock

Khoikhoi, who gave you an assumption that Tengri and myself is the same person. He is my friend, and I did use his computer last week. But it does not mean we are the same person. I realize you have to abide by WP:SOCK rules, but before taking arbitrary actions you should also have legible proofs that we are the same person. Otherwise, this looks more like POV position. And prior to taking "actions" on representatives of certain group, you should concentrate on Azerbaijan Discussion page, and look at opinions of several people against user Azerbaijani, constantly making edits and removing valid references from page, before taking single sided position and trying to block people, who are not the same. In the end, such actions discourage any kind of contribution or interest in Wikipedia articles. Thanks. Atabek 00:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, you assumed. Tengri and I use different IPs and the fact that I may have used his computer a week ago to login or make edits does not prove that he is my sockpuppet. He independently edited Musavat or other articles about which he complained on the page. I do watch and edit some of those articles as well, as we are both from the same region, have common interests. This does not, however, establish any ground or proof for you to claim that we are the same person. This is a complete POV, especially given the fact, that you have done nothing about the major concern raised on Azerbaijan Discussion page. Moreover, Tengri did not edit or remove or add quotes from main Azerbaijan article, he only contributed his view to the discussion. So what's your proof about meetpuppeting? Do you want to say that Tengri as independent user has no right to contribute to the same discussion as I do? Atabek 00:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, please, unblock Tengri following the rules at Wiki Blocking Policy:

Blocking to gain an advantage in a content dispute is strictly prohibited.

Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia. They should not be used as a punitive measure.

Can you explain what kind of damaging behaviour or disruption did Tengri or I have on Wikipedia? Meanwhile, user Azerbaijani accused 6 people of being sockpuppets on Wikipedia Check User. None of those has been proven as sockpuppets of each other, are you going to take any action about Azerbaijani terror, POV and constant vandalism as reported on Azerbaijan Discussion page?Atabek 00:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

If Tengri was a confirmed Sock puppet of Atabek, then why is Atabek not blocked also?Azerbaijani 04:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, you have to stop this witch hunt after people started by Azerbaijani, it does not contribute neither to your credibility nor to fairness in general. Wikipedia is supposed to be an environment for sharing information in a proper manner. It's not used for basing on opinion of one and trying to purge everyone else out. Please, follow the opinion of The Behnam on Talk:Azerbaijan page, and you will understand the situation. Thanks. Atabek 04:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

OSD

Do you have one?! Show me! Perhaps you can be replicated for the betterment of Wikipedia... :-D --Illythr 01:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

In that case, you've been dead for two years. The horrors Wikipedia does to people. Once you become addicted, even death can't set you free... X-[ --Illythr 02:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

sockpuppet Nareklm - ArmenianNY

I have suspicion that User:Nareklm created sockpuppet User:ArmenianNY. Please check this [20] --Dacy69 01:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.--Dacy69 03:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Pfffft what a weak attempt you put unsigned for people who don't sign there comments! Nareklm 04:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Policies

Nope, i got confused about this i understand now :) Nareklm 03:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello. I would really appreciate it if you did a check IP, please see here: [21] I have posted a great deal of evidence showing that it could be possible that these users are related, however, and administrator there declined on a technicality, siting that their attacks were not really personal attacks, while another administrator before him told me that they were personal attacks! I would really appreciate it if you did a check IP there. Thanks.Azerbaijani 03:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you atleast talk to the admin there?Azerbaijani 04:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I knew I did something wrong! Oh boy, could you please tell him that I didnt know exactly what was meant by the letter.Azerbaijani 04:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I just did, but I'm afraid that it wont have as big an impact if it doesnt come from another administrator.Azerbaijani 04:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, these may fit the description: Obvious, disruptive sock puppet (I have shown that these users edit the same way, talk the same way, make personal attacks the same way, etc...), or Ongoing, serious pattern vandalism (again, their edits are the same and their talking is the same). Also, make sure you notice the evidence that Nareklm has posted regarding some of these users.Azerbaijani 04:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, what do you suggest? We have already discovered that Tengri was a sock/meatpuppet and both Nareklm and I have posted evidence showing that there could be even more sock puppets/meatpuppets among those users, so isnt this on its own enough for a check user, especially since one of them has already been confirmed and banned? Please, I urge you, do you see how Atabek continuously attacks me? I have tried to ignore him as much as possible and its starting to get really abusive and tiring.Azerbaijani 04:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

More evidence Dacy here replies with an anon edit later, adil shows up, [22] on the ottoman casualties they actually overlapped so obviously dacy messed up so next time he didn't do this. Nareklm 04:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, regarding the Azerbaijan article, all I did was add more sources. The information I took out was information about the foundation of the Musavat party, which has nothing to do with the name and violates on the compromise for the section to be as short as possible, which it currently is. Ok, I will try to find diffs. By the way, you can check my edits, please show me which one of my edits are not acceptable, almost everythign I have done is find and put in sources, yet no one seems to appreciate that!Azerbaijani 04:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, the Azerbaijani was insisting on leaving pan-Turkic and pan-Islamist quotes to nature of Musavat, which have no relation to the nature of article on Azerbaijan. This user self-defeats himself saying now he actually tried to remove the information about Musavat party foundations. Please, review all his RVs. Thanks. Atabek 04:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I have told you this very much, those references show context and motive, where as your information about when the party was founded has nothing to do with the summary.Azerbaijani 23:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Asia Minor Catastrophe

