Why is it some people find it acceptable to quote someone whose bias is so obvious?? Can we have a look at the quote from the Bosnian Serb 'historian'? I have posted some of his other writings on the talk page of Izmir.. It is really sad that some people are continously harassing some articles to fuel ethnic-hatred... Baristarim 10:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I have tried to make some changes, for the better, I hope.. Can some people have a look at the new version? The older version, without trying to offend anyone, did not have a conciliatory tone. Baristarim 12:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Dont be disapointed Khoi, actually i wrote it here and many other things on that web site as im a co-founder of it :) cheers. p.s soon there will be a similar web page of Canadian Ass. of Copts. Ldingley 23:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Well I purchased this photo on Ebay, the description was Cyril. You think its not? hmmm. maybe so, because all the time those ebay sellers cheat. :( I dont like that content Khoi (language is bit poor and not encyclopedic), i have to change it. I think i'll be attacked by the Arabs if i don't indicate sources. When i originally wrote that year ago, i didnt have time for research. BTW that web site is almost non-functional. :( Oh man, now you troubled my mind about Cyril. Ldingley 01:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks bro, I just replied Chaldean 05:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC) reply

The pkk is considered to be a terrorist organization worldwide, isn't it? I removed what i have written cause i've just started learning wikipedia rules, but pkk is in the list of terrorist organitions of european union, us, and united nations. The promotion of terrorist organization should not be allowed. e104421 23:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC) reply

I have no problem of understanding that's why i removed my statements before your last comment. As i stated above, i've just started learning wikipedia rules. Furthermore, i strongly agree with the philosophy of wikipedia. e104421 23:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Khoikhoi. I'm glad someone noticed them so fast, but, that should be because of your watchlist for the related articles, not a great surprise then. I mean just thank you. I guess I should sleep. Atilim Gunes Baydin 00:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I do not understand the statement "altaic (disputed)", Turkish is considered to be related with altaic language group. Why it is written in parantesis as disputed? I actually removed that statement and also added some historical facts about the contribution of Agop Dilacar's and Ataturk's contribution about the Turkish Alphabet, but someone removed that without any reason. Shouldn't it be discussed at first in the discussion page? e104421

I've commented this at User talk:E104421. -- AAikio 15:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

If it is claimed to be so, citation is needed. Without relevent references, it'll stay as a subjective statement.

What happened to the Ataturk's and Dilacar's contribution to Turkish Alphabet? I stated above that this information is also removed while restating the "altaic (disputed)" comment? e104421

What i mean is quite clear if it is written as "altaic (disputed)" this statement require a citation next to it such as "altaic (disputed) [citation]" (according to academic writing principles), isn't it? You still haven't answer my other question: What happened to the Ataturk's and Dilacar's contribution to Turkish Alphabet? e104421

The references about scientific articles should be based on scientific references, for example the ones included in the citation index. Furthermore, your statement "A number of linguists ""believe"" that many of the languages of central, northern, and eastern Asia form a single Altaic language family, although others consider Turkic, Tungusic, and Mongolic to be separate, unrelated language families" is a guess, cause of the word "believe", which make the whole statement purely a POV fork not a scientific argument. e104421

Linguistics is a scientific study, you know. e104421

I do not know this " WP:V: the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.", unfortunately, i have an academical training. The references, in my opinion, about scientific articles must be scientific. e104421 By the way, you still haven't answered my question:What happened to the Ataturk's and Dilacar's contribution to Turkish Alphabet?

In the "writing system" section, there is nothing about Dilacar, who is invited by Ataturk to the Turkish Language Conference and given a duty of helping to adapt a new alphabet. Of course, the main idea and the work is done by Ataturk himself but Dilacar also contributed. e104421

I do not know AtilimGunesBaydin, but i'm sure that you are on his side. I'm not against anybody, i strongly agree with the philosophy of wikipedia. However, everbody should have a NPOV. By the way, his contribution is good. e104421

Uff, gush, AtilimGunesBaydin, a physicist, i'm a physicist, too :) e104421

It's very very small indeed, cause i'm also studying high energy physics and further furthermore also CP-violation :))) e104421

))) hahahaaa, good point, the one should be avoided. However, we, physicists ovecomed that difficult by creating xarchive and also spires/hep database, which contain all preprints for free. e104421

If you have time, take a look at the Bač article. Zello 03:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Merhaba, Why did you revert the edit? Please let me know your concerns on the talk page. Aristovoulos 11:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi, sorry I joined the revert war on Latin peoples on the opposite side and reverted you. Hope you'll find my argument on the talk page reasonable; if not, please feel free to reintroduce (preferably with a different wording though.) Your comments will be appreciated. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi. I saw this page of yours. i wanna ask u how can we create such pages? we just create a page, e.g. User:Hectorian/Quotes, or there is something else i must know? And something more: can these pages be deleted (without a request by the creator), or they remain, for at least as long as the account is valid? Thanks in advance:) -- Hectorian 01:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes it helped. Thanks -- Hectorian 02:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I think that User:TarikAkin has gone too far... The only reason that i am not reverting all his edits is that he seems to have spend too much time on them. But he is unwilling to talk and explain and goes on with POV and no sources... -- Hectorian 03:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

No. I read the discussion in the talk page, but i do not think that such a move is appropriate. The article states in the lead that it is about an "alleged" topic. According to the numbers and sources provided (and they are many) half of the population was killed... well, this is not (a) massacre(s), this is a genocide... -- Hectorian 03:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I would not accept an article like 'Turkish Cypriot Genocide', cause u cannot call 'genocide' the death of about 200 people between 1963 and 1975. The definition of Genocide is much different. if someone could provide a source saying that these 350,000 Pontian Greeks fled, left, committed suicide, kidnapped by aliens or whatever, and that the actual number of the attrocities (that noone denies that occured!) was in fact much lower, then, i could support a rename. The two terms u proposed fail to represent the event: the term 'massacre' does not mean a large scale event, and may be considered as spontaneous. The term 'ethnic cleansing' can well imply expulsion and assimilation. What happened in Pontus was planned. I do not know if this will be heard right to u, but in early 1900s 50% of Armenians were killed and there is the article Armenian genocide... In WWII 1/3 of the Jewish population was killed and there is the Holocaust... Well half Pontian Greeks killed makes the Pontian Greek Genocide. And since there are references from Greece, Australia and USA, i see no reason to rename it. -- Hectorian 04:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Btw, did u see what happened yesterday?! It was also on CNN's website, but now it's gone:p -- Hectorian 03:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

File:AviXyrael.gif

I'd like to thank you Khoikhoi for either supporting, opposing, commenting, nominating, reading, editing, promoting and/or anything else that you may have done for my successful request for adminship (I've broken the one thousand sysop barrier!); I'm thanking you for getting involved, and for this I am very grateful. I hope to be able to serve Wikipedia more effectively with my new tools and that we can continue to build our free encyclopedia, for knowledge is power, but only wisdom is liberty. Please do feel free to get in touch if you feel you can improve me in any way; I will be glad to listen to all comments. Again, thanks 8)             — Xyra e l / 11:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

---

I started discussing the issue with Ante Aikio and we shall continue. However, this debate is out of the context of the Turkish Language article [ [1]], for this reason, i want you to remove the word "disputed" and also the link related with it (which does not seem to be a scientific source). The place of this discussion is not the Turkish Language article page. The discussion is about "productive-predictive [sound]correspondences", not with the Turkish Language itself. You may start a new article about it if you want, based on academical resources not creating a POV fork, or carry the dispute to the discussion page of Altaic Languages[ [2]]. Thanx. e104421 2 September 2006, 16:23 (UTC)

Thanks for your support and all that jazz. It passed and whatnot. You know. Yes. – Consumed Crustacean ( talk) 19:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I reckon the external links section could do with a clean-up. There are a few spammish links there. Thanks for removing the last one. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 19:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

It should do. Thanks, E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 19:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

PS:By the way, I'm glad the ArbCom decision has been rescinded. You're a good wikipedian. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 19:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I thought they reached that decision? Maybe not closed yet but looks like that anyway. About Kosovo, I gave up on that article a while ago. I had managed to keep some sort of fine balance but all hell broke loose after the Montenegro referendum with a few of the Albanian editors showing an in-your-face attitude to the Serbian ones. I then came back to have my say on the intro text but this didn't work out either. I gave up once again and things have gone downhill since then. I can't see a way out. This is certainly going to be a messy RFA (I have already been insulted by an editor I've never had anything to do with before, just to give you an idea). I wish there were another way but as Reinoutr said, everything else have been tried out already. Cheers, E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 19:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, I have tended to do the same lately, aside informal mediation (i.e. requesting comments) for a couple of articles or so. I even had doubts about taking part on the RFA but decided it was the right thing to do. This is why I find so funny to have been attacked by Tonycdp... E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 19:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Khoikhoi, You removed my links to the website www.ferrylines.com, which I added to the wiki's "Ferry", "Baltic Sea", "North Sea", "Mediterranean Sea", "Black Sea", "Azores" and "Canary Islands". It is true, it is a link to my own site, but it is not a commercial link. ferrylines.com included as the only ferry site ALL 250 operators, who serves together about 1.400 ferry routes with passenger and car ferries in the whole area of Europe. All other similar sites have maximum 20 % of them or less. There are only very few commercial aspects on that site, which are not able to meet the operating costs. In other words: ferrylines.com has one intention: the complete and up to date information about all European Ferries, with comfortable searching tools as maps etc. (I added the links to the maps, clean of any advertising). Therefore I recommend to re-add these links because it is a useful information about all visitors.

