You unjustifiably warned me because of I added a link to the page Turkish Air Force.I added that link because the updated numbers of the numbers in Turkish Air Force were taken from this page (
http://warriorsoul.4t.com/airforce.html). That site keeps count of the exact flyable units.(I.E. when a F-16 crashes they change the current number). Warrior Soul(owner of that webpage) also warned this in the discussion page with no real feedback.
If I am wrong and those current aircraft numbers of TAF aircraft are taken from another site listed in the external links section please show me which one. Wikipedia shouldn't do plagirism. N.T. 13.44 7.11.2006
1.If the site mentioned above is an unreliable site then the info taken from there and shown no citation should be removed as there is no source for them. At least citation required should be added to the page
4.Even if it weren't, it says." However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception".How many completely reliable sources can you find on Turkish Air Force inventory? Does Turkish goverment or air force itself gave out the exact numbers.
5.The writer is also not anonymous.It joined wiki with warriorsoul nickname and asked for his link to be added in the talk page.
6.The Turkish Airforces page has a serious citation problem. For example 30 new F-16s were recently ordered. If the page were following guidelines it would give a source like this."
http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2006/Turkey_06-71.pdf" Official U.S. goverment release.
There are numerical numbers on the topic taken from a the web site mentioned above. If the fansite is not reliable enough to be on the sources list then the numbers taken from it are not reliable enough to be on the webpage.You cannot just take the numbers and decide the website is not reliable to be a source.(Check Wikipedia:Citing sources "Say where you got it")If the information is not taken from the website mentioned above then please show me where were they taken from. 19.05 8.11.2006
Hi, do you think the consensus on the requested move of
Etymology of Istanbul to
Names of Istanbul was clear enough for you to perform it now? I think it's time to go ahead with it but I'm too lazy to write it up on
WP:RM... The target has an edit history, otherwise I'd do it boldly myself.
Fut.Perf.☼ 22:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC)reply
John Hunyadi
Why does does my addition to the John Hunyadi page keep getting deleted? —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
Shield2 (
talk •
contribs) 03:03, 24 October 2006.
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 06:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Your advice
hi Khoikhoi thanks a lot for your advice. You people on Wiki are really helpful to us wet behind the ears newcomers!
Spinach charm 10:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belatedthank you for all of your kind words.
I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we?
Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be.
And congratulations on your own recent adminship, as well! :)
Luna Santin 19:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)reply
It's great to see you as an admin -- I hope I'll see you around often. I see that your off to a (prolific) start. Take care.
Saravask 19:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Very busy (like everyone else here). As for the articles--keep your eyes peeled. I don't think I can return fully until December, but I'll still "pop by" infrequently until then. Good luck with the "joys" of adminship (which I'm sure you've discovered by now--(*gag*, *cough*)).
Saravask 01:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi. I saw
this. I have already withdrawn the AfD (right above your comment), and filed for a merge in the article talk. Since you're an admin, maybe you could close the AfD and remove the template from the article. Then, you can express your opinion about that merge in the mother article
Talk:Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922)#Proposed merge. Thanks. PS. Aside from the debate, do you like the way I styled that poll? Makes it evident which option prevails, and easy to follow up with the comments below, without special formatting techniques (e.g. '#::') needed to maintain automubering while commenting!
•NikoSilver• 08:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Well...I'm not really used to AfD and I'm not entirely sure how to close it. Also, even though I could withdraw my vote, I'm still not comfortable with closing it as I've been too invovled in this article. Yeah, I liked the way you styled it. What's your opinion on the article? Do you think it should be renamed, deleted, or merged? I think the topic is notable enough to merit it's own article, personally. I would support a rename, however. Khoikhoi 18:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I understand, I've retracted that withdrawal anyway. My position is that any subject, if not elaborated to some extent, does not deserve being a separate article. I cannot assess if it could-would-should be worthy or not, I just see that it presently isn't. There are only 5 lines of unique content in
Occupation of Izmir#Occupation and the rest is repetition of background and aftermath to justify existence! So, my opinion is merge and delete. Whoever wants to keep it alive, should work more on expanding it and less on debating.
•NikoSilver• 19:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I guess I see what you're saying. You agree, however, that the subject istelf is notable—right? Khoikhoi 01:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
For the moment, I have no data to support notability. I would like to contribute in exploring ways of expanding it, but I am too busy these days. Other than that,
Richard's proposal for "
Greek capture of Smyrna and
Turkish re-capture of Smyrna" (
here) does not sound so bad (actually Hectorian had pointed it out too in his AfD comments). Provided there is content in the first place though...
•NikoSilver• 09:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I request a check IP to proove that I am not who this user is accusing me of. It is wrong to make such baseless accusations. The issue of
Arabs of Khuzestan and
Khaz'al Khan is interesting. On the
Arabs of Khuzestan article, Korshid et al want to delete content because they claim the referenced author breaches verifiability. Yet on the
Khaz'al Khan article, they want to retain a fairly strong statement accusing the man of murder and despotism, but without any referencing. The most interesting aspect of this is that the writer they object to and
Khaz'al Khan are/were both Iranian Arabs. I would be interested in your advice on how to ensure consistency in editorial standards.--
88.110.190.21 18:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Assyrian music
Hey their bro, can you please keep an eye on
Assyrian music? This user 'alonzo' keeps trying to promote artists by adding all these links. Please stop him from editing that page.
Chaldean 23:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks for looking out on the Assyrian music page. I see its keeping you busy :D
Chaldean 04:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Just to let you know the kind of people I'm dealing with [
[1]] - the
US Congress is not creditable enough for him! Do you see this? I dont know what it is, but some people from Europe are simply anti-Assyrian. Their is no other way to put it. They will do anything to delete the name in the history books and current times. Its usually religious Christians who are upsest with
Syriac Christianity. Just something to keep in mind in the future.
Chaldean 02:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I am sorry for sometimes sounding abit too crazy but you have to understand that us Iraqis are very emotional people :D. When we speak, we always speak with emotions and as if thats not bad, the male population of Iraqis have a very bad temper (Doesn't matter if your an arab, kurd or assyrian.) I will try to be more profession with my comments.
Chaldean 02:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Armenian Genocide
For the sake of limiting the vandalism, can you semi-protect?--
MarshallBagramyan 23:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I understand about the activity in that vandals do not always automatically revert back but how much more must we keep up with reverting things like these
[2] and these
[3] by new/anon users?--
MarshallBagramyan 23:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Please have a look. Some anonomous user's are tyring to use Bani Torof as a source, and he is very very unreliable. He is neither a historian nor an acadamian, he is an Iranian Arab writer and journalist. Bani Torof also claims that Arabs lived in Iran before the Aryans came, and that basically the Elamites were Arab. If this isnt historical revisionism and propaganda, then I dont know what is.
Khosrow II 03:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Yes and please also look at
Khaz'al Khan. There is a list of references there and it looks like the whole articles uses them but the anon keeps vandalizing and trying to censor the article to make the dictator look good. Please also archive this page, its too long. Thanks.
Khorshid 03:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
You speak Persian? You surprise me everyday :)
70.225.173.18 00:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Yea thats me. Sorry about that. So where'd you learn?
Khosrow II 01:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Its a pretty easy language to learn. Ask me if you want to know any phrases or anything.
Khosrow II 02:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
RfA thanks
Please accept my thanks for your support in my successful
RfA, which I was gratified to learn passed without opposition on October 25, 2006. I am looking forward to serving as an administrator and hope that I prove worthy of your trust. With my best wishes, --
MCB 06:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
thanks!
Thank you for your appreciation of my humble contribution to the project.
Don Alessandro 15:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Bonny alert
Please check the log of new user names and
this edit (as well as the previous ones on this page). --
Ghirla-трёп- 15:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Snle?
Hi there, Do you know when we'll get an answer to our check-user request on Snle? It's been a while since we submitted it and it would be good to have this done before the weekend. Judging by his past behavior, he usually starts making a fuss on Saturday mornings...--
Niohe 15:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
So far use azakhs did only useful things. He even deleted correctly the map from
Han Chinese: it was self-drawn poor quality and erroneous (or, say, non-verifiasble, since it differed from claimed source in some nontrivial detail). Azakhs added a CIA detailed map in some other place, so "assuming good faith" I guess here he wanted to replace bad by good one, but forgot. I replaced myself. `'
mikkanarxi 18:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Npa3 tag placed for user Mikkalai
Hi Khoikhoi,
I have placed an Npa3 tag at the user page
[4], because, in addition to reverting and refusing to give any explanation, he threatens. It is very hard to contribute in a hostile environment.