The el:Μικρασιατική καταστροφή (Asia Minor Catastrophe) covers mainly the events from the Greek retreat to the end of the Greek presence in the area; u can see that by the headers: "Η εκστρατεία" (The Expedition), "Η καταστροφή" (The Catastrophe). There is also the el:Ελληνοτουρκικός πόλεμος (1919-1922), exact translation of the "Greco-Turkish War of 1919-22". In Greek, the term "Greco-Turkish War of 1919-22" is synonymous to "Asia Minor Expedition", or else "Πόλεμος της Μικράς Ασίας" or "Μικρασιατικός Πόλεμος", both literary meaning "Asia Minor War". The events after the Greek defeat are called "Asia Minor Catastrophe", linked, but not part of the war. Also, the "Asia Minor Catastrophe" does not cover the events in Eastern Thrace, which are usually in the history books as a separate chapter or paragraph like "also, the Greeks from Eastern Thrace...". I am not sure if it should be there as an interwiki link... I mean, it does cover parts of what the article in the English wikipedia says, but it is not limited to that. but, the el:Ελληνοτουρκικός πόλεμος (1919-1922), also covers parts of this article. I suppose we cannot have two interwiki links in one language linked in an article... Anyway, soon I will create an article about the "Greek refugees", and, though I am not sure were to begin from, I think that Μικρασιατική καταστροφή should be linked there, although now Asia Minor Catastrophe redirects to the war. Hectorian 04:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps I was not clear enough in my previous message. "Asia Minor Catastrophe" includes the "population exchange". we do not have a different term for that, apart from "Ανταλλαγή πληθυσμών" (literary Population exchange, simply, without saying between who-everyone in Greece understands on what we are referring to). An alternative used very often, but again not limited, is "Προσφυγιά" (usually with a capital Π, "The Refugees"). The term "Asia Minor Catastrophe" refers to the end of the Greek presence in Asia Minor, and the population exchange was one of the means for this to happen... Be a little patient. I may create the new article today, if I have the time:). I will try to clear things up. Hectorian 05:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

These events are considered the worst thing that has ever happen to the Greeks (comparable only to the Fall of Constantinople). We have many terms for these events. Another alternative, used quite often, is "Εθνική Καταστροφή" (National Catastrophe); and the term "Asia Minor Refugees" (Μικρασιάτες Πρόσφυγες) is roughly used to include all the Greek refugees from modern day Turkey, though by simply saying "Πρόσφυγες" ("The Refugees") we mean the same. In fact, we make distinctions there as well: "Πόντιοι πρόσφυγες" (Pontic refugees), "Καππαδόκες πρόσφυγες" (Cappadocian refugees), "Πρόσφυγες από την Ανατολική Θράκη" (Eastern Thrace refugees), "Μικρασιάτες πρόσφυγες" (Asia Minor refugees; to include only those who came from the geographic limits of the peninsula, but with special reference to "Πρόσφυγες από τη Σμύρνη"-Refugees from Smyrna-since most of them lived in Smyrna and its environs). There is also a variety of terms for all the other incidents separately (i will not bother u with the terms in Greek): "Pontic Genocide" or "Genocide of the Greeks of Pontus", "Fire of Smyrni", "Smyrni Catastrophe", sometimes the word "Διωγμός" ("The Expulsion") is used; very rarely terms like "Hellenic Genocide" or "Hellenic Holocaust" are also used. and further subdivisions of the events, concerning time and type of atrocities, expulsion or actions. Hectorian 05:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Letting u know that I have created the article. It needs expansion, etc Hectorian 15:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for semi-protecting Rafida

Thanks for semi-protecting Rafida. Do you know how we can get Rafida on long-term semi-protection status so as to avoid going through this same old cycle of tiresome nonsense every several weeks?? Asking on WP:RFP seems to be utterly useless for this purpose, and of the last two admins who un-semi-protected Rafida, User_talk:Centrx was resolutely unhelpful, while User_talk:Voice_of_All is refusing to deign to condescend to acknowledge my existence (much less taking responsibility for his actions). AnonMoos 07:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Messages

Khoikhoi; Hi, I left a reply for you on my talk-page, cheers. Kiumars

Evan Siegel & Brenda Shaffer need urgent attention. Please contribute if you have extra material. Kiumars

Ok, thanks, I will. I am also going to contact Evan myself directly this weekend and see if I can convince him to participate here and look at a few of the articles for me. As for Shaffer’s article; as you can see someone has put a copyright on it and is not removing the copyright tag despite the fact that I have changed the article and I believe it is ok now but he does not even answer to several messages I have left for him! What is the procedure? What should I do next? Kiumars

Politics of Khuzestan

Please see my comments on talk and unprotect the article or tell Alex to unprotect it since Ahwaz has now been blocked for ONE MONTH. Should we have to wait that long until this troublemaker returns and continues with his racialistic propaganda campaign??? I am considering gathering support for arbitration and maybe even going to Jimbo himself because from studying the histories we can see this goes back over 2 years! WP is not here for propaganda,it is a encyclopedia. I am especially angered because this professor Ahwaz cites (which does not meet WP policy and guideline, like WP:RS and WP:V), also promotes ethnic cleansing (but only in Arabic!) THERE SHOULD BE NO DOUBLE STANDARD ON WP! Some people here are too accomodating of trolling behaviors unfortunately! Khorshid 11:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

block-evading IP

Since you're familiar with User:Ahwaz's repeated block evasion, can you please semi-protect Arvand Free Zone, User:Ahwaz is once again evading his block using his dynamic IPs to revert that article. --Mardavich 12:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Self-linking in a dispute

Hi Khoikhoi. I want to know your opinion on a matter. Jona Lendering (talk · contribs) uses his own website as a reference to his edits (examples [23] and even in disputes [24]). He has claimed since he is "the only one capable of actually reading the text." [25] it validates the fact that he is, in a way, claiming the article as his own (WP:OOA), and he keeps rolling back to his own version [26].

What do you think? Is this allowed? It may well be true that he is a respectable scholar/expert, however his website [27] is no more than a personal website, and his articles which he reference to are hardly in academic style (often not referenced) and merely are his opinions.

I know you are busy but have a look when you can and let me know what you think. Thanks. --Rayis 13:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks - posted at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Self-linking_in_dispute_by_a_scholar --Rayis 12:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I thought you may be interested

The IP address Dacy69 has used to vote (66.46.197.50) is an open port (on 80) proxy, the guy use an open port proxy to claim he is from Canada. You can check it yourself and you'll see. The other account you have blocked, both users Atabeck and his other sock are the same user. He has been claiming to you that the reason the IPs matched was because he used the other guys computer, he claimed on Azerbaijan talk page the other way around. The only reason you catched both was because with all the socks and proxies he was using, he made few mistakes. Fad (ix) 17:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It is getting quite annoying. SilkTork checked it, if I am not mistaken. Please talk on substance of the editing.