Btw: I added some more important ferry operators on the wiki "List of Ferry Operators" and there are much more to add (see above: I have about 250!)

Kind regards

Oliver Kowalski Germany-Luebeck

Hi khoikhoi, there are two baghdeda websites. And they are known for being rivals of each other. They have beef with each other (notice how he deleted one and kept the other). So I'm guessing this guy is representing one of them and hates the fact that it was the othe bakhdida website that originally posted this article. I have the permission email somewhere, maybe I should post it somewhere. Notice how he deleted everthing that I inputed myself (election results, the munipility, demographics of the town, etc) - this guy is obviously vandelizing. Chaldean 23:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey man, I thought 'Bajar' was 'city', not 'province'? - FrancisTyers · 01:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Can we again discuss the title issue? It is really not fair to accuse a nation of genocide just on a whim.. It is a serious allegation that must be backed-up by serious academic research. The definition of the United Nations and the international law must be taken into account. Pls let's not use Wikipedia to fuel ethnic hatred. The article still doesn't have even one impartial source or citation. Pls reply... If not we can easily witness a proliferation of 'genocide' sites on Wikipedia, claiming that every nation in this world has committed genocide against each other... Baristarim 10:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Look, I really need some help here, where can I go to ask for arbitration on the Pontian Greek site? I am an intl lawyer by training and I have tried to talk in the talk page, but nobody seems to be listening and everyone is just skirting the issue by resorting to name calling.. And I am being treated as a Holocaust-denier. It is really sad and not cool. The site has absolutely no references, one of the references that is mentioned doesn't even mention the Pontian issue, another one calls the Turks as baby-killers in its related page about the Pontian genocide.. It is neither good for Wikipedia nor for anybody else that some people try to settle some 'old scores' using Wikipedia. I have asked a substantiation of the 'genocide' claims but no-one is responding to my specific posts by seriously skirting the issue... Pls reply.. Baristarim 02:33, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I am sorry if I seemed to offend anyone, I know that nothing can be achieved by yelling at anyone, but not much has been achieved on this particular front for a long time by just staying quiet.. A. Garnet has been trying to talk for ages on the talk page, but nobody is listening.. And when I ask for more substantiation of the allegations of a genocide, Hectorian implies that I am a Holocaust-denier! Is that normal?? Not only is it sad, but it is offending as well, no? Everyone has been skirting the issue for ages... I'm new, so I suppose I don't how things work exactly around here, but what can I do? When I see such sites in the biggest encyclopedia on the Net, and that nobody is willing to talk, what am I left to do? I am sorry but, my experience with Wikipedia so far isn't giving me many reasons to be optimistic... I will try to request a mediation to see what comes up... Baristarim 03:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hectorian implies that I am a Holocaust-denier!: I did not imply this. As there will always be people who deny the Holocause and the Armenian Genocide, there will also be people who deny the Pontian Genocide (it doesn't have to be the same people...). -- Hectorian 03:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Look man, I know what I read... The logical construction of the sentence that u used (not the one above, but one in the talk-page) implies that, for u, people who do not accept the Pontian Greek Genocide are in the same category as Holocaust-deniers, and the fact that there are people who deny the Holocaust leads u not being surprised when someone 'denies' the Pontian 'Genocide'... This is basic English grammar, pls don't skirt the issue... And pls let's not beat around the bush, it's really not cool to be accused in such a manner. All I have asked is for substantiation of the accusations levelled, for you to imply, even remotely, that I am a Holocaust-denier is hors-sujet and neither cool, nor conforming with the spirit of Wikipedia... Baristarim 13:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

This is really ridiculous, the same claim is made in the Greeks article, but both of the links next to this claim DON'T WORK.. Is there someone out there that actually cares about Wikipedia?? This a serious claim to make.. If someone can't back this up in Greeks, I will add 'according to unverifiable sources, it has been alleged that'.. Pls reply... Baristarim 14:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Yancu is a Bonaparte sock, and Titirenko is a Ianosistvan sock. Why do you think Ianosistvan created Yancu, or what links them? Jayjg ^(talk) 04:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia. With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you. (Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp laudare 05:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

---

As i mentioned above, my objection about your action is not the way you understood. I said better to discuss the issue at the Altaic Languages section not in the Turkish Language section. There is still an accepted Altaic theory. The place of this discussion is not the Turkish Language article page. The discussion is about "productive-predictive [sound]correspondences", not with the Turkish Language itself. Both Ante and Future Perfect Sunrise are declared that they are not the experts of Altaic languages, but i appreciate their contributions and good will. I shall continue to discuss the issue with them. However, there are many academicians who still support the Altaic theory. Better to remove the word "dispute", cause there is already a link to Altaic languages sections, the one who interested in can read there what the so-called "dispute" is about. In addition, in the Altaic languages page, there is nothing about the "dispute", but the only in Turkic languages pages. I'm wondering the reason of it. This is the POV fork, not the claims about the Altaic languages. You are misunderstanding my words. I'm not trying to fight anybody, my main point of view is based on objectiveness, especially on the scientific issues. Lets put this discussion into the correct place. After then may some other people involve in discussion, even reach a conclusion. e104421 3 September 2006, 9:13 (UTC)

Let me also briefly comment on this once again. I still don't quite understand your arguments for removing the word "disputed". If it were removed, this would give the readers misleading information, as if Altaic were an unanimously accepted genetic classification on par with such established families as Uralic, Indo-European or Austronesian. This is not the case. The Altaic family is accepted by some experts but on the other hand rejected by others.

One of the problems here is that there are two separate but overlapping articles, Altaic languages and Altaic hypothesis, the latter of which documents the controversy (although not from a very balanced point of view and with too few references - more should be added). I think these two should be merged, as has been suggested. But in the meantime, the word "disputed" could be made to link to the Altaic hypothesis article. -- AAikio 09:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

The problem is to put the discussion on the right place. If we continue the discussion under Turkic Languages pages, this would lead to conclusion that there is a dispute of Turkic languages being Altaic cause only in the Turkic language pages there exist "disputed" tag. This is my main objection for removal. Ante, if you seach the pages of all Altaic languages, you'll see the "disputed" tag only in the articles about Turkic languages not for the others in the Altaic group. e104421 3 September 2006, 9:45 (UTC)

Hi Khoikhoi, it's me again. I've taken the freedom to join your discussion, please see my response to e104421 here: [3]. I'd say he actually has a point in some way, although he maybe wasn't putting it very well. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:33, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm not quite sure what's going on now - some misunderstanding? ( [4]) "an article full of POV and bullshit" seems a bit strong as a comparison of what it would be to use "Altaic" without a local disclaimer. I mean, major reference works (Ethnologue etc.) and the majority of the linguistic literature use "Altaic" as a matter of course, without any such hedging, if only as a convenient cover term for the group of languages, irrespective of the specialist debate about its genetic or non-genetic nature. (The matter for Japanese and Korean is different: There, it's a matter of whether J/K belong to Altaic at all; but Turkic belongs to Altaic no matter what the exact status of Altaic is.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I already warned them but they seem to be someone else's sockpuppets. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 10:36, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

---

There are many others, some include the tag some do not. There are also many languages which does not have any pages. You still do not understand the point. The discussion should be made under " Altaic Languages" or maybe much better " Altaic hypothesis" section. Please read Future Perfect at Sunrise's comments here[ [5]]. e104421. 17:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