I would like to add that I did and still have some disagrements with the user Irpen, who has also been reverting my edits. But with Irpen, I was able to work compromizes on about 50% of issues. Also Irpen has never used threats. So, although I disagree with some of Irpen's edits, and think they are biased, it is apparently possible to keep an "academic" dispute with him.
Yes, cheers from our common good friend. I am just waiting for more evidence. `'
mikkanarxi 17:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Mikkalai has errased my npa3 tag without saying a word. I have discovered also that he has completely errased another page that I started:
Northern Maramureş. This is the 5th case. I did revert this one, but not the other 4:
Romanophobia,
Budjak,
Bolohoveni, and
Battle of Vorskla. By all means, this is a personal attack. Why some users are civilized and talk, like Irpen (even when they have bised POV, it is still possible to talk with them)while others like Mikkalai are so agressive and intimidating? :
Dc76 17:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Obviously this person does not know what he is translating from romanian text. His
Northern Maramureş article is not about N.Maramures. `'
mikkanarxi 18:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Who are you, are you Mikkalai or Khoikhoi? The text that was in
Northern Maramureş is only the beggining of the article. Why does Mikkalai not wait for the whole article, and then constuctively copy-edit? I don't claim the article is 5-star, but that's why wikipedia exists. Help if you can! The problem however is not about the text. I have had disagreements with other people and was able to work out with every person.
Mikkalai personally attacks me. This is my problem.:
Dc76 18:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi Khoikhoi, and thank you very mcuh for stepping in. In the recent history of my user talk page I found this comment by 203.160.1.52 :
Salut! Vei avea probleme cu Mikkalai din moment ce el crede ca tu esti
User:Bonaparte, take care he will try to hount you and block you since he has a hatred towards romanians, that's why he was blocked for his anti-romanian attitudes..cheers :)
I will translate the parts in Romanian:
Hi! You will have problems with Mikkalai since he believes that you are
User:Bonaparte...
I would like to state clearly that I am not user Bonaparte, and that I have never had an account on wikipedia before september 2006. I have editted other pages before, as I have told you, and they were signed by the system automatically with the 4 numbers. I needed an account when I wanted to upload a picture. I never engaged in any edit war.:
Dc76 19:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Reverts
Isn't that a bit like an ad hominem vendetta? Why do we have articles for Koreans in China and Italian Americans but not Kazakhs in China? Your fervor (and the constant lack of edit summaries or use of "discussion") just doesn't ring true to me.
Badagnani 05:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
For example, why would you change the
Yi people wikilink on the CEG template to
Yi, which is a dab page? That just doesn't make sense, unless you are letting your emotions get to you and editing too quickly, without thinking and careful consideration. Sorry to bring up these points, but I feel I have to, because now I have to go there and clean up when I shouldn't have to do that.
Badagnani 05:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Thank you for supporting my RfA
Thank you for supporting
my RfA that I have passed with 73/2/1.--
Jusjih 10:00, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Greeks in Armenia
Hi. I noticed the article now. I also made some minor fixes.
Hectorian 11:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
An anon IP is vandalizing the
al-Farabi page. Please have a look at it.
Tājik 14:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Faridoun
I cannot find link to Persian king, Faridoun. May be it is spelled differently.
Siddiqui 16:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Sorry. I was not very clear. I am wikifying
Gakhars a
Persian tribe that setlled in
Pakistan long time ago. They claim to have setlled during the time of Persian emperor Faridoun. I have heard and and read this name in
Urdu many times. It may be spelled differently in English by Iranians. Can you also please review related page
Kayani it seems to have too much copy righted material.
Please check your e-mail. --
Mardavich 18:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Vasile Luca
Hi. The info on his birthplace was found in his autobiography (see the references section). The search problems you encoutered were due to two different facts:
there is an unusual problem with the â in Romanian spellings; even though it is generally considered proper to spell stuff with an â, many sources still use the old î (when diacritics are discarded - they shouldn't be, but they are -, this turns to i; also, while a google search for "Sincatolna" will also automatically yuield links to the diacritic version, the diacritic version will not yield links to the improper but widespread non-diacritic) - see
Romanian alphabet for more details on why spelling in my language is still problematic;
sources dealing with various topics in Romania are usually way less careful than they ought to be, and especially so when dealing with sbjects considered "irrelevant"; the link between Luca and his place of birth is not apparently as interesting as criticizing or outright cursing Luca (sites involved in the latter activities outnumber more neutral ones 2 to 1).
We have still not established a clear policy on what language Transylvanian names ought to be given in. If you think that, given his DOB, the Hungarian name is more appropriate, I suggest either "masking" the Romanian link ("Romanian name|Hungarian name" - since the article for the former is likely to appear before a Hun. redirect) or providing the Romanian name in parantheses after the Hun. name, and linking the former (as we did elsewhere). Your call, and thanks for taking an interest.
Dahn 19:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
If the person spent most of his life in country A, and was born on the territory of the country A, 1) when that territory was under country B, or, 2) the territory does not longer belongs to A, but the person moved to country A, did not stay with the territory, then his place of birth is to be written in the language of country A, and a remark added about B.
For example, Emil Constantinescu was born in Tighina, Romania, which now is a city in Moldova
Another example, someone born in 1960 in Kiev was born in Ukarine, which at that time was in USSR
similar Chisinau, Moldova. You never say the person was born in USSR, but in Moldova, Ukraine, Estonia, etc
Iuliu Maniu was born in the county of Salaj in Romania, when that was part of Austria-Hungary. Even though Maniu was first an Austian-Hungarian politician, and then a Romanian one
They even write Herman Oberth was born in Sighisoara, Romania. Even though Sighisoara at that point was in Austria-Hungary, and Oberth has worked in Romania, Germany and USA.
In your case, the logical formulation is Vasile Luca was born in romanian name,which at the time of his birth was called hungarian hame,and was part of Austria-Hungary.:
Dc76 20:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I just want to alert your attention to the fact that
108059 (
talk·contribs) is editing the contents of several articles related to the Qing dynasty, changing a number of names to non-standard forms. See for instance this
diff from
Qianlong. I've tried to communicate with him/her about this, but he/she doesn't respond and I'm getting a bit fed up. Please advice.--
Niohe 20:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Could you give an eye at what is happening at the RM vote at
Talk:Jogaila? A new Russian-Polish war appears to have erupted, and, what's worse, blatant vote spamming, like that done by the Polish editor
User:Truthseeker 85.5. Ciao, --
Aldux 22:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Oh, I understand, don't worry. Anyways, there are already a couple of admins surveying the talk, so maybe my request was a bit rash.--
Aldux 09:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
You may consider to block them permanently or report to the project "Open Proxy"
Alex Bakharev 00:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
THx
Thanks man for unblocking me i'll be ok. Cheers, Arthur 28 October 2006
WC
See
[5] It is a strange user. Has not even existed for a week. But appears skilled in administrative procedures. Votes for adminships. Wants to mediate. Especially see the first two (just 2) days of the activity of this user
[6]. New users are usually not so combative. -
Pernambuco 06:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Reply
Hi Khoikoi, i would suggest rename and rewrite. The massacres seem notable and verifiable from the sources he has provided, but attributing it to a genocide seems like original research. Thanks, --
A.Garnet 12:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi Khoikoi, please check your e-mail. --
Mardavich 00:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
False. I'm sure 100% that is you coi that tries to impersonates Bonaparte. I don't care about that account. We are free to edit Wikipedia...
ok Mr. highschool Putnam, how many new articles have you made? or how many languages do you speak? you're waisting your time..get a new hobby..
take Mr. Bon as model for you, and stop using socks to attack him. it is you that you use socks. I know it.
March Days
Khoi,
Have you seen the
March Days article? Without anyone's consent,
User:Baku87 added POV information from sources such as Justin McCarthy and the Azerbaijani media then he reverted the article's name to "March Massacre," a name not used by any credible historian but only by the media of Azerbaijan. The name "March Days," however, has been used by several historians to describe these events. Although I reverted all of his recent edits to the article, I am unable revert the name so perhaps you could do that for me (since only admins have the ability to fix a situation like this). Also be sure to remove the redirect "March Massacre" after you've fixed the article's title and place the article on your watch list.
Thanks in advance! Kindest regards,
Clevelander 12:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Did you get my note? --
Clevelander 20:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Ah, I see. I was too quick to act. Sorry. --
Clevelander 00:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Alright, I've moved it back now. Could you please delete the redirect "March Massacre?" Afterwhich, I will start a discussion on the talk page about it. Regards,
Clevelander 00:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Check out my argument on the "March Days" article. Would that work? --
Clevelander 00:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks very much for keeping an eye on my page. A friend alerted me to lots of sometimes odd activity on the page about me. The person using Amoaveni as his/her username is not me, and I consider the use of this username for editing this page misleading and problematic, especially given the vandalism that has been involved. I would appreciate it if this username could be blocked or returned to me. Thanks again for any help you might be able to offer. You can leave messages for me on Shabdiz's talk page.