I don't know what open port means but I am really from Canada - it can be easily checked, I suppose. As a matter of fact I am working from two comps (can actually have two user IDs) but I always sign as one user (except one single case, I believe, when I forgot to sign in but it wasn't voting). It can also be easily checked - This message for example I am leaving from home comp. Previous about Urartu on this very page I left from other comp - in both cases (and in all) I signed as Dacy69. I don't believe in the power of numbers rather in the power of arguments. I was alone against a bunch of guys on Urartu page and still managed to get right edit.

I can't understand the reason of this accusations. The fact that I appear on pages where other Azeri users make edit is nothing strange, just like you - a bunch of Armenian users follow each other on various pages related to Azerbaijan or Armenia. Please, Khoikhoi, consult with SilkTork and check it again and put a final note on all these groundless accusation.--Dacy69 19:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Maronite Church‎

Can you please put a semi-protected on non-registered users to edit the page? The page has been RV 16 times in the month of January alone. Chaldean 19:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok now its becoming a big problem. His coming in everyday now and has started to edit Assyrian people as well. Please find someone to put a semi-protection on these two pages. Chaldean 16:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures at Pashtuns crisis!

Hey so what's the deal with the pictures? Apparently many of them are violations including the wedding picture?! Can you help out? I finished fixing and adding new references and we're up to 86 now. Not too shabby eh? Tombseye 01:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright, good job dude! Really sad to see the wedding party and the afghan girl go. It's always good to have ordinary people up in these articles. So can we figure out something about the status of these pics? Are they just gone for good? Anyway, you did your part so hopefully we'll have Pashtuns back up to speed. Ciao. Tombseye 02:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey dude, let me know if we can ever return the wedding party to the article at the very least. Also, I'm wondering why we can't use the Afghan girl when we id'd her photographer and where the picture appeared. We need a chick on the page. The pictures from Soraya Tarzi look old as hell. Why can't we use them? Surely they can't still be under copyright laws? I mean we're talking close to a century here. Tombseye 06:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You da man! Always finding the pictures. I put in the family instead of the boy (who I moved into the article though) just to have a group. I also added the other girl and now we've got a damn good looking article. Frankly, I'd be surprised if this article doesn't make it now. Tombseye 03:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You are so in-charge of the pictures for the Persians! heh heh. Tombseye 04:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Teaser? What teaser? I do recall hearing about Chan getting injured during the shoot. Not surprising as he's probably still going to be doing his own stunts until he's like 90. Tombseye 04:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Man, that's weird. Brett Ratner directed huh? Not a big fan of his work, but the script might be good and Chan and Tucker have good chemistry for some reason. Plus, they could both use the career boost. Looks like another reason for the French to think we're idiots. I kid, I kid. Tombseye 04:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Turkish coffee

You should move the page since Greek coffee gets more hits than Turkish coffee what do you think? Nareklm 05:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I checked this way, Greek coffee - 2,470,000 [28] and Turkish coffee - 1,920,000 - [29] Nareklm 05:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

What seems to be the problem?

What seems to be the problem with template:Infobox city? I noticed you made a revert. This would contradict WP:CfD guidelines which stipulate you should not remove content from the current category. ie.: category:UTC-5. --CyclePat 08:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Well if you allow me to revert your recent change and perform some more tests that may help. I ask you this because I may be seen as a my 3RR... even if I'm currently testing!) Is that okay! I will put it back to normal if it doesn't work. Thanks to your feedback I can now check this article out. I suspect it's because it doesn't have a timezone stated in the infobox. I'dd like to try it out though, if you'll allow me? --CyclePat 09:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll see what I can do! Again, if it doesn't work. I'll obviously put it back myself! Thank you again. --CyclePat 09:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. I added the template. This time with a little change. Is the problem still there? --CyclePat 09:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I actually think my previous version would work... I think the problem was the fact that I added a (enter) line break the first first time. I also think that the bring the line up in the article didn't have much of an effect. I didn't see anything weard when I glued the category right onto the table break. Nevertheless, I think I got a get some sleep on this one because I got a think of the regionality of the time zoning permutations, some zones go back 1 hours... some only 30 min, others dont. Finally, we have the articles that didn't take the time to place the UTC. So, it needs some work. Thank you for your help. I guess we'll have to revert it back to what it was for now. --CyclePat 09:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok! Well I guess we can leave it as is. It's not actually doing much though because it's placed only in the template's page itself and not on every template. [[30]] So I guess it should look good because currently it only affects the template and nothing else! There's alway... I was going to say tomorow... but after my sleep! Thank you again my friend. Good luck! And if you feel like being adventuruous check out the codes at WP:CCT--CyclePat 09:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 5	29 January 2007	About the Signpost

Foundation names advisory board, new hires	Court decisions citing Wikipedia proliferate
Microsoft approach to improving articles opens can of worms	WikiWorld comic: "Hyperthymesia"
News and notes: Investigation board deprecated, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ararat arev

He broke the 3RR here, Armenian language, by the way if its an indef does that stop sock puppets? Nareklm 03:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Great minds think alike

I just saw your warning to him - however that was one of five IPs (that I know of) that he's used today alone (and this was after my "final" warning that one more would result in an indef). I dont like blocking any good faith editors, but he's exhausted my patience (and made a mockery of our warnings). I blocked him indef as a result (and range blocked his ISP for a few hours). What are your thoughts? Glen 06:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Osama-med.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Osama-med.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 08:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

83.229.21.4

Thanks for taking care of the disruption by this user. I notice this IP has been blocked before, with "block evasion" noted in the summary? [31] The user of this IP must have an account. I wonder what the account is, as 83.229.21.4 started to go through my edit history earlier today to harass me. 172 | Talk 15:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Now I understand. Thanks for the note. 172 | Talk 16:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please intervene