---

Either you do not understand or do not want to understand. I reccomend you to read the Perfect at Sunrise's comments here[ [6]]. Have you ever read his comment? Furthermore, i forgot how many time i wrote to you where the discussion should be done. Just read the paragraph above. There, it is written that "The discussion should be made under " Altaic Languages" or maybe better " Altaic hypothesis" section". I'm not fighting with you, if you think so, just to make you happy, i'm declaring that "you won". You won cause i cannot help you to understand. You're getting aggressive, this means you are losing your NPOV. If you continue in this way, I shall not relent. However, I continue the discussion with others who have NPOV, such as Future Perfect at Sunrise or Ante Aikio. Bye. e104421. 19:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

---

Hi there: I noticed your spelling edits, and obviously left them in place. For information, is it the case that the lower case i in Turkish does not have a dot over it? We live and learn!-- Anthony.bradbury 19:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you.-- Anthony.bradbury 19:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I have no problem moving ancient named rivers to their modern equivalent where known (in this case Ceyhan). I generally create them that way unless either there is a difference of opinion as to which river is which (see Albula River (disambiguation), where among other Albula's there is one who don't know what to make of. Cities may be different: if the importance of the city is while it was called Foo and now the modern inhabitants call it Xab, I'm of two minds about whether to put Foo's history as part of Xab, or let Foo and Xab each stand on their own with pointers to each other, with a general default position to the latter, especially where Xab isn't exactly on Foo's location or is in no way a successor to a continuously inhabited Foo that was renamed, or the main blub on Xab is just a regurgiation of census and geopositioning data with no context. Carlossuarez46 20:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

`' mikka (t) 21:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi,

Would you please take a look at here List of English words of Turkic origin, the entry for Effendi. All dictionaries say it is from Turkish which in turn borrowed it from Greek [7]. Unfortunately a user tries to show it has a pure Turkic root. All he provides are links for some book in Turkish that use the word, but without any etymological evidence. Also take a look at Bairam too. In English the term only applies to a specific Muslim festivity [8]. Thanks. I do not wanna break 3RR :). Heja Helweda 23:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I never denied the Greek origin, that is in the beginning of the definition. What I wanted to say is 'Nasridin Apandi' is a historical personality in Uzbek and Uyghur tradition, and of course they have nothing to do with the Greeks, the links display this fact, they do not give the roots, and I wrote in the text that these links show the uses of Apandi, not the roots.

As for Bairam, this page is not a page for definitions, if the reader wants to see the definition, he can simply click on it. Additionally, in Turkish, which is our topic, a bairam can mean an ordinary festival.

85.99.170.234 23:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Additionally, if you can take a look at the English words of Persian origin, you can see lots of geographical names including Kazakhstan or Kyrgyzstan that cannot be applied in a word list. My list is much more sensible regarding this.

85.99.170.234 23:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Moreover, this 'Apandi' theory is not a theory I created, there is such a theory of Turkish scholars. Here is a link of a page of Middle East Technical Uni. If you search for Apandi you can see that. The article is in Turkish.

http://72.14.221.104/search?q=cache:GrNLcVEQy7IJ:pc12.soc.metu.edu.tr/bolum/bolum047.htm+apandi%2Befendi&hl=tr&gl=tr&ct=clnk&cd=1

85.99.170.234 00:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi,

Yes, that's correct. But I don't have the impression that Mëḏyoyo is often used to refer to the local dialect by the Syriacs themselves, it simply means "from Midyat". The language is usually called Ṭuroyo, Suryoyo, or Sureṯ. -- Benne ['bɛnə] _{( talk)} 06:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, I have. It's a lovely town, with very fascinating architecture, definitely one of my favourite places in Turkey.

I took some pictures while I was there, I'll see if I can upload some for the article. It's a shame that there's so little information about Midyat on Wikipedia. -- Benne ['bɛnə] _{( talk)} 08:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Bro did you see "chaldean warriors" comments on the assyrian peoples page? Do you see how these Detroit Chaldeans are uneducated? For the love of God they dont even know when their own Church was established. Did you see his theory about "Catholic" ? LOL. Fortunatly whats good is that this isn't the case back home. If this guy went back to one of our village and said what he said, do you have any idea what they would do to him? Chaldean 04:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh and by the way, that flag you see is illegiminate, because the Chaldean Church does not recongize it and has renounced it. Chaldean 04:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I have informed a speedy delete patrol officer [ [9]]. He should take care of it (hopefully) Chaldean 04:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh and one question; if I bought a book and I want to use a pic from that book, who do I ask permission from , since the author is dead? The seller? Chaldean 04:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh and by the way, if you are interested, I can send you a Aramaic-Jewish song that I think its nice. Kinda give you the feeling how the Jews of Northern Iraq spoke. Chaldean 04:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I don't know which dialect it is, but its one that was established in what is today Northern Iraq. I personally know 2 Jews in Northern Iraq, but you couldn't tell they are Jews because they dont tell people they are, they say they are muslim, for obvious reasons. These people are elderly and I dont think there is one that is younger then 50 years old. I know for a fact that the youngest Jew in Iraq is 42 years old and lives in Baghdad (in other words, there wont be not one Jew in Iraq, in about 30 years from now) Chaldean 05:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Check your email ;) Chaldean 05:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey bro, I will upload some Assyrian songs for you later :) - I had a question. You sound like you know somewhat about Moldova, and I was just wondering, is the country considered to be pro or anti Russian? Because I thought they were pro, but after seeing this - GUAM Organization for Democracy and Economic Development - I got confused. If they are considered to be anti, then why haven't they started a movement to reunite with Romania again? Chaldean 03:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi ,I don't understand why, you preffer a commercial site beltsy.md (only in russian) to my balti.atspace.com (the're are more than 50% of romanian speakers in this city)!!!? I hope you noticed that balti.atspace.com contains other, photo's , and video, and also a forum. So ,I thik you shoud re-add it to external links, or remove www.beltsy.md as well.

Hi Khoikhoi, thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which was closed as successful today with a finaly tally of (56/0/3). I will be very careful at first to avoid any mistakes. Please feel free to leave a message in my talk page if you have any comments/suggestions about me in the future. Once again, thank you! -- WinHunter ( talk) 09:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

You said ethnic Turks(about changing population) but if we believe what you say the non-Turks are at about 15%-20% in Turkey I think it is very big number that can make big problems.

Ok.I saw the ratio in CIA World Factbook.

• As i say i am not sure about that number.Must be researched and evidenced.

• Thanks for the welcome message.

The source you added is full of typical R. of "Azerbaijan" propaganda and historical revisionism. The author of that essay is from the R. of "Azerbaijan". Like I said in the edit summary, outside forces claiming to be seperatists does not constitute internal seperatism. Remember that Ganom and its sister organization (Sanom I believe its called), are two organizations set up in the R. of "Azerbaijan" by R. of "Azerbaijan" "Azerbaijani's". There is no internal seperatism movement like there is in Kurdistan and Balouchistan. Please reply on my page if you have any comments.

Also, the R. of "Azerbijan" (as well as Turkey) is known for its historical revisionism and propaganda. The "Azerbaijani" government even claims that Zoroastrianism is a Turkic religion. Also, the government of the R. of "Azerbaijan" nad certain members of the political frame work have openly called for seperatism in Iran and is known for inciting violence in Iran (with the help of the Grey Wolves pan Turkist's). ALso recall that not so long ago (I believe a year ago) the Iranian ambassador to "Azerbaijan" (who was an Azari himself) was invited to the "Azerbaijani" parliament (I believe it was the parliament, it could have been a conference). There, the politicians insulted Iran and called for seperatism, so the Iranian embassador became offended, got up, and left. Khosrow II 18:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Actually, I've never read those but thanks for giving me the links. They seem interesting. Also, I hope now you see what I mean. Let me give you an example.