Shabdiz 18:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Ba Dorood-e Faravan. Thank you very much for the quick action. Appreciated. I will let her know and will also take a look at the other users who messed up her page. User Amoaveni specifically messed up with Azadeh's biography and the page of her book. Nowhere else. We may eventually need to protect the book page too. I will get back in touch with you if necessary.
Shabdiz 07:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Done. Thanks.
Shabdiz 09:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I thought you had blocked that one already. I have created requests for the others. Or should I create just one request for amoaveni and list all the others under that one request. I guess this is what I needed to do. Sorry.
Shabdiz 09:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I corrected it already. Thanks for the help.
Shabdiz 09:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
No, not at all. Many thanks.
Shabdiz 09:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Feedback on Luca
Hi. I agree with your point on the spelling (although I do not know if the same criteria can be applied in every instance of pre-1918 mentions). Tell me if like the current form.
Dahn 20:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I think it's the best thing to protect the page for a while.
User:NisarKand is flooding the page with nonsense, POV (claiming that all dynasties in history that lived in what is now "Afghanistan" are to be considered "Afghans", including the
Ghaznavids or
Seljuqs), Pashtun nationalism, and vandalism. He has several times deleted authoritative sources (i.e. the
Encyclopaedia Iranica or the reliable Oxford University translation of the
Baburnama).
I have reverted his most recent 20+ POV edits and vandalism:
[7]. Please protect the page in
this version. Thx.
That explains why the information was turning up in all the wrong places. Thanks!
Mattisse(talk) 00:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Transnistria
VoABot II
What did just happened on the article Transnistria? Is there a limit on the number of dayly edits for this article? I just thought to clear it a bit, so that William and Alex can concentrate their "war" on more "serious" stuff. :):):) They fight about names (which is ridiculous to me, because it is possible to state all used names, and end the issue) and don't see that their sentances are alternatively in the present and past, making it very funny article, and consequently unserious.:
Dc76 00:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
...and I think someone decided she misses us
here.
•NikoSilver• 01:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
OK
OK I won't make another edit to that article but why don't you alert
Khosrow II as well? Is it because he's/she's a registered user? :). --
24.211.184.243 04:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Oh - I didn't you would respond that quickly :-) --
Tekleni 08:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Of course. You may also want to reset Nixer's block.--
Tekleni 08:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
If the IP can be traced to Moscow and is not an open proxy, then it is likely Nixer. Also, I really got to go now.--
Tekleni 08:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
---
Saluton,
Bogdan's house (Bogdan estas persona nomo), hungare Bogdánháza, germane Bogenhaus aux Bogeschdorf (bogesxdorf), la domo de Bogdan Stârc is a kind of bird with long beak.
12, 30 Okt. 2006 (UTC)
Vikipediisto:Zetey
Another "can you?"
Hi, khoi khoi. I would be very happy if we could have your input / moderation to the discussion about the new Turkey location map started on
Talk:Turkey. Please accept my congratulations with your adminship by the way.
Atilim Gunes Baydin 15:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Ottoman Turkish is different from Turkish
Please don't restore the changes I did on Turkish.
see: [
[8]] is Historical —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
204.104.55.241 (
talk •
contribs) 16:20, 30 October 2006.
Hi, Khoikhoi. I learned that you're adminship was approved. Congratulations, I had your e-mail, and appreciated too much. I already commented on the
page about this but unfortunately lately. Cheers
E104421 21:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Also Khoi, could you s-protect
Malakas as well. An anon-pest has been engaging in promotion of his website there for the past few days.--
Tekleni 22:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia for online losers
I am being accused of vandalizing Afghanistan's article....because the accusers are all jealous of me hahahahahahahaha.
User:Tajik accuses me of vandalizing Afghanistan's article but in fact he or she is the one vandalizing the article. It wrote under the NAME section on Afghanistan's article that Afghanistan's first constitution was in 1964 and wants the world to believe this lie. Here is
1923 constitution of Afghanistan -------->
link You know what?...since now I am convinced Wikipedia is all false information written by people who enjoys spreading false information to the world....I give up on editing Afghanistan's article. Afghanistan is ruled by the majority Pashtuns and the whole world is fully aware of this...so it doesn't matter what you write in the Wikipedia on Afghanistan. Wikipedia has nothing but low life losers who don't have nothing else in life but write false information...hahahahahahahaha. Shame on you all for writing false information.
User:Tajik lies like an old Persian rug...nobody even bothers looking at it.
User:Tajik is a racist Shia...I can easily tell by his actions...and so can everyone else. It refuses to acknowledge that Sunni population is about 90% while Shia is less than 10%. I came to make the article more proffesional and more easy to understand for people with reliable sources....but I am being prevented...so I just give up...it's not even worth doing it. I am now beginning to feel really ashamed of being someone from Afghanistan...because of people like User:Tajik. So go ahead write all the BULL you can write about Afghanistan...I give up on it...besides...not many people take Wikipedia serious and there is nothing interesting to write about Afghanistan. The fact remains that we Pashtuns rule the country with the help of Pakistan, which is equipped with 100s of nuclear bombs and very supportive of Pashtuns...hahahahahahaha
NisarKand 09:32, 31 October 2006
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 06:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Why you insist on keeping that reference at Orhei article? That reference is about the Hungarians in Moldova and it is not about the Hungarian at Orhei. And also it is a reference with a lot of mistakes about the presence of Hungarians in Moldova. For exemple it is incorrect to say that the Hungarians were subject to Hungarian kings. The historical documents say that they were subject (after 1360, of course) to the Moldavian princes (check the historical sources collectioan Documenta Romaniae Historica, series A, Moldova if you do not believe me). That is why I think that reference is not ok, beeing a partisan article (it is a propaganda problem between Romanians and Hungarians). Sorry for my English.
Mihail ioniu 10:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi, I am the one who added the Orhei reference. The reason for that is that it provides a source for the etymology of the name of Orhei, although I agree that the site has some inadequacies. Nevertheless, I don't want to leave an unreferenced statement in, so if you can find support, please exchange that for the current ref.
TSO1D 12:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Heathzhao
I think you can block Heathzhao for spamming, if there is any room for that. He/she has spammed before and has not been particularly communicative about it...
Niohe 12:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Dear Khoikhoi! My amendments - at all POV, they are based on documents and the facts. POV - that was earlier because article it has been written by Azerbaijanians. Unless not POV - to write, what Susha is in " Nagorno-karabakh region of Azerbaijan "? It is the most obvious to any. Further - Armenians are presented as recent immigrants in Karabakh, and Azerbaijanians - as aboriginals though all is on the contrary, at least concerning Mountain Karabakh. Reflect, why the author of previous clause writes about nomads in Karabakh and nothing writes about farmers lived in the same place, ремесленникх, dealers? Because nomads were Azeri. The statement that in 1920 was not massacre, and "counterattack", will not be coordinated to any sources - compare that Russian write, at me is resulted. The statement, that Armenians, having attacked the first, have started to set fire to houses of Azerbaijanians - an impudent invention. I not the Armenian - can not trust me - but i am revolted with the bald lie and falsification. I apologize for bad English.
Sfrandzi 16:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Snle again?
It seems that our friends is appealing his/her case now. Have a look at this:
I think I will respond...--
Niohe 19:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Romanian images
Unfortunately, the licensing info at
commons:Image:IonAntonescu.jpg is not very helpful. Someone has pasted the Romanian version of publicity rights, which doesn't have anything to do with copyright. We'd need to know who took the photograph and when that person died in order to say that the photo is in the public domain. According to
List of countries' copyright length, the author needs to be dead for seventy years (the EU standard, but no references at the list). It looks like photographs of twentieth century Romanians are going to be a challenge to get properly licensed.
Jkelly 19:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a
wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to
log in (although there are
many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to
be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out
how to edit a page, or use the
sandbox to try out your editing skills.
New contributors are always welcome.
Jkelly 16:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I left {{
sofixit}} above purely out of whimsy, but it is also true that I really don't mind people editing my userspace... anyway, I archived my talk page. Thanks for the reminder.
Jkelly 18:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Your revert
Hi there. I think the SNLE sock puppet case is unfair. I've reported this case to the Administor Board and Jimbo Wale. Please stop deleting constructive comments or edits.