Hi. A user keeps adding templates that he does not justify to the article on Vladimir Tismăneanu, claiming that he has argued in their favor during the past two days. I had left the two days as a term for feedback on issues I had raised, after having evidenced that the person who had originally added the templates made false claims about text content (as evidenced by a series of sources I presented). That user has not answered. User:Daizus' recent edit summary says of me that "users are justified in ignoring you", his only reply on the talk page regarded his support for changes in format (not allegations of POV or the likes), but he claims that I have received an answer to justify the templates! Please intervene in support of my version, because this is senseless. Dahn 18:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Ararat arev

This guys never going to learn, [32] so i guess theres nothing we can do. Nareklm 00:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way i can revert more than the 3RR, because the expectations say we can revert banned users so no problem there well if im not mistaken :-) Nareklm 02:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thank you, I come from the WikiEs and there we do it like that, we put a {{delete}}, then a sysop moves the page. But this method's good! I'll do it mañana (3:32 AM zZzZz) --Damián del Valle 02:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Please help in FWD and RWD article

Could you please check the activity of the user User:Liftarn in Front-wheel drive and Rear-wheel drive.

His edits are not neutral.

• He doesn honour my insertions of by removing them.
• When I add a source, he deletes the source as "not reliable".
• He puts non-reliable or not-verifieble sources by himself. For example a webpage that he cites explain some behaviour but doesn't specify the conditions where it happens. He copies a centence from this webpage as though this behaviour occurs in absolutely all cases. When I add a clarification to describe the conditions, he deletes my clarifications.
• He reverts my edits and doesn't allow me to revert his edits.

From his activity I see that the user User:Liftarn inclines to Front-wheel drive.

I am neutral to Front-wheel drive, Rear-wheel drive and All-wheel drive, because I participate in motorsports competitions as a driver on different cars with different types.

Please also see the Talk:Front-wheel_drive.

Help us resove the dispute. Thank you in advance.

Yes, please help. Some clearifications:

• {{fact}} was only removed when a reference was inserted instead.
• the source I judged as "not reliable" was a personal homepage on the benefits of rear wheel drive
• the source did say it was in all cases and the "clearifiction" was unsourced speculation
• I have reverted blankings and bad edits (regardless of who did them) and there is no way I can stop anyone from reverting my edits

When that is said and done I do reccomend a visit to Talk:Front-wheel_drive. // Liftarn

Mainly the dispute in the Front-wheel drive article is related to the reliability of sources. Liftarn tells that his sources are reliable and mine are not. We have invited the other wikipedians to the talk page and they support my point of view. Also, [User:Liftarn|Liftarn]] includes motrosport-related benefits to the article without explicitly stating that this benefit only relates to motorsport vehicles and not commercial or passenger vehicles. I want to delete all the paragraphs marked as dubious by Liftarn doesn't agree with that. --Maxim Masiutin 15:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI

Hey - User:CalicoJackRackham is still operating as both "CalicoJackRacham" AND User:Shuppiluliuma, even after you warned him not to do this. Rarelibra 16:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

(If you have time) please vote in this survey on another proposed move

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Valiyat-e_faqih_%28book_by_Khomeini%29#New_Vote:_Should_title_be_in_Persian_or_English_Translation.3F

from Valiyat-e faqih (book by Khomeini) → to either

or

Thanx again, --Leroy65X 17:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hebron article

Reverting pages without using talk page or summaries, and deleting references of sourced material without justification, can be considered to be a strong violation of wikipedia rules, some will say it amounts to vandalism (although I prefer not to according to WP:CIVIL). Please refrain from such behaviour. Thank you. Amoruso 01:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:Kurdistan

Please do not drastically change inclusion criteria and participate in the discussion under Category talk:Kurdistan. There is no logical reason I can see why we should tag airliners, squares and provinces as well as others under the same category. --Cat out 03:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Whose inclusion criteria? Your own? Why must you empty 90% of a category when it's already gone through sevral CfDs? Khoikhoi 03:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I was using the inclusion criteria on several encyclopedias as well as how we include cities and towns elsewhere on wikipedia. No sourced information provided establishes kurdistan as a cultural region. Sources I used present on the category page before you removed was: Encyclopædia Britannica, Columbia Encyclopedia, Dictionary.com. I have the option to remove any category I feel fit from an article if it has been added without a rationale on occasions by people who are banned from wikipedia such as User:Diyako

The Category going through several CfDs is irrelevant. We never categorise cities based on geographic categories. Take New York City for example. No doubt it is in North America but categorizing it like that is silly why must cities inside the geographic region Kurdistan be treated any differently?

Also for instance why must Kurdistan Airlines be inside the geographic category? Is it an article related to geography? One would be hard pressed to consider an article about a Market or a Square to be geography related.

--Cat out 03:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

CSULA

Hi Khoikhoi, can you please remove the sem-protection from the CSULA articel whenever you have time. It has been about 15 days now that it is protected. I think it would be safe to remove it. One more question I was wondering am I allowed to delete the protection from the articel by myself instead of bothering you. Thanks. ROOB323 05:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) ROOB323 08:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Emerging superpowers

The emerging superpower articles are up for deletion. Please note that the article does not predict who is going to be a superpower, it provides information on speculation that is currently very much taking place. — Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 07:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Arabkir

The information in the first sentence is wrong it says "The present town was built at a comparatively recent date; but about 2 miles north-east is the old town, now called Eskişehir", but when you look at the map and see where Arabkir and Eskişehir are located you see that it is wrong information since it says "about 2 miles north-east is the old town" Eskişehir is not even close to the location that it says the old town was. ROOB323 08:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I put a note about Arabkir on the talk page. Xemxi 09:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I looked into the Arabkir/Eskişehir issue a bit more. I was wondering if you knew when the source which talks about an "Eskishehir" was written. The reason I ask is that there seems to be references to a present day "Eski Mahalle" which means "Old Quarter". I bet this means that in the past the new and old towns were seperate, but that they have grown together over the years. If your source is very old then this probably explains why I couldn't find any modern references to an Eskişehir. Xemxi 21:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Tahrir-ol-vasyleh