Mexico cannot set up Mexican seperatism groups and claim that the Mexicans in the USA are seperatists. Its the same with the R. of "Azerbaijan". They set up such organizations, and then claim that there is internal Azari seperatism within Iran, which is completely a lie. I mean, just imagine it. there are between 13 and 24 million Azari's in Iran, if there was seperatism, wouldnt it be much worse or about the same as the sepratism Turkey is seeing with Kurds (bombings, civil war, etc...). Khosrow II 18:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm going to go for a walk and cool my head. Please remember my version and please restore it after the other user gets banned (among others, because he is probably a sockpuppet). Thank you. Dahn 20:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I noticed just how dark it is outside ;). Actually, I stayed because he was attacking my talk page. Anyway... Thank you. Dahn 20:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I haven't attacked you on your page. -- Peter IBM 20:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

WP:CIVIL is the page you must read. -- Peter IBM 20:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I have no real preference which gets merged; but one should point to the other. Carlossuarez46 20:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Also, if you're taking the intiative (more power to you!), I would do a google scholar or google book search to see if Spasinu or Spasinou or something else is the preferred transliteration of the Greek. I assumed the latter, but apparently others assumed the former and neither of us found the other. Carlossuarez46 20:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions&target=Moldoveanul? who is he? I suspect it's you. -- Peter IBM 21:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Nu, nu sunt utilizatorul Khoikhoi. -- Moldoveanul 21:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

are you User:212.227.103.74? -- Peter IBM 21:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

What do you think about the removal of the unreferenced tag in this article? Baristarim 21:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Maurya Empire

Hello Khoikhoi,

The sources you were referring to were speculating. They were not construction a logical history. Hence the deletions. Those entries were examples of sneaky vandalism. Please make that distinction. The inclusion of speculation is injurious to the historicity of the article.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Hello Khoikhoi,

The sources that were being used themselves were attempting to propagandize and not construct a logical history. The contributor of those edits was attempting to insinuate some connection that didn't exist, and then, to ensure NPOV eligibility later includes the actual indigenous source that accounts for that. That is the reason for this on-going debate. The concern is that anyone can throw out idle speculation so long as the mainstream perspective is later included. However, if the speculation itself skews the actual understanding of that history, then the historicity of the article is harmed. That is the concern. I understand the importance of ensuring NPOV here, particularly in regards to ultranationalism. However, we must be equally vigilant against eurocentrism and philhellenism as well.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Ok, my mistake. Yes, I'm deepblue, but I don't use that login anymore. I visit this site very rarely. I know that if I start using my account, that'll pull me more into this, so that's why. Take care. 24.211.193.113 02:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Ok, I got your point. With regard to Karl Meire, it's true that I was reverting his reverts because he was blindly reverting articles on Turks and Islam. In fact, almost his all edits were reverts. I was simply helping other editors deal with this guy. I'm sure that Wiki hasn't lost much due his absence.

Hey, Khoikhoi. I'd be happy to add the Ottoman script in for those names; it might take a bit of time, though, since I'm currently computerless at home. But rest assured, it will be done. As the excellent modern Turkish pop singer Göksel says in one of her more popular songs: "صبر صبر يا صبر" (Sabır sabır yâ sabır = "Patience, patience, oh! patience"). Cheers. — Saposcat 05:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, sorry I forgot to reply to your question. I's been busy a bit. The song's title—oddly enough—is "Sabır" ("Patience"). — Saposcat 05:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Khoikhoi, for your support at my RfA, which finished with a tally of 94/1/0. I hope I live up to the confidence you have shown in me in my activities as an administrator. JPD ( talk) 15:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello Knoi,

a anon has deleted the entire Talk:Kurdistan page could you please revert it. Thanks. Ozgur Gerilla 23:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks :) Ozgur Gerilla 23:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply

OK, i added them. about what u said, as it seems, it did not happen 'his wayyyy':p. Cheers! -- Hectorian 18:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Sorry for bothering you again but could you please set up a poll for this section [10] to be displayed as one of the top sections in the PKK article. If you can please tell me how to do this as well so I won't bother you next time. Ozgur Gerilla 18:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I removed the bolding from the former names, and kept bolded the two modern ones. I think it seems better this way. -- Hectorian 01:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

BTW, do u think it is better to have the lead with only the modern names in bold? -- Hectorian 01:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Not quite... I think that 'Trebizond' is the former Turkish name, which comes from the Greek 'Trapezounta'. In the Greek language there are only two names for the city: 'Trapezous'->ancient Greek, 'Trapezounta'->Byzantine and modern Greek. We could have the greek and former names in italics, and keep the bolding only for the english ones, since it is the English Wikipedia anyway... -- Hectorian 01:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I do not really know something specifically for the Greeks that used to live there. however i found 3 links: [11], [12], [13]. seems that there were many Greeks. 'bout the name 'Nis' i can assume that it comes from 'νήσος' ('nisos'=island) or 'νησίς' ('nisis'=small island). 'Akrotiri' is the greek word for 'cape' and it is written like this: 'Ακρωτήρι'. This seems very interesting to me... i will see if i can find something more. -- Hectorian 02:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hehe:). u "almost" had it:p. 'Ayastefanos' is the turkish form of the greek 'Hagios Stefanos' 'Άγιος Στέφανος'. but u are right about which saint it is refering to:D. u are improving your greek, though. well done! -- Hectorian 02:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi, do you think this is a Bonny edit? -- Telex 18:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Apart from Bonny, doesn't it seems to be the night of the living dead?:p -- Hectorian 18:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm sure this ip is the sockpuppet of the user Kachik, but lets wait for a while, i shall try to talk with him, maybe he'll understand the wikipedia principles and give up this exaggeration habit. i'm also against to him, because of him my account was blocked last week. However, i'll try to assume good will and wait. We can discuss about this after seeing his future contributions. Bye. e104421

Yes, i know from the beginning :) e104421 7 September 2006 (UTC) 23:10

That's right. I tried to check his fascist inclinations by replying him in such a manner that he would like. However, there's no need. Alex told me that he should admit his fault himself otherwise it's meaningless to contact with him. Yes, he's right. I always try to be a socialist person, always try to assume good will, but sometimes this makes no sense. That's the case, better to block him and watch the articles he'll vandalise in the future with other ip's or user names. We already know these pages. Keep in touch young brother. e104421 7 September 2006 (UTC) 23:37

I do not know this. Usually women do not interested in military staff. Just because of these exaggerated figures, i learned the inventory of Turkish military forces :( Actually, i'm against all kinds of military expenses. The system itself causes problems. By the way, You know Turkish quite well, aren't you? e104421 7 September 2006 (UTC) 23:47

More questions, why are you so interested in articles related with Turks, Turkish, or Turkey? I checked your contribution history, most of your contributions are related with Turkish related staff. Furthermore, in my opinion, you are trying to put controversialy statements on these articles. Why are you doing this? One of the basic wikipedia principles is to assume good will, isn't it? I also learned that you applied for admin.ship but failed. I read the comments there stating that you're full of Turkish hostility. Are these statements correct? Remember our discussion about the dispute of dispute, future_perfect_at_sunrise put a very neutral and scientific arguments about the Altaic, but, in my opinion, you never read the article "telling the general linguists about Altaic" yet, however, continued to put "(disputed)" tag on all Altaic languages. On the other hand, in this state-of-art paper, it's revealed that the dispute is a minor one. I'm still wondering what you're trying to do??? e104421 7 September 2006 (UTC) 00:27

I never mentioned about the Armenian issue. I just said that your contributions on Turkish related subjects causes controversies. I know from my own experience about the dispute of dispute that you are getting aggressive whenever someone opposes your POV. If i'm wrong just say it so. As i said you before i'm not trying to fight anybody, just trying to understand. Furthermore, i should state that you still do not answered my questions above, just tried to change the subject into a controversial one. I'm not your enemy, but just a foreigner trying to understand your POV. e104421 7 September 2006 (UTC) 00:53

Ok, let me simplify my arguments above, why are you dealing too much with Turkish related staff, just for fun or ...? I'm just wondering your reason. I think you somehow have a connection with Turkey, aren't you? e104421 7 September 2006 (UTC) 01:10

Then, let me put my own arguments about you. I think you're related with turkey, may be a turkish citizen. However, you feel that this country or to simplify turkish people somehow did something hurting you. I want to know this. May be i can help you about this. I shall greatly appreciate if you could be kind enough to explain the situation, but in a honest way as i assumed for you to be. e104421 8 September 2006 (UTC) 01:30

Well, i'll send an e-mail to you tomorrow, cause i've already started sleeping in my office, should try to find my bed. Keep in touch brother :))) e104421 8 September 2006 (UTC) 02:12

I'm sorry, Khoi, but I think it's not very nice of you to selectively mobilize the users with predetermined bias towards the Sokhumi/Sukhumi naming issue. Thanks, Kober 08:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply

If you think that I'm a "user with predetermined bias", you need to prove that I was "mobilized" by Khoikhoi. My advice is to not to expose yourself to Tbilisi propaganda for extended periods of time. Cheers, Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your advice. Should I watch more Russian TVs? Judging from your edits and phrases like "Georgian imperialism", I don't think that Georgians are more exposed to governmental propaganda than Russians are.-- Kober 09:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi. I wanted to ask you some advice: if I want to ask an article I've just written to be commented and some opinions to be given (the article is Voulet-Chanoine Mission), have you any idea where should I go? Which is the most indicated place in wikipedia? Wikibureaucracy is becoming a true jungle...-- Aldux 00:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the help, Khoi, I've given a look there and for now I opted for WP:RFF. Ciao :-)-- Aldux 01:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi. I had, of course, not meant to induce the belief that Transylvania had always belonged to Romania or any such notion, but that it is a historical region in Romania (when "of" is both carrying the same meaning as "in", and prevents the article from being vandalized by another horde of Bonapartes).