User68732 21:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Is it ok for me to edit those controversies? People may share some similar opinions.
User68732 21:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I see a lot of editors are bloked for editing controversial articles. It seems to me everyone will be considered a sock puppet who edit these contraversial articles.
User68732 21:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Well, if the reason for you to decide whether SNLE has sockpuppeted is on a shared IP address. That will be wrong, because many of the accused editors don't share any similarities at all.
User68732 21:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Re: "enthusiatic followers"
Would you be able to show me some examples? If it's an anon it's most likely Bonaparte, which would therefore give me the right to block him. Khoikhoi 06:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
No, they are the ones who engage in the lame edit wars on Talk on several Transnistria-related subjects (my specialty and area of expertise). They have taken to studying my contribs now. Anyway, I don't want them blocked. It is disruptive, of course, but if it gets too out of hand I think that the next step will just be an RfC or two. Hopefully it won't even come to that. -
Mauco 06:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks for offering. It gets tiresome to be reverted all the time, of course, but I don't think it is getting out of hand yet. I have found that the page protections have helped, but of course this is not what we should strive for here at all, since the principle is that we should be open and all should be able to edit. So I am reluctant to wish for them (and have never once requested one, myself ) -
Mauco 06:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
How come
Bitola doesn't have the Greek and Turkish names of the city in the head? Is it some sort of exception?
Miskin 12:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
So how about adding a name section in
Thessaloniki,
Crete,
Chios,
Rhodes... and the literally countless of Greek articles which mention Turkish names right in the head? Unless of course, Bitola is some kind of exception to the rule, now is it?
Miskin 15:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
How will two alternatives names (Greek and Turkish) make it crowded? Have you checked what's happening in
Thessaloniki? I'm not falling for such an excuse. Aldux reverted me claiming "duplication of info", but in
Thessaloniki too the Turkish name is well mentioned in the damn body of the article, yet no-one claimed a "duplication of information". I'm going to add those names back, and if other editors insist on removing them then I'll start removing foreign names from the heads of Greek articles too. I'm getting the impression that some certain ethnic groups get special treatement because people feel sorry for them or because they just bitch too much. I don't really care to examine the reasons, but it's a clear double-standard policy which I'm not going to tolerate. All I'm asking for is justice.
Miskin 18:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
With such helpful attitude you'll make me regret supporting your adminship much sooner than expected.
Miskin 18:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
User:Dbachmann
I am sitting here with fire coming out of my ears. PLEASE put
User:Dbachmann in check.
Chaldean 14:50, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks for trying to solve the conflict.
Chaldean 03:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
E-mail
I don't think I got it; when did you send it? Or could you just re-send?
Jayjg (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Just a second opinion, since you have been involved in this longer than me- how do we handle the Arab-persian edit war going on recently? Protecting the pages doesn't seem to help, as nobody is talking, and I know that if I unprotect they'll just keep on revert warring.
Borisblue 21:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Again Afghanistan
LOL Take a look at this:
[9]Tājik 21:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)reply
BTW: could you do me a favour an correct a typing mistake in the article (the part about the language). It should be: "... the Persian language is the mother tongue of roughly 1/3 of Afghanistan's population ..." and not "... only 25% ...". It was a typing mistake, and it contradicts the numbers given in the same source (and in the article). Thx
Tājik 00:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks!
Thanks for reverting vandalism from my user page. This guy is way out of line... I wonder why he/she doesn't take a break and then work on his/her cred on Wikipedia by writing some good article or sth...--
Niohe 01:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Zhonghua Minzu
I've added a note on the question of Overseas Chinese at
Talk:Zhonghua_minzu#Overseas_Chinese. Would appreciate it if you could have a look and maybe comment.
Hey, Khoikhoi. Since you were a recipient of Cretanpride's lovely little email back in September, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new proposed policy under discussion at
Wikipedia:Death threats. I've put in my two
quadrantes, but I thought you'd like to know as well. See you around! —
Josiah Rowe (
talk •
contribs) 06:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Yüksekova
Hi. There are two articles about Yüksekova (
Yüksekova and
Gawar) may I redirect Gawar to Yüksekova or should I use the merging procedures?.--
Hattusili 08:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Armenia in Europe
I am a member of the
AMA (Association of Members' Advocates) currently acting on behalf of
User:Caligvla, who has named you as one of the participants in the dispute over whether Armenia is in Europe or Asia. Caligvla has listed a number of reference sources classifying Armenia as an Asian country. He claims that the only sources quoted by your side of the dispute are 1.) an obsecure Canadian website that places Armenia in Europe, and a BBC article that mistakenly places Armenia in Europe. Can you please respond to this and give your side of the argument (preferably on my userpage)? Under the AMA principle of
audi alteram partem, you have the right to be heard. (NB Copies of this message have been placed on the talkpage of all those who Caligvla has named as participants in the dispute.)
Walton monarchist89 09:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Assyrian people
most of my edits were straightforward cleanup of offtopic material and unsourced fanciful claims. There may of course be disputes about them, but such dispute must be firmly grounded in
WP:CITE and
WP:RS.
dab(ᛏ) 11:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
re Karapinar
Hi Khoikhoi, sorry for the late reply - I've been quite busy the past few weeks. I dug up whatever I could about those Hungarians in Turkey and posted what I found out on
Talk:Karapinar. Happy editing,
KissL 11:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Thank you for supporting my RfA
Thank you for your support in my RfA, which passed with a final tally of (56/0/2). It was great to see so much kind support from such competent editors and administrators as commented on my RfA.
I know I have
much reading to do before I'll feel comfortable enough to use some of the more powerful admin tools, so I'll get right to it.
Dear Kars/Khoikhoi,
Please check the article, especially mitological Bakhus(What is the correct spelling for that Anatolian plentiful/wine god).
Roots of Zeybeks are not Thracian(there is no any evidence for that), Anatolian people.Especially,they comes from yörük and turkmen villages and some Greek villagers.They acted against unjustable applications of legal authorities.(Except some a few bandit group which they were themself-not other people-also zeybek).Very smilar history/action like as Robin Hood.
Please check and correct my English also.
Regards.
Mustafa AkalpTC 17:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
There is no any source that origin is Thracian.There is self evidence regarding the geography, names etc.So to keep Tracian here without any source is not so logical. What about Bakhus, can you help?
Thanks. About Bakhus; in history there was ceremonies/rituels in autumm for the name of Stin Bakhus(probably zeybek name related with this; Stin Bakhus->Zeibekus->Zeybek/Zeibek).Many years ago, I read a research on the roots of Turkish folk dances which was pointed that zeibekiko comes from, the wine producing rituels. Foots press the grapes and arms up to the balance. I am trying to find this source.I think "Halikarnas Balıkçısı"-Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı's books also a source.
Imbros, Please warn hectorian about rv. He reverts article deleting all contribution. I put my comments his talk page,(please see my message) but till to now no any action. I have some material to add,but I prefer to wait in this position.
Regards.
Vandalism of Al Andalus
New acts of vandalism in Chile. new violation 3RR. please to block, to AL ANDALUS. thanks
Antarcticwik 18:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I am Atarcticwik not Chileuropide
Chileeuropide is an invention of Al Andalus, it investigates better, Al Andalus is to professional Vandal.-
Antarcticwik 21:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Can you protect the article
Sparta from being vandalised on a daily basis?
Miskin 02:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Deep responds
Hi Khoikhoi. I know that those changes will be reverted back immediately. I did not expect them to stay. But I hope you are not serious when you say that Armenian genocide is accepted by the majority of historians (said differently, questioning the Armenian claims is the minority view). If you say media coverage, I can agree with you. But when you say historians especially the ones who specialize on this subject, I really doubt that Armenian claims have any wide-scale acceptance. To this opposite, if you restrict yourself to top 20 US university, you'll have a quite difficult time coming up with a list of historians that support armenian claims. On the other hand, one can list many that are supporting Turkish claims. By the way, when I say real historians, this of course excludes people like Balakian, Charny etc. who have no proper training in history and who are not respected by historians.
69.134.220.50 03:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi, Khoikhoi. I think Ahvaz article should be revert to my last edit, you know there's something which I can't say because of racism, but all of them are true anyway; just trust me ...
p.s.: give them 1 and then they want 2, give them 2 then they wanna 3 ... so never give them anything.
Sasanjan 05:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
...for you support of my recent RfA. If I can ever be of service with my fancy new buttons or just as an impartial, disinterested reviewer of an article, do not hesitate to ask. Cheers.
youngamerican (
ahoy hoy) 16:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hello, user E104421 keeps taking out sourced information regarding the origin of the Hephthalites. First they complained that the source was wrongly represented in that section, so I formed it to match the source directly, and now they still take it out... Please have a look. Also, look how they kept that same sourec and added their own information. This is definetly POV, please have a look ASAP.