If you think it is a conspiracy theory, find sources and add it to the article.--Patchouli 10:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Disputed, but still connected with him.--Patchouli 10:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Why would Lankarani say he did?http://www.lankarani.com/English/bio/ --Patchouli 10:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC) Why would he besmirch his friend?--Patchouli 10:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Explain yourself at Template_talk:Ruhollah_Khomeini.--Patchouli 10:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

another sock-puppet of User: NisarKand

Dear khoikhoi. I am getting absolutely sick of this guy. He does all sorts of violations. He puts FAKE citations and provides FAKE sources. I told another mod about this and they are not doing anything. I'll talk about that with you instead. But first, today he made ANOTHER sock-puppet here. I am really getting sick of his DOZENS of sock-puppets. Please warn him to stop doing that and maybe give him another ban, I'll talk about the other stuff later. Thanks. Behnam 12:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is typical of Nisarkand. He has insulted many users before with racist or in general hateful comments and has expressed an extreme ethno-fascist/nationalist mentality. I hope you read that so that you realize what's on such people's minds. And hey, it now disappeared. Do you know anywhere else those comments might still be? I want to show it to another user. Thanks. Behnam 02:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try that. And about that picture, I had no objection to it for the info-box. It was actually Tombseye that removed it from there. Behnam 03:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Surprised? Not me

The argument in the talk, which you didn't read properly, is summarised for your pleasure here:

• - The number shown for population of Kurds in the infobox next to the Iran flag, refers to all the Kurds in Iran.
• - Kurdistan (i.e. the area in the map which you referred to in the talk page, which is considered as where 'Kurdistan' is in the middle east), does not include all the main Kurdish inhabited areas in Iran. For more information, actually READ the talk page discussion I made, and look at the map that shows how Kurds are scattered in Iran.

• There is a major community in North East of Iran which makes up a lot of the Kurd population in Iran and this population is included in the statistics for "population of Kurds in Iran" which is used.

• So:
• :: It's best if we remove "Kurdistan" as an area for the info box, as it has a vague definition and does not count the other Kurdish-majority areas in Iran,

• OR - You find statistics that only support the population of Kurds in the map which you pointed out.

• PS. It is not surprising to find an admin who doesn't read discussions properly before taking action, even in your case who is usually trusted with Middle East-related articles.

• PSS. I will not change it, but I do welcome you to do something about it. Thanks --Rayis 17:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Protection of Colchis

Hi Khoi, can you please protect Colchis from anon user vandalism? Thanks. Ldingley 20:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Help

Hi Khoikhoi

I would like to ask you for a favor. I want to bring Iranian cinema and Abbas Kiarostami's article to a good article status. As you wrote some high quality pages and also you are a native speaker of English, I would like to ask for your idea and comments on my works. Thanks for your time. Take care. Sangak 21:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Denial of the Armenian Genocide

I'm very sorry about the Three-revert rule.. I had taken a short look at the Wikipedia policies, but it was a short look! I should have been much more careful about the policies, as I will do in the future.. On the other hand, I would not edit the same article over and over for no reason.. Immediately after my edit, somebody else changed it and discarded my edit.. I had deleted "Anti-Armenianism" and "Holocaust Denial" links from the "See Also" section of the article, and placed "Genocide Denial" that would be more appropriate. I'm a newbie, I didn't know much about the talk page and stuff.. Thus now I looked at the talk page of the article, and saw the reason of the user "Aivazovsky" editing my page.. He stated: "Rv - I'm sorry, but to deny the Armenian Genocide is to deny a major part of the Armenian identity. When one denies the Genocide, they're denying the suffering of a people." Well, I have to oppose his opinion. First of all, armenian genocide and denial of the armenian genocide are both theses. I'm not saying that the genocide did happen or not. But they are both these, and Armenian Genocide, though accepted by mostly European countries for political reasons, is not accepted as a 'genocide' according to the 'international law'. Hence, for a democratic platform like Wikipedia contains the views of both sides. On the other hand, the user says that Armenian Genocide is part of the Armenian identity. Anti-Armenianism is "hostility toward or prejudice against Armenian people, Armenian culture and the Republic of Armenia, which can range in expression from individual hatred to institutionalized persecution." as stated in Wikipedia article 'Anti-Armenianism'. Thus Anti-Armenianism is a form of hostility or prejudice. In the article "Denial of the Armenian Genocide", there is no hostility towards the Armenians. Instead, there is an opposing view. If we consider opposing-views as hostilities toward a particular group (ethnic, religious etc.) or idea, then there is no place for democracy: ".. Two cheers for democracy: one because it admits variety and two because it permits criticism" (E. M. Forster (1879-1970)).. Therefore, I find it irrevelant to put the "Anti-Armenianism" link on the article of "Denial of the Armenian Genocide". To put this link on the article would mean that Denial of the Armenian Genocide is a hostile act towards the Armenians, however, as I explained above, it is not. It is nor a prejudice, because the article has concrete references and proofs. Hence, I recommend you that "Anti-Armenianism" link should be deleted from this article.