On the "History of..." article. The contributor has shown himself to be an open-minded one, and, just by glancing over his edits (supposedly his, as I did not compare in the history page for the article), I see that they are, at the very least, more neutral than the earlier versions. Some of the page is redundant (part of it was just copied from an article I wrote on Avram Iancu), some is superflous (nobody really needs as many mentions of the events'legacy in chauvinism), some may be wrong, but I have little patience to deal with that massive a topic just now (especially since ancient Transylvania is not really my cup of tea). I promise I will look into it in the future, though (at least, for copyediting). As for references: I note that he did not use them in the article, but he did reference some related topics and probablly felt that it would be redundant to add references present in links. Dahn 05:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

People keep on removing the tags from the Pontian Greek Genocide article.. The issue about the title is far from over so I am putting them back up, just wanted to let you know, just in case... Cheers! Baristarim 16:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

FYI, the {{ totallydisputed}} tag covers everything (title and sources). Multiple tags over the same thing just uglify the article (something I suspect is your overall objective anyway). -- Telex 17:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

the article, the title and its sources are not the samething.. Anyways, i am really tired of this POV pushing.. Before I joined, I thought that wikipedia was better than this.. But I am not giving up... Baristarim 17:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

People have been citing the name of an institute, the Australian Institute Of Holocaust and Genocide, in the Pontian Greek Genocide article.. I have looked through the section in its website where it talks about this issue and it is only signed Panayiotis Diamadis.. I put a post on the Talk:Pontian_Greek_Genocide about this if u want to have a look.. I am afraid that people will say that i am a genocide denier because of pointing this out so it would be greatly appreciated if you can just have a look at it and tell me what u think about the reliability of this source, that would be appreciated.. I am of the opinion that this institute gave some space on its website to this guy, and this is his thesis and not the position of this institute as a whole.. thanks... Baristarim 17:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

BTW Khoikhoi, did you see this. Apparently, the EU (or the Dutch MEP who prepared the report) is considering requesting Turkey to recognize the Armenian, Pontian and Assyrian genocides prior to full EU membership. While I personally disagree with such a request (re-opening the Halki Theological Seminary, lifting the unreasonable restrictions on the Ecumenical Patriarch and withdrawing its forces from Cyprus (Turkey can't expect to join the EU, if it's militarily occupying a large part of an existing member state) would suffice for me), it's nice to see that the genocides are getting more and more publicity. -- Telex 17:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

It was accepted in a meeting of the sub-committee that was dominated by MEPs who, let's say, are not that sympathetic to the entry of Turkey's entry to the EU. On the other hand pls read it Khoikhoi... For the Patriarch, I got one thing to say, Turkey is a secular country that has even abolished the Caliphate after the revolution, the issue of the Patriarch is not a Greek versus Turk issue but a role of religion in politics versus seperation of church and state issue, believe me.. Baristarim 21:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Sorry to say that, but Turkey is 'considered by itself' to be a secular country. There are religious schools in Turkey, and Turkey funds the construction of mosques, not only in the country but also in places of the Turkish diaspora (e.g. Austria). However, the operation of the Greek Orthodox seminary has been banned by law. That's why EU says that this is not democratic. Since all the European member states (and all the world, apart from Turkey) recognise the status of the Ecumenical Patriarch, Turkey has to do the same. Not to mention that this is a violation of the Treaty of Lausanne (among many other violations) that Turkey had the obligation to respect. -- Hectorian 21:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

User talk:VinceB#Magyar őshaza yeah, then I realized it (and found a duplication also) so I "nominated " it for AfD. -- VinceB 20:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

And the tile name was also awful. Urheimat is german for Homeland. The right name for it would be "Hungarian homeland". -- VinceB 20:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Its name is Baskiria, not "Yaga" or what. Tons of bad stuff in such a short article. Here's a map. Mek stands for Magyar Elektronikus Könyvtár = word-by-word Hungarian electric library wich means Hungarian online library - part of the Hungarian National Library. -- VinceB 20:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Careful with the edit summaries, dont raise tentions. :) -- Cat out 20:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hehe, I got the idea from a user who tried to rewrite the article, but ended up actually deleting 90% of it. I'll be more careful in the future. :) — Khoikhoi 20:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

^_^. Say you interested in anime at all? -- Cat out 20:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Not at all. ;-) — Khoikhoi 20:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Why not? :P -- Cat out 20:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

BTW, don't you think "armed militant" sounds sorta redundant? Of course the PKK is armed. — Khoikhoi 20:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hmm, it is pointing the obvious for a person who knows what PKK is, but when BBC for instance report it as an "armed millitant" group. "Armed" basicaly points out that they are not like your average political party. Not imperative, but certainly cant hurt to have it. :) -- Cat out 20:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I completely forgot it! Damn ME! After I select the previous date do I click 'edit this page' on the top or somewhere else? Oh I will try the skill next time. Thanks. Ozgur Gerilla 22:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I think the one anon changed it to is full of POV it's better to have this:

Kaya went into exile in France in June 1999 on account of various charges arising from his political views.

Kaya went into exile because the policies on this matter in Turkey are ridiculous. Everyone who talks negative about the Republic of Turkey or Ataturk or even one who says he/she is Kurdish is directly insulting Turkey. There are so many writers in Turkey both Turkish and Kurdish who have been restricted just because of stupid things like this. Take Orhan Pamuk and Ismek Besikci for example. Same thing with Ahmet Kaya just because he said he's Kurdish and he will produce a track in Kurdish (It's done and the track is called, Kervan -Hoscakal Gozum, Listening to it now:) he was attacked by the entire media and nation. When this guy was the one of the most respected artist in Turkey he became notorious just because he said his Kurdish! I mean it wasn't a shock to us the Kurds because this happend before with the one of the one of the most sucessful filmakers in Turkey Yilmaz Guney and the most sucessful poet Nazim Hikmet. So yeah -anon is full of POV with that sentence and I'll try me super awesome technic to revert it happily. I'd also check the criticism. - Ozgur Gerilla 23:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I've just realised. :( Ozgur Gerilla 23:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply

A motion removing your probation in the Aucaman arbitration has passed 6-0. As of now, you are no longer under arbitration restrictions in that case. [14]

For the arbitration committee. -- Tony Sidaway 03:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, Khoikhoi, congratulations! -- Telex 10:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Indeed! Just got the news myself, and wanted to give you my congratulations. You've more than earned it! -- InShaneee 18:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I don’t really know much about the Assyrian Genocide, although the article in question does say that France, Sweden, and the United States have permitted the construction and display of commemorating monuments. Also, as you mentioned Χαλδαίος, I have a question: are the terms Assyrian, Syriac, Chaldean and Aramaean synonyms? -- Telex 10:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Okay, I've re-added the System of a Down topic on the Genocide talk page. You take it from here. – Clevelander 11:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Well sadly it looks like its not going away..are you *still* not an admin? -- K a s h ^{Talk | email} 11:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

After a month of military training, I swore in and became a proud member of Turkish Armed Forces :-( I attained a judicial job, i.e. office work, therefore no more hard outdoor training. However, I will not have access to the Internet at the office. I'll try to contact you when I leave the barracks for a day off, once in a week. Take good care of yourself. Ciao! User:Behemoth 12:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

So where's that apology? I did fix it didn't I? Miskin 12:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

---

The item removed was discussed in detail in the talk section a number of times by different users but the people who kept it up through sheer repetition did not care to answer a single of these

true the phrase is taken from a "source" but to say the that through out history "kurds" as defined by the article have been fighting assyrians & crusaders ...and to immediately link it with present struggle against nation states in the region ...i.e to suggest that a notion of kurdishness being present in a group of people (the then resident tribe call it hurrian or carduchi) fighting neighbouring tribes is false and false and false again

the people populating that region weather then speaking an indo aryan language or otherwise are common ancestors of all people who fall within that region could be lurs or armenians or other resident people who may have migrated sideways or otherwise and their fights through out different ages is not coherent kurdish theme as suggested in the article

" the kurds have continously fought ....this amd that... what then when the kings of the kingdoms ruling Iran were from what today be the region termed such why then man dont they link this with current scenario .....

in the discusssion page nobody came up to answer the argument that:? are the carduchi forefather to present day residents of anatolia all(kurd, armenian and turkish speaker) or otherwise specifically a proto peshmarg ...no one has answered users:ali dostzadeh or loosekarma or ....