Khosrow II 17:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Well, when I see things going on, I'm not one to just let them stand...you know? If a user is going to replace sourced information with unsourced POV information, then yes, I will dispute it. Anyway, hows your Persian coming? Oh and by the way, the reason I go to admins first is to prevent edit/revert wars.[User:Khosrow II|Khosrow II]] 15:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
After explaining that I believed the edits of
User:Caligvla to be of a racist nature, the administator
User:Inshaneee has accused me of trolling, on my own user talk page. Can you please request that he restrain his aggressive behavior while trying to chastise me for my frustration at Caligvula's vandalism and racist remarks? --
Augustgrahl 18:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Yeah, he might have good intentions but his tone and way about it is extremely aggressive. Actually there is even an open RFC about it
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/InShaneee--
Eupator 19:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hmmm, he seems to have a clear pattern of using his powers to threaten Wikipedia users, make questionable accusations, and impose arbitrary punishments. This is simply not acceptable for a Wikipedia administrator. --
Augustgrahl 20:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Chile
I can't believe what a joke it has become at the article
Chile. And by the way, I'd like to "thank you" (laugh) for your
unjustafiably blocking me (yes, unjustafied according to wikipedia policy) for 31 hours for my having to revert Antarcticwik's vandalism. I'm still waiting for an apology, or maybe you could redeem that action by this time actually helping out appropriately.
I want to clearly express to you, that the problems at
Chile, and
Latin America, and
Andalusia, and
Quechua, and
Southern Cone, and all the other articles Antarcticwik or any of his IP's and/or sockppuppets have eddited, are not content disputes, as you have suggested. As for the Chile article, Antarcticwik hasn't engaged in discussion nor is his actions based on a dispute, he merely deletes all sources and text, mainly in the demographics and economics section. And he has reverted yet again. When will it stop!
I just want you to see the vandalism that his
edits do to the page:
From:
"
...fell from 46% in 1987 to around 18.8% as procclaimed by the then president
Ricardo Lagos in 2005
[11] Critics in Chile, however, argue true poverty numbers are considerably higher than officially published figures.
[12] In 2006, according to statistics released by Chile's CAS Informática, around 58% of Chileans lived near or below poverty levels; 20.6% in extreme poverty.
[13] Despite enjoying a comparatively high GDP compared to most other countries of
Latin America, Chile also suffers from one of the most uneven
distributions of wealth[14] in the world, ahead only of
Brazil in the Latin American region and lagging behind even of most developing
sub-Saharan African nations. Chile's top 10 richest percentile possesses 90 percent of the country's wealth. On the national level, 6.2% of the population belonged to "Grupo ABC1" upper economic bracket, 15% belonged to "Grupo C2" middle economic bracket, 21% to "Grupo C3" lower middle economic bracket, 38% to "Grupo D" lower economic braket, and 20% to "Grupo E" extreme poor economic bracket.
[15]"
To:
"...fell from 46% in 1987 to around 18.8% as procclaimed by the then president
Ricardo Lagos"
From:
Demographics
Population of Chile from 1950, projected up to 2050 (INE)File:Niños Chilenos.JPGChilean children during the annual Fiestas Patrias, or National Celebrations
The
Spanish conquest of Chile and the subsequent intermarriages between colonial
Spanish immigrants and
indigenousAmerindian tribes "began a process of racial and cultural mix which gave birth to the Chilean people."
[16] The country's population is thus relatively homogeneous, with most being of
mestizo[17][18] — mixed Spanish and Amerindian — descent, although in various degrees of admixture. See
Population background below.
About 85% of the country's population lives in urban areas, with 40% living in
Greater Santiago. Chile's population growth is among the lowest in
Latin America, at around 0.97%, it comes third only to
Uruguay and
Cuba.
Population background
The ethnic composition of Chileans is marked by a socio-genetic gradient where Amerindian admixture typically correlates to
social levels.
[19][20] Amerindian contribution tends to be strongest in the
lower echelons of society, with the middle majority presenting a more balanced degree of both
European and Amerindian ancestry, while the upper echelons of society tend to register the lowest degree of Amerindian contribution. Almost the entirety of the population, however, presents a racially mixed origin, and only a small minority can truly be said to be unmixed European or unmixed Amerindian. The unmixed Amerindian population is in fact said to be now extinct.
Nevertheless, based solely on
physical appearance, between 5 and 10% of the current population would be classified as Amerindian, some 30% would be classified as
white, and the remaining majority, between 60 and 65%, would be the discernably
mestizo population that has a certain tendancy towards a slightly greater input on the European side and averages a racial mixture not much lower than the average ratio for Chile's overall population.
[21]
According to the Program of Human Genetics of the
University of Chile, the average ratio of racial mixture for Chile's overall population, calculated by the use of nuclear markers, is approximately 60% European contribution and 40% Amerindian, depending on the socioeconomic level.
[22][23] According to Rothhammer (1987/2004), that average ratio stands at 57% European contribution and 43% Amerindian.
[24]
According to the 1992 Chilean census, a total of 10.5% of the total population declared themselves indigenous, irrespective of whether they currently practiced or spoke a native culture and language; almost one million people (9.7% of the total) declared themselves
Mapuche, 0.6% declared to be
Aymara, and a 0.2% reported as
Rapanui.
At the 2002 census, only indigenous people that still practiced or spoke a native culture and language were surveyed: 4.6% of the population (692,192 people) fit that description; of these, 87.3% declared themselves Mapuche.
[25].
Immigration
Relative to its overall population, Chile never experienced any large scale wave of immigrants.
[26] Compared to neighbouring
Argentina or
Uruguay, where European immigration doubled to tripled their existing populations, the total number of immigrants to Chile, both originating from other Latin American countries and all other (mostly European) countries, never surpassed 4% of its total population.
[27][28] This is not to say that immigrants were not important to the evolution of Chilean society and the Chilean nation. Small numbers of non-Spanish
European immigrants arrived in Chile - mainly to the northern and southern extremities of the country - during the
XIX and
XX centuries, including
English,
Irish,
Italians,
French, and
Balkans.
[29] In
1848 a small but noteworthy German immigration took place, sponsored by the Chilean government with aims of colonising the southern region. With time, and although undertaken by no more than 7,000 people, that German immigration influenced the cultural composition of the southern provinces of
Valdivia,
Llanquihue and
Osorno. The prevalence of non-Hispanic European surnames among the governing body of modern Chile are a testament to their disproportionate contribution to Chile. Also worth mentioning are the
Korean and especially
Palestinian communities, the latter being the largest colony of that people outside of the Arab world. The volume of immigrants from neighboring countries to Chile during those same periods was of a similar value.
[30]
Currently,
immigration from neighboring countries to Chile is greatest, and during the last decade immigration to Chile has doubled to 184,464 people in
2002, originating primarily from
Argentina,
Bolivia and
Peru.
Emigration of Chileans has decreased during the last decade: It is estimated that 857,781 Chileans live abroad, 50.1% of those being in Argentina, 13.3% in the
United States, 4.9% in
Sweden, and around 2% in
Australia, with the rest being scattered in smaller numbers across the globe."
To:
"Demographics
Population of Chile from 1950, projected up to 2050 (INE)
Chile is a relatively homogenous country and most of its population is of predominantly Spanish origin, with varying degrees of native Amerindian admixture, the product of the racial mixture between colonial Spanish immigrants and the native Amerindian tribes. About 85% of its population lives in urban areas, with 40% living in Greater Santiago. Chile's population growth is among the lowest in Latin America, at around 0.97%, it comes third only to Uruguay and Cuba.
Indigenous communities
Those belonging to recognised indigenous communities (
2002)
According to the 1992 Chilean census, a total of 10.5% of the total population declared themselves indigenous, irrespective of whether they currently practiced or spoke a native culture and language; almost one million people (9.7% of the total) declared themselves
Mapuche, 0.6% declared to be
Aymara, and a 0.2% reported as
Rapanui.
[31]
At the 2002 census, only indigenous people that still practiced or spoke a native culture and language were surveyed: 4.6% of the population (692,192 people) fit that description; of these, 87.3% declared themselves Mapuche.