Thanks Khoikhoi for warning me about the Three-Revert rule and for reading this long:) message, 14:02, Kalkim, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. You brought up a lot of interesting points, and I recommend that you post them at Talk:Denial of the Armenian Genocide. Having said that, I wanted to point out that the countries that don't recognize the genocide do so because they don't want to hurt their relations with Turkey—it doesn't necessarily mean that they hold the same views as Turkey does on the events. Also see WP:NPOV#Undue weight. Most historians recognize the events as a genocide, right? For example, if you read this article, it says, "To the filmmaker and most historians, the documentary covers settled history, although Turkey continues to deny that it committed what many consider the first genocide of the 20th century." The view that it was only a civil war appears to be a minority view, and whether it's accurate or not, it wouldn't make much sense to give both views equal weight. As for the link to Anti-Armenianism, some people who oppose the genocide thesis are anti-Armenian in themselves (i.e. Samuel Weems, the author of "Armenia: The Secrets of a Christian Terrorist State"). However, I suppose I see what you're saying. Again, try making these points on the talk page, and hopefully you'll be able to come to a compromise. Regards, Khoikhoi 10:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for answering my message. I actually posted my opinion on the Talk:Denial of the Armenian Genocide. I know that it is a very tense subject. I wanted to send you a reply clearing out some points (this is the last message to you on this subject, I promise. I will continue my arguments on the talk page from now on). You pointed out that “the countries that don't recognize the genocide do so because they don't want to hurt their relations with Turkey”. That may be true. However, on the other hand, some countries which recognize the genocide have considerable Armenian populations. Examples are France, Russia, Argentina, and the state of California (see: Armenians). On the other hand, I had stated that the Armenian thesis is not accepted as genocide according to the international law. I do not think that all (or none) of the countries must accept the genocide claim in order to be officially accepted by the international law. I read about the “Undue Weight” policy. I do not agree with you on the fact that most historians recognize the event as genocide. Do you calculate all the number of respected historians in the world, count the number of them who recognize genocide and then come up with a conclusion that “most” historians accept the genocide? Well, at this point, I can tell you that Bernard Lewis, a well-respected historian, does not call the events “genocide” *[33]. And it’s not just him. Bernard Lewis also distinguishes Armenian case from the Holocaust *[34]. I did not know about Samuel Weems. Based on just the Wikipedia article I’ve read, I agree with you about your views on Samuel Weems’ Anti-Armenianism. However, unfortunately, by putting the Anti-Armenianism link at the bottom of the “Denial of the Armenian Genocide” page, you are actually violating the “Undue Weight” policy. He is just one person among the many who does not recognize the events as genocide. The people opposing the thesis (including Bernard Lewis and Justin McCarthy) cannot be considered, in anyway, anti-Armenian. On the other hand, we can call some people, who are in favor of the genocide, Anti-Turkish. For example, see this video on Youtube that insults Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic: *[35]. (I know that this video clip of System of a Down is not made by themselves. It’s made by a fan of the band. But, again, it’s someone who is in favor of the genocide. Then, we can probably place “Anti-Turkism” in the “See Also” section of the “Denial of the Armenian Genocide” article.) Nevertheless, I am not saying that we must put the Anti-Turkism link in the Armenian Genocide article. I am actually pointing out that it is not fair to put the Anti-Armenianism link in the Denial article. (It’s a harsh term.) Sorry for the late reply.. Also, can I get your permission to put our discussion on the talk page? Regards, 01:22, Kalkim 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Fire of Smyrna

Hi Khoi. Concerning this: it is written on the picture; i have explained also in the talk. Hectorian 04:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the protection. Good luck with vandels :S. ps - I think you should put a semiprotection on Rick James - been getting crazy amount of vandels by nonusers. Chaldean 05:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

If thats the case, then go ahead and move it. Chaldean 05:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Huns

Hi Khoikhoi. User:E104421 has once again started to mess up articles and pushing for some weired, pseudo-scientific, Pan-Turkic POVs! Just take a look at these edits: [36][37][38][39]. He is still claiming that "scholars compare the Huns with the Mughals, because the empires were similar". This is the most hilarious claim ever! Why should ANY scholar compare the Hunnic Empire (a large confederation of different nomadic peoples of Central Asia, with no literary or artistic traditions) to a highly civilized and modernaized sedentary kingdom such as the Mughals of India, and than claim that "these two Empires were similar"?! I had deleted that part from the article many times, but he keeps reverting to the previous wrong version!

What the scholar did was comparing the Hunnic Empire to that of the MONGOLS (also known as "Mughals"), because these two empires DID have similarities: both were nomadic, both were ruled by semi-independent Khans, both were a threat to the civilized sedentary population of Asia and Europe.

E104421 has already proved his "bad faith" in that he keeps reverting changes in the Huns page, but he did not show any reaction to these POV edits in the article List of Turkic states and empires.

Tājik 08:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Right now, the article is OK again. Tājik 11:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Page move.

A user just moved Byeong-in yang-yo to French Campaign against Korea, 1866, by cutting and pasting, which means that the edit history has disappeared. I think the page move should be uncotroversial, but I wobder if you could restore the edit history? Thanks!--Niohe 16:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion sought on User:Pernambuco

Given your previous unblock of User:Pernambuco, what do you make of [40]? William M. Connolley 20:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Ararat arev back with a new alias

I am 100% sure that User:Angine is Ararat arev. Fad (ix) 21:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

He is lying, 4000 miles away? Give me a brake, a girlfriend living 4000 miles away. Doesn't make much sense, does it? He uses the same exact arguments Ararat Arev was using. Raffi actually tried to get rid of him from his own encyclopedia, the guy will try any new gimmiks to sell his crap. Assuming good faith has limits, do you think that the guy who was blocked indefinatly and who kept comming back, will leave it to his girlfriend? Fad (ix) 21:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I just tried connecting on it on port 80. It is too, an open proxy. Fad (ix) 22:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Will do, but seems that they do nothing about it, the other one has yet to be blocked. Fad (ix) 23:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Ottoman Turkish

Sorry so slow to respond.

I am neither an expert, nor a native speaker, but I do both study and read, and this is the first place that I've seen the claim that Ottoman Turkish is a different language from Modern Turkish. I intend to look for sources, as time permits. It should make editors nervous if the first place they learn something on a subject they know something about is Wikipedia. (OR warning bells, right?)

The alphabet change is, as far as linguistic change, a non-event, since the majority of the population was illiterate before and immediately after the change, (it was a key element in the literacy campaign), and as the change of alphabet did not correspond to changes in pronunciation, meaning, grammar, etc.

The elimination of Arabic and Farsi vocabulary was dramatic, but largely removed synonyms and near-synonyms. Some on the list in the WP article are actually still used, though perhaps in more restricted ways.