why ? the sourced reserch on the link with jews does not even say that ..it just concludes that jews have far more commom with some other mediterranian (anatolian) populations than arabs to whom as refered to in an erlier research per that article the various jewish groups are similar anyway

to keep that up in that way is only what one would term as a bilakh per a language from that region

? please stop this -- 129.241.57.59 21:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I just did I hope I made some sense even though it was a hurried argument!!-- 129.241.57.59 21:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Sure have heard of him. Its probably "Yahya Ilhan" since "Yahya" is the Turkish version of "John" , but im not 100% sure on that. I'll have a look around the net-- Kilhan 05:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Aha, got it - its Mustafa İlhan [15]-- Kilhan 05:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello, I would like to share with you the fact that the Kurdish people article is nothing but propaganda. The history section is mostly fictional and nothing is supported by mainstream scholars. I have tried to raise attention to this matter in the past by adding cleanup and POV tags but they have constantly been removed by Heja, Wirya, and some other person who I suspect is sockpuppet of one of them. I really do not care anymore but I believe something should be done by somebody. The Iranian focus is mostly on Azarbaijan articles now but I think the Kurdish problem is much worse because of all the fictions that they have inserted which does the real Kurdish peoples no good. Wikipedia should make alert to everyone what they are doing and none are "verifiable". It is "junk" history that is made up to force their view. Khorshid 08:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello, yes I did try to explain on the talk my concerns weeks ago, but they were ignored and all three removed my changes. If you notice for example Heja removed mention of a Kurdish girl called Nazanin Fatehi because she is not "very important" person according to Heja. Even though this girl is about to be executed and is probably the most well known Kurdish girl in the world right now. Why Heja does this? Because Nazanin is Shia. You can look at the talk there for all my comments and their "non-responses" if you know what I mean. Unfortunately no one is interested in the Kurdish articles except those who are motivated by politics or ethnic bias, and it would take a lot of work (A LOT of work) to fix the problems. Where is Tombseye? He seems to be good at this type of thing. I would try to fix it myself but as you know I don't like to put in so much hard work like last time and then have it all erased. Khorshid 05:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Have you become admin now? Khorshid 05:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Please look at the history of Iranian Kurdistan for example and compare all the edits. There has been TONS of information removal due to bias and politics. In my opinion we should say to the Wikipedia "community" to make new guidelines about the behavior of editors and give everyone an ultamatum that Wikipedia is not supposed to be political and all factual information belongs here whether anyone likes it or not. If they dont like, they should leave and stay far away. Or go to hell. :) What do you think?? Khorshid 05:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Unfortunately some people (I will not name names, but it is clear) do not understand this important policy that you have quoted. It is regretable. Khorshid 03:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi, some users are love moving article names to funny anglicized names not knowing some become funny in their native languages. I've seen that you revert some of them:) As a respect, i write a message to that guy but he doesn't seem to respond :) And today i checked it's already reverted by another user. Cheers -- Ugur Basak 08:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Selam Uğur...or shall I say, "Ugur". ;-) Yes, I've indeed been reverting. :) In this case it looks like we might have to go to requested moves. Personally, I think people take this "Use English" policy a bit too far. For example, one of the reasons to move Gökçeada and Bozcaada to " Imbros and Tenedos" was because the Turkish letters are "undesirable in a title in english Wikipedia", but from who's point of view? Anyways, good luck on getting the page moved back. Please let me know when you start the survey. Kolay gelsin! — Khoikhoi 02:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Selam Khoikhoi, i was too lazy to start a survey, but an admin has already reverted without a request. May be he saw my messages, i don't know, but there is no problem now. Actually Gökçeada and Bozcaada is more accurate names because they are in Turkey's terriotary, anyway it's a different case. When i see "Kolay gelsin" i remember a turkish saying about "Kolay gelsin", if someone says you "Kolay gelsin" in a difficult situation, otherone says "Kolaysa başına gelsin" literally "if it's easy it come upon your head" means "if it's easy it come upon yourself". Kolay gelsin -- Ugur Basak 13:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm glad there's no more problem. I agree that Gökçeada and Bozcaada is better too. Wait, I don't understand...what does "if it's easy it come upon yourself" mean? Besides that, your English is excellent. :) Take it easy. — Khoikhoi 01:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

What kind of excellent is it, do you mean good or bad:) Ok, "Kolaysa, başına gelsin": baş means head and sometimes used as yourself, himself etc., "başına gel-mek" is "to encounter a bad situation" or "to undertake a task" and all this sentence means "If it's easy, you encounter that bad situation". Cheers -- Ugur Basak 08:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Nope. Sorry. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

hoopydink ^{Conas tá tú?} 23:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Romanians is already semi-protected, was that not sufficient? Or did the :) mean you are joking? Did I step into the proverbial hornet's nest or something? – Gyrofrog (talk) 00:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply

it is a passage from the Qur'an, specifically 3.102. ITAQALLAH 01:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply

no problem. yes, they are.. Yusuf Ali being one of the more popular translations today, although some others are very noteworthy. i think Pickthall's rendering is more accurate in some places.. although it uses old english. ITAQALLAH 05:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi KhoiKhoi. I am dealing w/ the issue. I want to sort this out for once. I've just deleted User:Yessou El Maseekh. I also asked User:Sargonious about their request re the deletion of their account. User:Jihad Jones got no sign of suspicion and their contributions are limited to 2. However, has anyone made any prior request for a checkuser related to User:Peter Agga and User:Shaitan Al Mahdi? – Szvest 21:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply

KhoiKhoi. Sorgonious has apologized and i'd like to see you both avoiding any kind of confrontation or harrassement. I believe the matter is sorted out. Cheers – Szvest 14:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I know KhoiKhoi but that's another matter that dates back to a long time ago because of editorial reasons. The important now is that he refrained and aknowledged the usage of multiple socks and that was the reason behind your request of my intervention. I am just trying to cool down the situation between you and i hope you both could avoid confrontations in the future. – Szvest 17:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks mate. By the way, where are you from? – Szvest 17:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Love that place. The best State in the whole US! – Szvest 17:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I am from Northern Morocco ( Tangier but living in Casablanca). I've just came back a few months ago after years abroad (KSA and UK). I've been to Calif but only to L.A. for a couple of months in 1995. – Szvest 17:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Though i am very active on Berber-related articles, unfortunately i can't speak any one of them :( There are a few wikipedians who can. – Szvest 18:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Happy editing. – Szvest 18:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi. i cannot understand something: [16], [17]. is there anyone who calls it this way? what will be next? a redirect of AEI to AEK and of PAOI to PAOK? Hectorian 01:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I disagree. Turkey rejects the 'Ecumenical' title of the Patriarch, therefore such a redirect is surrealistic. not to mention that the turkish government considers him just the bishop of the 2,500 Greeks that have remained there-they hardly consider him a 'patriarch', but rather a bishop (if not just an ordinary priest...). i did not mentioned the 2 sport clubs above just to show the difference... Turkey had officially demanded from UEFA their rename... and although such a demand was of course rejected, i think it shows that "someone" wants to rub away the name 'Constantinople'. Hectorian 02:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

OK. how can we delete the redirect? there is no reason to have such a redirect... Hectorian 02:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'd love to fix the double redirects, but unfortunately I can't quite figure out how, and the abstract "page A" and "page B" and "page C" hoo-ha over at Wikipedia:Double redirects didn't help me out any, either. Any clearer explanation that you could give would probably prod me into fixing them pages up, but for the nonce I feel like a çaylak ... — Saposcat 05:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Regarding the discussions on İstanbul/Constantinople and Patriarch (Ecumenic or not); The name "Konstantinople" in AEK and PAOK is using as adjective which represent Ancient/historical name. But "Constantinople" in "Patriarch of Constantinople" and other smilar places ; is using a current city name which has no a city with this name.This is an onesided and improper attempt to change the name of a Turkish city. The name of that city in all languages of the world is "İstanbul". We/you can use "Constantinople" in all related/similar articles with a remarks "Ancient/historical name". Please revert your last edit. Mustafa Akalp 13:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Could you please explain the reasons for adding "de-facto" in the captioning for the flags and the coat of arm. The political status of these entities is already so apparent, it's impossibble to miss. Mentioning the same thing over and over again, in every field of the infobox, is an overkill, compromising the style of the articles. Please look at List of unrecognized countries, especially Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and Republic of China. Not a single article uses the same style. Óðinn 16:31, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Khoikhoi, for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. — this is messedrocker (talk) 17:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Certainly you can add them, those are my contributions to everyone... Chapultepec 22:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

No, hopefully I did not get caught up in the violence when I was there. But, I was working there and we were always under safeguard of Ingush policemen, whether we liked it or not :)

Chapultepec 23:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, I've only been to Ingushetia, but I've seen Chechnya on the border, there was no difference at all, verdant like Ingushetia. In fact almost one third of Ingushetia's population was formed by Chechens. Yes, it was indeed a small area so that I could see Ruslan Aushev at least twice :) Some of my co-workers were visiting Nalchik periodically for logistic purposes, but I could not have the chance to see either Kabardino-Balkaria or Dagestan.