[32]
Non-Spanish European immigrants arrived in Chile - mainly to the northern and southern extremities of the country - during the XIX and XX centuries, including English, Irish, Italians, French, and the Balkans. Smaller waves of Danes, Dutch, Portugese, Romanians, and Greeks arrived as well. In 1848 a small but noteworthy German immigration took place, sponsored by the Chilean government with aims of colonising the southern region. The German/Swiss immigration influenced the cultural composition of the southern provinces of Valdivia, Llanquihue and Osorno. The prevalence of German, French, Italian, English and Yugoslavian surnames among the governing body of modern Chile are a testament to their contribution to Chile. Also worth mentioning are the Korean, Japanese, and especially Palestinian communities, the latter being the largest colony of that people outside of the Arab world. The volume of immigrants from neighboring countries to Chile during those same periods was of a similar value. Chilean ranchers and farmers settled vast expenses of
Mexico in the early 1800's, while thousands of miners from Chile and Peru emigrated to
California in the 1850's during the gold rush.citation needed
Currently, immigration from neighboring countries to Chile is greatest, and during the last decade immigration to Chile has doubled to 184,464 people in 2002, originating primarily from Argentina, Bolivia and Peru.
Emigration of Chileans has decreased during the last decade: It is estimated that 857,781 Chileans live abroad, 50.1% of those being in Argentina, 13.3% in the United States, 4.9% in Sweden, and around 2% in Australia, with the rest being scattered in smaller numbers accross the globe."
Note that every single source and reference, all from Chilean sources, including the Chilean Census, Chilean Embassy, University of Chile, other Chilean university's website, Chilean science genetic magazine, Migration Statistics website, etc. etc. etc. have been deleted with text and all, including a whole subsectio, and whatever text he has kept, he changes the figures to his own unsourced ones. The format of the sections he vandalises are also un-wikified in the process, with all hyperlinks removed. And then he has the audacity to come to you and
tell you to block ME again! I'm surprised that you didn't, seeing that you had already misued that admin privalege overme once before in spite of what was obviously going on at
Chile and who the vandal was.
CieloEstrellado has countless times resotred the info box whose figures keep being affected by the reverts, including the deletion of the national motto. The entire layout of the article, positioning of pictures (one ontop of another, poking into sections and text, and horrendous paragraphing and punctuation horrors throughout, put simply, the overall structure of the article is destroyed by him. Just compare them;
Antarcticwik and
normal edit
As I have said before, and will say again, this is blatant vandalism, and NOT a content dispute or edit war. Other users have tried to keep up with his constant reverts to his mutilated unwikified edition. He has refused to engage in dialog, and I have indeed
posted to his user page but only to recieve no reply. As you are probably aware, the only pearls (
in Spanishin Spanish) I have recieved from him were three personal attacks full of racism to every human ethnic/racial group immaginable other than Europeans, even Spaniards were attacked as filthy african, arab, semites (ie, Jews). He even said whatever "minor" (
according to him) Amerindian admixture in Chileans is "compensated" (a word he used) with "real European" German blood (as he himself put it), or so he has made himself believe. Please, lets not even get into the proportion of non-Spanish immigrants that ever made it to Chile (never surpassing 4% of its population, only half of which were Europeans with the other half being other Latin Americans, and which all sources back up including every single Chilean source, and which btw is also text and sources that he deletes) or how "minor" the average Amerindian admixture in Chileans actually is (ie. between 40 and 43%) that is supposedly "compensated" with German blood. He has even tried to encourage others to join in his "MANO DURA" ("Heavy Hand") approach, as he so called it (
in Spanish). Will you now do something to resolve the problem with him and the situation he has created? I think more than enough has been perpetrated to justify all his IP's and main account to be permanently blocked.
Also, if you are trully intent on helping to stop vandalism and protect verifiable content, then you may want to check out
Hispanic too. There's an IP there that is determined to take out sources and content that attest to the make up of Argnetina's colonial population. Al-Andalus 23:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)reply
There is a problem with Antarcticwik. Not only he is a POV pusher of the worse kind but he has made several personal attacks, generally in Spanish (reason why he could get away with murder, I guess). I would suggest Al-Andalus to let it be but I will be keeping a close eye on Antarcticwik. If his behaviour does not change, I am more than happy suggesting a community ban for him and any sockpuppet. If any of you have ever listened to the song titled "Las casitas del Barrio Alto" by
Victor Jara, you will understand the sort of uppity that could perfectly define his negationism... Regards,
Asteriontalk 11:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I saw your name in the list of active users in
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Central_Asia.
Could you please take a look at these pages and the corresponding talk pages?
Jahangard 03:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi Khoi. I have a content dispute in the article
Renewal (Transnistria) with Mr. Mauco. I don't agree with his position that this is an oposition party, as this is the main party (has the majority in parliament) and didn't put a candidature against president Smirnov. Can you please block this article until the dispute is solved? Thanks.--
MariusM 12:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Clarify the case
Dear Khoikhoi,
Please check the stuation. I confuse a little bit.
A new user, was declared himself as admin and member of ArbCom.
see and was making vandalism by putting a block tag to another user talk page.
see .
I posted him
here
Later an admin only cleared the user page,
nothing else.
I'm in confuse about wiki rules. Is it enough.No need any other steps.
Since you know more about the rules,Please clarify/explain me.
Regards.
Mustafa AkalpTC 15:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hello. Can you please watch this article? I added up the total number of all the Turkic peoples listed in order to come up with the 120-150 million number (which actually matches what the article has been saying for months), yet an anon user claims I "fabricated" the numbers and reinserted the exagerated POV number. Please keep an eye on that article, thanks.
Khosrow II 16:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Did you read my last statement on the Turkic people talk page? The numbers I summed up are sourced, Zaparodjik's are not.
Khosrow II 21:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I did a quick google search and couldnt find anything, however, it is allowed for Wikipedia Users to combined several sources to come up with a statistic or a map, etc... What I'm doing is not wrong, and it is not breaking any rules. Infact, as clevelander put it, its encouraged for users to do this stuff when information is not abundant. The numbers I came up with are sourced, and its simple mathmatics. If you dont trust my math, you can grab a calculator yourself and plug in the numbers. I will also bring to your attention that the article for months has said 150 million (first sentence here:
[33]), and my calculations show that the original estimate was indeed accurate. Zaparodjik has a history of putting in propaganda and POV, take everything he says with a pinch of salt.
Khosrow II 05:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
How does that apply to numbers and addition? Technically, those numbers each are about the respective Turkic peoples. Therefore, adding them up would give us the total population of those respective peoples combined. If the sources about each of them is accurate, then their some would also be accurate, dont you think? If there a source says there are 3 of me in the USA and another says that there are 5 of me in China, than my total population, according to those sources, would be 8.
Khosrow II 05:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I went to those articles, and used the sourced numbers they had there. Simple as that, they were all sourced. What is so hard to understand about the process I went through to get that number? All the numbers are sourced, and I added them up, simple.
Khosrow II 05:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
All Wiki articles are created using many different source, most of which talk about different things, but are put together to create one article. Then according to this, all of Wikipedia is a synthesis. Sourced information is sourced information, and adding up that sourced information makes it total credible. Its funny, you havent questioned for one second about Zaparodjik's number, by my number, which is sourced, is getting all the attention... Khoikhoi, this is really not that hard to comprehend. Bringing together several sources to create something that otherwise cannot be found on the internet, is not against Wiki rules.
If all the numbers are sourced from credible sources, then their total sum also constitutes a credible number. I did the same for the Iranian peoples article and no one complained, because I used sourced information.
Khosrow II 05:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Your an admin, and this is a pretty clean and cut case, I dont understand how Zaparodjik gets off scot free everytime with no one questioning his edits, yet everytime I try to fix something, the whole world turns against me.
Khosrow II 05:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
No not at all, thats not what I'm suggesting at all. Im suggesting that you fix the number on that Turkic peoples page to the only credible number we have so far. Tell me this, if we have one source that says the population of Martians on Earth is 500, and another that says the populations of Venetians on Earth is 1000, but no source that tells us the total population of Martians and Venetians on Earth combined, can we or can we not say that the total population is 1500 just by adding those two sources?
Khosrow II 06:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Any user would easily agree with this. Who else do you want to show this argument to, anyone, be my guest. But what are you going to do about Zaparodjik's edit while its still in the article? You are an admin, you can make decisions yourself now cant you? I brought up my argument, and we all know Zaparodjik's argument, he got his number from another Wikipedia page (which actually also puts the number at 140 million, Zaparodjik decided he was going to add 68 million to that number for some reason...) which he says is more credible than "an Iranian".
Khosrow II 06:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Good decision for now. I'll talk to you later, good night and I appreciate you taking your time.
Khosrow II 06:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Zaparodjik and Karcha are reverting your edit to the page. Also, I will have you know that Karcha has called the Iranian wikipedians "Perso Nazis". I'll let you deal with that how ever way you see fit:
[34].