Here's what the Turkish language article says:

The standard language of Turkish is essentially the refined Ottoman Turkish language as written in the Latin alphabet but not the initial Arabic alphabet and with the boost of neologisms added and the Arabic and Persian imports excluded.

So, new alphabet, same grammar, same structure, some sounds, but elimination of some vocabulary, this is a different language? Worse, this discussion arose over place names. Are there any differences in place names? Jd2718 22:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes it may be a different language because as a Turkish person I cannot read nor understand Ottoman Turkish. It's not same grammar, same structure!!!! Who told you that? --Gokhan 10:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

You cannot read it because it used a different alphabet. As you don't think you have heard it, how would you know whether or not you can understand it? The only question worth asking is whether the vocabulary change was so extensive that it should be considered a separate language. Answering that will require better sources than have been presented so far. Jd2718 03:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

re:Pashtun

I'll have a look tomorrow - I've been fighting with ArticleHistory templates all day, so my brain is mush. Raul just archived/promoted, so I'm sure it won't get passed over if I wait a day. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

My brain is toast - if I forget tomorrow, pls do ping me again. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Article

Sure, I'll upload it.--MarshallBagramyan 01:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

For the exact same reason that Armenians continue to live in Baku, some Azeris continue to live in the region itself. They probably live incognito like the Baku Armenians but there have been recent articles in the Armenian media interviewing them, showing their pictures, house, etc in generally amiable way. --MarshallBagramyan 01:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Might have to comb a little more but here's one by IWPR [41].--MarshallBagramyan 02:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Turkish Invasion of Cyprus

Thanks Khoikhoi for pointing out the 3-revert rule. There is absolutely no way of equating the forcefull expulsion of the Greek Cypriot population by the Turkish military from the occupied areas of Cyprus with the displacement of Turkish Cypriots to the occupied areas. The latter retain their right to freedom of movement and settlement. Even the source from www.internal-displacement.org makes this distinction. Larisv 01:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

thanks

for that Andav 09:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Appropriate Editing

Khoikhoi - I carefully read the EL policy and I believe that my links fall well with in the guidelines. I would be grateful if you point out how I am outside this policy. My link to Churchill provides 200 quality Churchill quotes showing his wit and communication ability.It is not a blatantly commercial site and it certainly adds value. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Speermeister (talk • contribs) 09:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

Nonsense edits by User:Linear Model

Is there an easy way of reverting all the nonsense edits of Linear Model (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? From the start with creation of article on not-existing Czar Maksim of Orenburg to the last is all nonsense. It will be lots of works if user's edits is to be reverted one-by-one, also with needing put several new articles on AfD, which are Maksim of Orenburg with Image:Maksim of orenburg.jpg, History of the guillotine in Russia, History of the guillotine in Ukraine, History of the guillotine in Belarus and History of the guillotine in China. Hevesli 11:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Lachin (rayon)

Hello again, would you please change Kashatagh redirect from directing to Lachin town it should redirect to Lachin (rayon) but not to Lachin town. Thanks ROOB323 11:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. ROOB323 11:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey khoi can you restore the kirovabad info to here? User:Nareklm/Kirovabad i know admins can see the deleted pages right? thanks man. Nareklm 22:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :-) Nareklm 22:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hey, more evidence that many of the users in the Azerbaijan dispute are actually one or two people: [42] Notice how Elnurso and several others who have not participated in weeks or months are listed... This shows that they are using them as meatpuppets/sock's to bolster their side. Many of these users popped out of no where! Remember that Atabek had a confirmed Sock.Azerbaijani 16:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Moved to talk:2004 Cypriot reunification referendum.

Schools

Are schools notable enough to have their own article? I noticed that you voted for delete on a AfD of an elementary school. Is there any Wikipedia policy that says schools are or are not notable? Thanks for the help. Agha Nader 02:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Agha Nader

Khoikhoi

Mr. Khoikhoi nothing personal but what orgin are you? (Mexican, Indian, etc.) Also what does your user name Khoikhoi stand for? King Lopez 09:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I read the artical on Khoikhoi I didn't know about that untill now. Thanks. King Lopez 10:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

E104421

Sorry, I was away over the weekend. To be fair, the two articles you named were not part of the "parole" package, and you'll remember it was you who insisted the parole should only be valid for a narrow range of articles, right? I actually find Dmcdevit's one-week ban a bit excessive and I'm considering to shorten/lift it. He wasn't actually close to a real 3RR, was he? Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, cancel that, I'd overlooked Golden Horde in the list. Sigh... Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Maylad

Hi, I've just noticed you deleted Stephen Maylad per CSD G5 (log [43]) but it appeared in the recent additions: ...that Stephen Maylad became Voivode of Transylvania with the help of Petru Rareş, who later doomed him to a wretched death in the Yedikule dungeons?. Now there is a red link and it doesn't look good. What to do with that ? ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 11:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

User_talk:Aziz1005#Use_edit_summaries

Can you please remind this user to use the edit summery? I've asked him twice already to use the edit summery, but he has ignored my request. He makes sweeping changes to articles, without using the edit summery. --Mardavich 15:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppet of Ararat arev

Please block him, its obviously him, User:Aryatzi Nareklm 00:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Yıldız

Hi, so we moved Yildiz to Yıldız. Shall we do the same to other related articles? Namely, Yildiz (disambiguation) and the still non-existing Yildiz Palace ? Chapultepec 00:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thank you... Chapultepec 08:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Qazakh

Khoi, can you close this article due to edit-warring? -- Aivazovsky 00:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Aivazovsky tries to impose one-sided version based on personal website of a Canadian historian unsubstantiated with references. You can check different versions, and Talk page as well--Dacy69 02:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Khoikhoi, I'm surprized that you reacted so quickly to user Aivazovsky's request, who has been the one violating the 3RR rule and has just admitted making a major mistake after being continually and politely asked about it since August of 2006. The page should be unlocked already now, as it's all clear from the Talk pages that Aivazovsky's source is just not good enough for Wikipedia, is not reliable, is not NPOV, is not solid, does not cite any archival documents, etc. --AdilBaguirov 02:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Khoi, what can I say? They love me! :) -- Aivazovsky 02:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Safavid

Salute. Looks like there is an agreement. Can you unlock it or at least make it for registered users? --alidoostzadeh 01:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Conflict on title

Ok, let's see if I can explain this all.