Chapultepec 23:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I strongly recommend everyone to go there and see the countryside, that's fabulous. So, bye then.

Chapultepec 23:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi, you inserted Template:Infobox Bilateral relations into Greco-Turkish relations the other day. Apparently, the template automatically links to a locator map image which doesn't exist in this case. Do you know how to create one? Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hope you like it!!! -- HolyRomanEmperor 17:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I say we just delete it. – Clevelander 23:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Sounds fine to me. – Clevelander 23:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I accept your edit respectfully, but I want to note that the idea that we can just put both groups together in one lump is utopian. truth is hebron for jews and hebron for arabs are two completely differnet things with two complete different histories and meanings and lives and ideas and philosophies and legacies, and whatever happens, no jews will be able to live in hebron under a palestine state in the future and so on. it's the sad life of things. Amoruso 03:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey Khoi. Just saw your question. Can I be of any assistance? Kober 07:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure about it, Khoi. I'll ask a freind of mine and reply you later, OK? -- Kober 07:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Khoi, try to download Georgian fonts from [18] and [19], but I don't know whether they can be installed on Mac. We mostly use Windows here in Georgia. -- Kober 08:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the 3RR warning. I am not reverting anything which Greier says, but merely trying to move it (without changing a word) into the appropriate section so we have a cleaner, easier-to-read talk page. - Mauco 17:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Also, I am proud of my editing record and there is no point in debating Greier, who already has his mind made up. I remember his unreasonable behaviour in Talk:History of Transnistria and Talk:Disputed status of Transnistria, which still stands for everyone to see, so I won't make the mistake again of baiting a troll. - Mauco 18:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

You can always ask for one :) Whether I do it depends on the request (and my time) :) --  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |  talk}  18:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Protection is something I rarely deal with, but let me point you to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, where your request should be quickly reviewed and addressed by experts in that field.--  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |  talk}  18:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Mikkalai suggested the same. I keep proposing that we discuss it first in Talk, but they don't seem to pay attention and this was when the personal slurs and innuendo against me started. - Mauco 18:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

My family in direct lineage had to leave in 1898, Khoikhoi. They couldn't wait to be liberated:) Cretanforever

hi there... this may sound a bit stupid question but dont get it wrong. are you Jew? if so how are you really thinking there is any resemplence between holocoust and Armeian deportations? neurobio 21:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I have read that article. That really points what I mean. you only hear the one side of the story. That city was the epicenter of the atrocities of armenian voulunteers and bands. So many Turks were killed there. But our people are so naive if you go and as did they kill armenians here they will say yes and tell you the story. Later they will probabyl tell what happened to their families. but who will publish the story of the Turks. Who cares? And they are there to make a story of armenian genocide. I was raised with these stories my family told me both stories how armenians were killed on the way and how armenian bands plundered and raped and killed. the world only hears the first part. neurobio 21:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I totaly agree about that. rebeling was not an excuse. but genocide is something different. it is done only with an outrageous hatered against a race or grup. it has nothing to do with war time atrocities. We accept that many people died but it was not genocide thts all. neurobio 21:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

No body says Armenians made it up.We say it is not genocide. think the other way around are the Turks making it up. Am I making up a family history. Is my grand grandfater who withnessed the crucificaton and cutting into pieces of his fellow friends a fake? it was war time Armenians rebelled and thought they can have a piece of the empire in return ottoman empire deported (a big part but not all) of them many died on the way attacked raped, killed or dead by hunger or dissease may of these incidents are done by irregular bands and bandids who were after money or revenge. but there is no singe document showing a goverment order to exterminate due to religious or ethnic hatered. where germen archives are swarming despite the organised attemp to wash them out. It was war time and the measure was too strict maybe outrageous. but if it wasn made there would be no Turkey today. it was a military decision not a Genocide. Think about Bosnia. there serbs massacred a whole population. today stil people are discovering mass graves. Why is it not named as genocide. just simly because there were two parties aiming differnt goals and using warfare as a way. The Serbs had a better and backed army they won. during that time they have made many atrocitis but it is not Genocide by international law.

I got your point about Turkish sites. that is a well advice actually. thanks. neurobio 22:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I am sure there is no genocide because the description in international law is clear. to kill one or more people from the members of a group in order to exterminate the group in a systematic way supported by the goverment. 3rd parties are not protected by this law. Meaning that if you are in war, pursuing a political aim, if you have an army you cant talk about genocide. these are clearly stated in genocide law. 1.there is not a single order,telegram, or document that says exterminate armenians in the ottoman archives. vice versa many orders to protect, give food etc. these archives were in english control for 4 years. (except for aram andonian documents which are shown to be forgeries and not taken seriously back in 1920). 2. not whole population was deported. armenians in izmir, istanbul protestan armenians and armenians in army or with a job(crafts men) were not deported. 3. Armenians rebelled (before deportation) burned and plundered the city of van and handed it over to russians. thay had regimens of Volunteers in russian army (about 50.000) and irregular bands behind Turkish army lines (about 10.000 - 20.000)(i am talking about Turkish armenians only not armenians of russia). Even Andranik and his Volunteer regiment accupied the city of Bitlis despite Russian army commands counter orders. So they had an army. they were a side in the war.later 3000 to 5000 armenians made up the Legion deorient and fought against turks with the french army.

did jew had an army of 50.000 fighting agints Germans? did they rebel? did they ask for authonomy? Any jews were spared? were there international orphanages working for jew kids? did any jew had any high level army or goverment work during holocoust (in the mean time many armenian oficals were in ottoman goverment and army)? did they ask Russia or england to accupy jew districts? would they be allowed by Nazis to return after the war if nazis were still there? the hate against jews originates from which century? How did the dehumanisation of jews took place? in an instant? please ask your self these questions. what percent of Turks or kurds were killed in russian armenia(or they were not there anymore)? (let me tell you kurds 98%, Turks 77% these are from an armenian source called Lalayan) And finaly why taner akcam always gets grands from Germany? Ask this? if this is genocide than all wars on earth are genocide. neurobio 00:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Its in Arabic. May I ask why you wanted to know? Khosrow II 21:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

No, that seems like giberish to me. This means Heydar Aliev in Arabic: "حيدرعليي Khosrow II 21:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you. I have already read that. It is a great source of information on Pan Turkists, their ideologies, and its affects. I suggest you read it. Also, it makes a good point of seperating pan Turkists from the general Turkish population, who are open minded and good individuals. Khosrow II 21:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply

You can ask R. Koot to verify it for you if you want. -- ManiF 00:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you for participating in my RfA. Consensus to promote was reached, and I am now an administrator. I'll be using the tools cautiously at first, and everyone should feel welcome to peer over my shoulder and make sure I'm not doing anything foolish. -- Robth ^Talk 03:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello! I just wanted to thank you for reverting vandalism to my Talk page. I'll try to return the favor some time. Happy editing! -- Slowking Man 03:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello Khoi,

Could you please check what is going on here Talk:Kurds in Turkey I got a pointless personal attack warning from Coolcat when it was the other user who insulted and that user didn't get any warnings. Could you please give me some advise because I find this very unfair.

Ozgur Gerilla 11:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, Thanks for the message you wrote on the Talk page but do you see that the user Coolcat has completely supported the other user. I really do feel upset about this. I didn't even directly insult the user and coolcat just gave me a warning and not the other user. Ozgur Gerilla 23:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

This article needs work in the light of current events. Thought you'd want to take a look. -- Cat out 16:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

My sincere apologies, I did see the question but it slipped my mind afterwards, since I only started checking WP sporadically and got involved in confronting some POV warriors. Your question is "would most Palestinians today be happy with the 1948 UN two-state solution, or do most want all of Israel?" I could give you the official PLO line, which is that the PLO (the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people", much to my chagrin) recognized the right of Israel to exist in '93, and actually declared the State of Palestine in 1988 along the lines of UN resolutions 242 and 338 (thus implicitly recognizing that Palestine would be in the 67 borders only). I could also point out the polls, that tell us that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza favor a two-state solution. However, I guess the honest answer to your question is "both". Palestinians would "like" to have the right to live and return to the ancestral homeland (and I don't use ancestral in the biblical sense here, just the logical everyday sense), but would also be happy with a two-state solution if it means the end of occupation, misery, and above all, humiliation.