Khosrow II 23:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Assume good faith...?
Hi,
Regarding this
[35], you should have read the talk page.
The user
user:Inahet went to the library and borrowed the book: E. J. Holmyard (ed.), The Arabic Works of Jabir ibn Hayyan. He also took the time to type it down on his user page for others to read (thank you Inahet!)
[36]. Instead of being greatfull for the effort of this user, you automatically jump to the conclusion that he is a liar and that he forged the citations!! or as you put it diplomatically "This article or section may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations"... Cheers
Jidan 17:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)reply
From Holmyard:
"One of the tribes whose members were present at Kufa in sufficient numbers to be assigned a definite quarter was that known as Al-Azd, a celebrated tribe of South Arabia. From this tribe there sprang, towards the end of the seventh century A.D., a man named Hayyan, who carried on the business of a druggist"
The Al-Azd tribe home is yemen. The author used the term south arabia, a term used very often for ancient yemen. For example,
Himyar is a south arabian kingdom, although they it was centered in todays yemen.
Whilst in Arabia, he studied the Koran, mathematics and other subjects under a scholar named Harbi al-Himyari, of whom unfortunately we have no record
Harbi al-Himyari comes from the
Himyar tribe as can be read from his name, which lived also in yemen.
Cheers.
Jidan 06:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
ohh BTW, "some" in that sentence is not "bad" grammer, as you can see from this oxford journal
[37]...
Altaic controversy
Hi, after all again the same issue. There is a consensus on the
Talk:Altaic_languages that the Altaic is a proper name to label these languages. I changed the "disputed" as "see also Altaic controversy" because it was not clear what was disputed with the previous "disputed" notice. Furthermore, the
Altaic Languages page contains enough information and sources about the issue (will be improved considerable in the near future). Regards.
E104421 12:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I think you still misunderstand the issue. The consensus i mentioned is here
Talk:Altaic_languages#Altaic_Controversy, the name is proper to label all these languages. If you write as "disputed", it is not clear what the dispute is? Furthermore, my notification "see also Altaic Controversy" is more convenient. AtilimGunesBaydin is also pointed out the same (see my talk page). The information about the controversy is given in the Altaic Languages page. I'd like to know why you are so insisted to keep "disputed", the issue is a minor one. This is totally misleading as i pointed out before. Future Perfect Sunrise also commented about the issue. Even Ante Aikio stated there that the dispute issue should go to Altaic Languages. I do not see anything wrong by writing as "see Altaic Controversy". If there is i want you to explain it clearly. Regards
E104421 17:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Khoikhoi, the language template is not a place to discuss these issues. I'm not a native speaker, what is the difference between the "disputed" and "see Altaic Controversy" which implies the issue is controversial. Why you are so insested on the word "disputed"? You're the only person insisting on this. Furthermore, i do not think that you're a linguist, cause if it is so, you should have given scientific sources not the encarta. Regards
E104421 17:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
In linguistics papers it's written as Altaic Controversy not the Altaic Dispute or Disputed Altaic. If it is a better wording, can you explain the difference as a native speaker?
E104421 17:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
If they are the same, i'm replacing (with pleasure :)) the dispute with controversy cause it's the way used in linguistics and also we have "Altaic Controversy" section in Altaic languages. Don't worry, i shall first wait your comments. Kind regards
E104421 18:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hahahaha, Khoikhoi, the issue (if you read the Altaic controversy section you'll see more clearly) is related the genetic relationship between these languages not related with any language with itself. The "disputed" notice alone does not make sense without Altaic language classification. Please also read
Talk:Altaic_languages#Altaic_Controversy for more comments. I can also provide you detailed information via e-mail. I think by denoting "see also Altaic controversy", we also invite users to read what the controversy is about. I think that's enough. In my opinion this makes the notification more clear. Regards
E104421 18:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
We're not only implying the controversy, but also showing the place for them to get more information. This will lead users to have a look at the Altaic Controversy section. Putting the "disputed" misleads cause "what the dispute is about" is not clear in that kind of representation. Actually writing both "disputed" and "see also Altaic controversy" together clogg-up the infobox. That's why i'm offering to remove "disputed" which has the same meaning as controversial. Now, i'm getting ready to do the changes, ok?
E104421 18:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Sorry, i could not replied on time. There was a heavy cold yesterday and i had to leave with my friend earlier. For the Altaic issue, i agree. Although there is still an ambiguity with this solution, that's alright, probably the tags in themselves do not give much information to the general reader. As a trial, i applied our solution to
Turkic Languages article. Kind regards
E104421 12:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
This user is requesting unblocking; their original 1-week 3RR block would have expired, what remains is the extension for evasion that you gave for the contributions of
203.187.235.106 (
talk·contribs). I think you made a mistake here: I'm not sure why 203.187.235.106 added Nixer's name to the WikiProject on Armenians, but
[38] this edit (203.187's first) was a revert clearly perpetuated by
User:Caligvla; Caligvla had reverted 3 times already in 24 hours. Up to you, though.
Mangojuicetalk 12:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Like I said, up to you. But I would think, just tell him not to evade blocks; having to have a discussion first will make things go too much slower.
Mangojuicetalk 18:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
It was not me! I don't use socks or Anons. I have sent MangoJuice and e-mail. --
Caligvla 20:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Can you please unprotect this article. This article has been scene of Indian writers rewriting the history of Pakistan and has been protected by an Indian admin with Indian version. Can you please also check why I cannot edit
Babur page.
Siddiqui 16:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Greetings!
Hello! Thank you for your warm welcome; also thanks for your 'interventions' at
Aegean Sea and the
article I just created (I realise it isn't much). I hope to stick around and to contribute much more in the near future ... particularly regarding (but not limited to) geography. Let me know if and how I can be of assistance. Thanks again!
Psychlopaedist 18:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Any sources?
Can u provide any reliable sources for your rv? I mean, the Amnesty article was nice, but it did not say anything about the correct spelling. In addition, Amnesty article is not a source. For example I am a member of the Rotary club and I can just write anything I want and that does not mean that Wikipedia should follow my opinion.
Sosomk 20:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I INSIST I AM NOT CHILEUROPIDE, PLEASE DO NOT OFFEND TO ME. CHILEEUROPIDE IS A INVENTION OF AL ANDALUS, TO ATTACK ME AND HARM ME.Antarcticwik 00:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE SPECULATIVE
1 ANDALUS WAS BLOCKED BY 31 HOURS
2.COINCIDE the AIM OF the BLOCKADE WITH the CHILEEUROPIDE BIRTH.
3. AL ANDALUS PRETENDS THEIR ENGLISH BADLY.
4. IN DEMOGRAPHY OF CHILE CHILEUROPIDE IT DENIES THE INDIGENOUS EXISTENCE OF CHILE I NO.
I INSIST I AM NOT CHILEUROPIDE, PLEASE DO NOT OFFEND TO ME. CHILEEUROPIDE IS A INVENTION OF AL ANDALUS, TO ATTACK ME AND HARM
Antarcticwik 00:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Bot
It still sometimes reverts users with 25+ edits which (among other things) it should never do. It seems to do that sporatically, but I still cant figure out why.Voice-of-All 02:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Moldavia
Hi. I understand that you reverted Bonaparte, and it was good that you did so. However, Mikkalai is POV-pushing in this case, and I would like you to look into the matter: I have done a lot of work creating, expanding, managing, and styling that article to reflect the most neutral version one could come up with. It was not contested by anyone, and the relations between Moldova and Moldavia are made as clear as possible, without imposing a Romanian POV.
Primordially, the word "Moldavia" is used in reference to the present-day Romanian region - other regions are "Moldavian" only by way of being Bessarabian and Bukovinan - both of which [sub]regions have separate articles which [should] clarify the matter in specific areas; moreover, the references to them as "Moldavian" point to their political status as parts of the former principality (before the 1500s; before 1771; before 1812), and it is hard to discern whether there is real agreement over their belonging to the geographical entity. Such relations are, however, made clear in the second line of the text... (just how much does one have to cram in the first sentence?).
I think Mikkalai is doing this because he misinterpreted a comment I made a while back, when I told him that, no matter what POV to take on the matter, it would still have to be a paradox that the Moldavian/Moldovan identity was preserved not in Moldavia, but in a part of Bessarabia. Interestingly, his edits unwittingly reflect the POV of Romanian nationalism ("Bessarabia=Moldavia"), because he came to advocate them by way of wishful thinking and its consequences. Please tell me you note the uncomfortable position I'm stranded in: I have to quarell with some Romanian users over the "Romanian-speaking states" category, and, at the very same time, I have to answer to Mikkalai when he accuses me of being a nationalist and of supporting the incorporation of Bessarabia (I have already told him, several times, that I do not) when I am writing down the first accurate and neutral version of a long-neglected topic...