We have a discussion in Spanish Wikipedia about the word Reggaeton. The same discussion you have here, as I've seen. There is a "trouble-user" (the same here and there), who keeps "adding references" and yelling out the word must be spelled "Reggaetón". His references are always the same; and I can assure you, for every link he wrote (where they spell the word "reggaetón"), I can give another one where the spelling is "reggaeton". In addition, the most common is, of course, "Reggaeton", the english term. So, the thing I don't know is why, in english wiki, you have an invented (because "reggaetón" doesn't follow the spanish rules) term and in Spanish Wikipedia we have the true english term. What must I do? I add references of "reggaeton"? Can I start a votation so we can decide for one term? Thank you! --Damián del Valle 02:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 6	5 February 2007	About the Signpost

Foundation organizational changes enacted	Group of arbitrators makes public statement about IRC
AstroTurf PR firm discovered astroturfing	WikiWorld comic: "Clabbers"
News and notes: More legal citations, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

NisarKand is back

Here's another sock puppet [[44]]. He is not editing here on Wikipedia. He is now on WikiCommons and up to no good there. He's doing alot of vandalizing there. Take a look at his recent contributions [45]. If he is banned from here shouldn't he also be banned from Commons, Wiktionary, and others? Please take a look at that. His recent edits are all vandalism and he won't quit pushing for his POV even there. And if you can just please remove all his edits and undo all his edits. I know I should have contacted that other Admin, but you are most familiar with the situation so I decided to contact you. Thanks Behnam 07:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's another one PRTkand. Same thing, he's on Commons vandalizing there and and pushing his POVs and displaying his hatred for certain people there. Behnam 07:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there!

After 6 months, I am home and hopefully back at Wikipedia. There is no need for an edit war at Lucie Theodorová. The guy does not seem to be convinced by any means and the mentioned article bears little importance for me. Of course I cannot know its level of significance for you. I am now planning to start the article Mhallami but I certainly need a time of serious reading for the subject. Ciao! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Behemoth (talk • contribs) 13:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

Baibars

By the way on Baibars, you put the "Sprotect" code but you never actually protected it meaning clicking protect on top of the article. Nareklm 21:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Shuppiluliuma

FYI - This user is at it again with reverting constantly... HERE.

VERY beautiful picture, by the way! :) Rarelibra 21:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Persian_culture

Hi Khokhoi,

Just noted that Persian Culture article not only tries to avoid to dicuss "current" religion of Iranians, it also tries to emphasize signs and symbols of "anciant" Iranian religions.

I actually know where it comes from, but I find it somewhat un academic. Iranians, especially those living outside Iran, who are the ones with most interest and very passionate in editiong Wikipedia, do not like the idea of being identified as Muslim/Arabs more than Persians.

However, I think religion is one of the most important aspect of a culture. I have never seen an article about a culture not mentioning religion! Correct me if I am wrong!

Anyhow, just thought to let you know since you have had interests in Iran related articles.

Regards, Persian Magi

Hi again. Thanks for your response. I put a section there and hope it proves not to be contraversial and that others would build on top of it. Cheers, Persian Magi 10:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR violations

Can you please take a look at the conduct of User:Aziz1005, he broke 3RR on and Banu Musa and Musa bin Shakir, for which I warned him, and now he's making personal attacks against me on my talk page. He doesn't use the edit summery either, he just blindly reverts other people. --Mardavich 03:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Celil dispute

I respect your editing, but I do not understand your reversions on Huseyincan Celil, and I find the version you are reverting to to be pov in that it does not mention his conviction in the introduction. I also must insist that the categories on Terrorism remain per Wikipedia's policy on referring to terrorism and terrorists. KazakhPol 03:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Click the link. The category has a policy that arguably should be separated. I think I may do that now... KazakhPol 07:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: That translation ...

Hey there. Without me knowing the context of that, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but here goes:

To the respected personage (which is the term being used in Ottoman Turkish userboxes for "Wikipedia user")

Those esteemed five people together, from time to time the old newspapers! (grammar here is a bit ambiguous: it could be something like "in the old newspapers from time to time" or "sometimes associated with the old newspapers" or a couple other such things; without knowing the context, I'm not quite sure, nor do I know who those five people under discussion are)

Alright, nonsense comes out of you guys in a dream state. (the "you guys" could be a plural or a respectful singular referring to just you—I went for plural because of the five people mentioned earlier; the "dream state" bit could possibly mean something like "la-la land" as well, I suppose)

However, it's not that way for each one of you, mature fellow. (the "mature fellow" bit—sorry if I translated it a bit sillily, but it's early here—could be something like "wise guy" as well, possibly; "each one of you" could be "all of you" as well)

Again, without context, I don't know what is being referred to (and I also can't tell whether he/she's being sarcastic or not). I haven't got the time now to dig into the link he/she gave, but the picture there is of two gazel poems written by the 17th-century Ottoman poet Nâbî.

You might want to have someone else check my translation, too. It's early here, as I said, and my Ottoman is far from perfect. Cheers. —Saposcat 06:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, given some of that user's other contributions, I would say that he/she might not actually be being particularly kind, so I'm leaning towards the sarcastic interpretation of kâmil as something like "wise guy" or "tough guy" or "big guy", etc. Cheers. —Saposcat 07:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Wrong place

I briefly tracked User Gorco who kept adding in wikipedia articles, links to his site and the email address to his site (he has done the same with the German wiki). There are still some of his links across wiki. The language of that user also, in my opinion, seems threatening (for instance, "If you wanna scare me man, I'd rather prefer on doin' it, when our eyes will establish a contact, and not through a PC."). Could it be that he fits the profile of someone who needs to be blocked for a while? Politis 18:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)