Palestinians, who have been victimized by everybody, Arab and Israeli alike, see the loss of Palestine as a 'great injustice'. They were denied a return to their homes, whereas foreigners were welcome in droves, simply because they were the 'wrong religion'. They are also the victims of guilt by association; i.e. Palestinians are blamed for what non-Palestinian Arab states did to, or said about, Jews. Furthermore, (and I always make a point of this), Palestinians suffer from one force that doesn't really affect other players in the region, and that is humiliation. It is a bit far fetched (in my opinion) to ask the humiliated people to recognize the legitimacy and the fairness of the 'humiliator', which in my analysis explains why the Palestinians have never been able to clearly and explicitly act on their recognition of Israel. When the Oslo accords of the 90s was interpreted by the Palestinian as a transition period to pave the way for Israel to leave, we were devastated to realize that Israel saw the accords as the exact opposite: an internationally supported mechanism to make it comfortable for them to stay. The doubling of the number of settlers, the increased roadblocks, and the cutting off of the city of Jerusalem beginning in the early 90s slowly convinced Palestinians that the Israelis were not serious. Your friends are towing the Israeli line that "Palestinians don't want peace" because, again in my opinion, it has always been in the interest of the Israeli government to dehumanize and misrepresent the Palestinians, because that makes their job (maintaining the occupation) easier - and of course, on many occasions some of our own actions haven't helped either. The irony is that the current Palestinian government says it doesn't recognize Israel, but behaves like it does (wants to enter into negotiations based on fair standards, is ready to recognize the two state solution etc etc), whereas Israel states that it does recognize the Palestinians but behaves like it does not (building the cage, expanding settlements that carve the areas left for Palestinians into disconnected islands, pulverizing the Gaza Strip which has had no constant electricity or water since early June and people dying because of lack of dialysis, insulin, or medication due to the blockade).

I guess the best way to summarize all his is to quote Afif Safieh, the PLO representative in Washington, where he was asked this question and responded with something like "Most Palestinians are ready to accept the two state solution in 22% of historical Palestine, but we are not converted Zionists". The entire interview is in audio here. You might also be interested in another appearance (also in California) last month, this one is here although you might want to download the entire broadcast first because the streaming version is extremely choppy, at least on my Mac.

Finally, although its pretty long, but you might also be interested in this fascinating documentary produced in the US by Bathsheba Ratzkoff and Sut Jhally about media coverage of the Palestinians, here.

I hope that once the humiliation of 'powerlessness' and 'collective punishment' is no longer applied to Palestinians, it will be easier for us to play the game of politics with the Israelis in order to give the region a lasting peace. Palestinians have a lot of growing up to do, something that Safieh neglects to mention in the interviews above (although I guess he wouldn't because he is after all a diplomat). I hope you take the time to listen to at least a little of the links above, because they might answer a lot of your questions and I have a feeling you'll find them interesting. Let me know either way if you have any other comments of questions! Ramallite ^(talk) 16:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'll be happy to try. I don't know much about Turkey though. Mattisse (talk) 20:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply

It seems there is a user working here: [20] by the IP: 70.111.86.235 . He is inserting some racist stuff [21]. I do not think I can get him banned by the 3RR rule since technically he is not reverting. I am wondering what is the procedure? -- alidoostzadeh 01:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I would had made another link under "Do not feed the troll", in Talk:Turkey...:) Hectorian 01:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the help! -- alidoostzadeh 01:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I gave a warning on civility and personal attacks (and overal other nonsense). That is hardly nothing. I am required to give two warnings ({{ npa2}}, {{ npa3}}) before I can request admin intervention. -- Cat out 05:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

His concern is that you didn't warn neurobio at all... — Khoi khoi 05:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I am not obligated to warn anyone. I just noticed Ozgurgerilla's post and reacted to it. Feel free to warn him (other person) if you feel it is for the better of wikipedia. Just, do not encourage Ozgurgerilla's behaviour. -- Cat out 05:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I don't really feel like warning him, Pişîka Xasûk. — Khoi khoi 05:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Exactly how I feel... -- Cat out 05:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hmmm. Besdies that, how have you been recently? — Khoi khoi 05:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Well was mostly busy with Oh My Goddess! Soundtracks, CVU deletion thing, meta:Wikimania 2007/Istanbul, and commons:COM:DEL. A bit fatigued with all that but overal ok. You? -- Cat out 05:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Trying not to get distracted by Wikipedia from real life work. :) — Khoi khoi 05:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Real life? What is that? Cite sources for its existance! :P -- Cat out 05:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Kinda messed up there, I will try to contact to get it removed. I just got back from vacation, I will be a bit busy but I am not giving up on wiki :))) BTW, I just ran into some info about your admin vote... Just to let you know, I am surprised that you were not an admin already... Baristarim 05:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi, Khoikhoi. I felt the need to share with you a few concerns of mine regarding your recent edits on the Turkish language article. I shall start by thanking you for taking the time to find the citation I requested in my edit summary and incorporating that into the text. I do not intend to take much time, could you please check the following calculations?

• Taking the figure of 3,950,000 million native Kurdish speakers in Turkey (for 1980), and dividing that by the total population of Turkey in 1980 gives: 3,950,000 / 44,737,000 = 8.83% (or, say, 9%).

• I understand that the current "~10 million as a second language" clause is mainly an estimation for the current native Kurdish speakers in Turkey (which seems reasonable to me). Dividing this, again, by the total population estimate of Turkey for 2005 gives: 10,000,000 / 73,193,000 = 13.66% (or, say, 14%).

Yet, you were so sure when you reverted the figure of 85% (introduced today by 84.77.151.169 [22]), which, I believe is now fully compliant with your final edit (65 / 75 = 86%, approximately). I feel the necessity to quote your edit summary here:

"wrong - Kurdish is spoken by 20% of the population"

You reverted the edit as simple as that, with a cold, authoritative edit summary and seemingly absolute certainty. Yet now we see that it was in fact not that wrong. I totally realize that minority language data from Turkey is not much reliable and these are estimates, but what disturbs me most is how you acted like possessing absolute knowledge on the subject, while, I think, you actually did not.

I hope you take no offence and I was just thinking that it would be better to share my worries with you. Happy editing and regards, Atilim Gunes Baydin 17:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi and sorry for the delay. I just glanced over your reply, and did not notice that it contained a question until now. Thanks for the appreciation, but I don't believe my knowledge of early Romanian history and other areas is impressive: in many cases, it is just the common sense facts that my compatriots have been submerging into senseless propaganda. My main interests lie with the area after the invention of politics, and I originally contributed to medieval topics only to give common sense a foot in the door (I knew that they were and are most at risk of being flooded with crapola - and I get a major headache every time I look over articles on "History of Romania in X period", all of which I hope to be editing properly in the future). Overall, I guess I take in an interest in many things related to Romania (if not exclusively so): my main goal is to take these topics out of suburbia and into an informative source for all users out there. One of my pet projects is expanding the areas related to right- and left-wing politics in Romania, and trying to blend them into context - especially since their international context is systhematically glossed over, making our recent history seem eerily out of place). Dahn 20:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm online right now. What's up? -- Neutrality ^talk 21:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Hehe... I have told u, Khoikhoi, that i cannot write Aromanian. i can speak it, but not write it... as a matter of fact, i wonder how such an wikipedia project exists, in a language with no standard grammar and syntax, which has never been written... Hectorian 01:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I must remind you that along with WP:NPOV there is also WP:VERIFY and WP:NOR. Maybe you should explore the link between those three policies more closely. Please stop reverting blindly my edits in Cretan Turks, you see that I'm right on every single account. In case you didn't notice, I added "fact" tags on the unsourced edits some three weeks ago, before finally removing them. I've been removing unsourced and OR claims, that's about it. I even took the time to verify that a specific source did not at all contain what the editor claimed. I also per wp:name the article needs to be renamed for reasons I explained in the talk page. If you really want to participate in a good article's construction, then please leave your personal ideas about Turko-Greek relations aside. As I said before, NPOV's purpose is not to mask the truth in order to make everyone happy, it is to provide alternate views on a topic where the truth is not as evident. This is not the case with the current article. Last but not least, I don't mind seeing Turkish sources in the article - if and only if - their claims are not extreme and contradictory to all non-partisan sources I've read. Miskin 13:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC) reply