Dahn 21:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Yes!
I guess the reasons are many, but none other than the usual ones heard: it's not much fun any longer; yadda yadda yadda; dealing with this or that type of person; falan filan (Turkish for, roughly, "yadda yadda yadda"); real life; falan feşmekan (a slightly more, to my ear, euphonious alternative to falan filan); etc.
Basically, that's the reason I'm taking off. I'm not sure my leaving will be as entire as the
Flann O'Brien quote now on my userpage suggests (I'll still try to "defend" at least the pages I nurtured from unreasonable and/or silly crap of the sort we are both aware of), but it should be pretty nearly so. It's just that I recently realized, while writing my latest minorpieces (
Layman Pang and
Katsu (Zen)), that the energy and research spent on such work could be better directed than towards Wikipedia ... not that I have come to entirely doubt the value of the project, just that I have come to doubt the value of the project's influence on me (ooh, that sounds positively
Pynchonian) and, more specifically, on other work that I feel I should be doing.
Nonetheless, it's hard giving up, ain't it? Post-leave, I made
one content edit (anonymously) of a section that I had written myself for the
Samuel Beckett article, and of a sentence that is with about 92% surety original research (if for no other reason than that I was in whiskey-soaked epiphany mode when writing
the whole section so as to get the article up to speed for
main page featured article day, 13 April, which the article wasn't otherwise ready for yet). Anyhow, the post-leave edit was
promptly reverted, proving that the hawks are watching, and so I did as the hawks asked and simply
tagged it as "citation needed" (under my own name). So, it's nice to see that the whole Wiki-process is still going strong.
In the meantime, I wish you all the best of luck in all your endeavors (and a belated congratulations on becoming an admin—you, as far as I can tell, certainly deserve it, since you were all but doing an admin's work anyhow). Cheers. —
Saposcat 22:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I am not unable to edit this page. Is it possible that someone has changed some setting. Also please upprotect
History of Pakistan page. This page is target of Indians writing history of Pakistan from their perspective.
Siddiqui 22:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I double checked and I still can't edit
Babur page. Is there a user lock for my account ?
Now it worked !! I eas trying to revert it to revert back to version by
REcheck for days but it never worked. It was very odd. But it started working. Thanks.
Hello Khoikhoi:). I noticed that new edit- revert-wars are about to break out concerning placenames in Greek-related articles. I added the Greek name in the top in
Bitola again. I can't see why this article should be "excluded". if it's the 'Name section' that it has, tell me so, so i can create such a section in
Thessaloniki as well... I honestly why some users see the placenames issue as "revence", "50-50" or supposed "equality". A place (town, city or area) has to have some basic characteristics in order to have a name in another language (establishment, first inhabitants, historic or modern importance, present minority, past or modern usage of that name in english, etc...). if we are about to say: well, greek placenames are in turkish or fyromian articles, so we "should" (huh?) add in those languages the greek articles, why not adding in all greek articles the name in arabic? greek names are already in
Alexandria,
Lattakia, etc. or maybe lets write Thessaloniki, Ioannina, Xanthi, Epirus in italian, for the greek name is in
Naples,
Sicily,
Syracuse... This eye-for-an-eye attitude makes me sick! (but what i am talking about? the Italians do know history, as much as the Greeks do...). Regards
Hectorian 23:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Good, but i still can't understand why u did this...
Hectorian 23:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I have posted a comment on that talk page, and i would appreciate a reply on that:). Ioannina shares no similarity with Istanbul, and i have explained the reasons many times. btw, do u know what 'Ioannina' means? well, it means 'the city of John'... how strange... a christian name used by its "muslim" inhabitants... A corruption of the original name that some want to make it as important as the original one...
Hectorian 00:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Huh? aromanian name? check
this out: in Greek or or Janina, in aromanian Ianina! it is the same, for crying out loud! i could also add Thessalian: Ianena, cause this is how in my area we refer to the city. i do not think that adding dialects and idioms in the lead we offer anything good (apart from desperately searching for hidden supposed minorities...). This way we can add in Thessaloniki: Official and most used Greek name: Thessaloniki, Alternative Greek name: Saloniki,
Greeklish: Salonika, Slang: Thes/niki, Internet Slang: Thess. and so on... As for the name in Albanian, are there any Albanians? do they have/had large concentrations in the city? is the city of major historic importance to them? do they have a distinct name for it? did they ever rule the city? did they found it? to all the above the answer is 'no'. so?
Hectorian 00:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Are
Mycenaean language,
Cappadocian Greek language,
Tsakonian language,
Griko language,
Pontic language seperate languages, or just former forms and dialects of modern Greek? I am puzzled by the usage of the word 'language' here in wikipedia (i can list other dialects from other languages as well, that here are considered "seperate"-funny enough, only
English language is considered, despite its widespread usage and the diverse backgrounds or its speakers and its long history as one language...- All the others, French, Spanish, Italian, German, Dutch, Greek have been "butchered"...). Anyway, not mentioning the name because the Aromanians call the cities 'Thessaloniki' and 'Ianina', just like the rest of the Greeks, and I, myself an Aromanian, have never heard the name 'Saruna' in my whole life! I do not know for other articles...
As for the Albanian name, there actually are (Cham) Albanians living in the city: what are u talking about? where are they? never seen one. apropos, they all left following the WWII, and, btw, Cham is the region of
Thesprotia, and there is where they were living, not Ioannina! let me clear something as well: Greek: Ioannina, Alternative Greek: Ianina or Janina or Janena or Ianena (if u prefer in the Greek alphabet, Ιωάννινα or Γιάννινα or Γιάννενα). 'Janinë' does not seem that distinct now, does it?;-).
Hectorian 01:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I said: remove the aromanian name because it is not different than the greek. on whether aromanian constitutes a language or not, that's another case... I won't compare anything with any Turkish user in any Trabzon article... Because, those things there are sources. btw, i can't understand why today i find myself twice in the "awkward" situation that u should had learnt french...:p. though i can't read much of the link u gave me (for i don't speak french), i can understand some things... One of them is this: Ioannina: de rares villages dans la zone limitrophe de la Thesprotie et du département de Prévéza [un village situé au nord de Konitsa est également albanophone]. This is not about the city of Ioannina! it is talking about the perfectural borders with Thesprotia and one albanophone village, north of
Konitsa, near the borders of Albania. so, no reason to have the name in albanian there...
Hectorian 01:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Aha! If i say i did not expect this, i would be lying;-). I knew u would find something about Ali Pasha and present it as "evidence" of albanian rule... He was an Ottoman appointed governor, so what? we won't add the albanian name just cause the city's control was taken by an albanian (appointed by the Turks on the ground of religion)! i bet u know that there have been Greek, Albanian and Slav (Serbs and Bulgarians) Grand Vezirs or the Ottoman empire... id est, they were ruling all the empire (also on the grounds of religion and not ethnicity). so, Mecca was part of the Ottoman empire back then...
İbrahim Edhem Pasha, was Grand Vizier... may i add the Greek name in Mecca (Μέκκα-i know it is almost the same, but it doesn't seem to be a prob, right?), just because a greek once ruled (among many) this place as well?
Hectorian 02:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Yes, i would have;-). On which ground do u want to add it? on the ground that once upon a time they had control of the city? on this ground, would u object me to include the Greek name in
Kabul,
Cairo and
Jerusalem? btw, u want to add it in the arabic script? cause this is what the Ottoman Turkish name was... I see the Greek name added in some places in the polytonic system, and i have no problem with that! why the turks do not want to see their own former writing system? lol...
Hectorian 02:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
The Greeks stayed in the Holy Land many more years than the Ottomans ever stayed in Epirus. the same applies for the Greeks in Bactria and Egypt... I must say that if we are allowed to add names according to how much time a nation controlled an area, i can add thousands of Greek names in approximately 20-30 modern countries... I know u know it is in the arabic script, but in which script do u intend to add it?
Hectorian 02:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Even if i wouldn't mind u to add it, soon, a turkish user would appear and filled with "disgust" would alter it to the modern turkish writing system... (it has happened before). i think it's better to let it aside for the moment... Btw, u Jews have also been all over the freakin' world. but in another concept, more peaceful;-)
Hectorian 03:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Hehe... I may believe in some conspiracy theories (e.g. the Assasination of JFK), but not in this one;-)... It's all about money, oil and lobbies... in some periods of history a certain lobby is more powerful than the others... later, these things alter... (money makes the world go round, as an old american song says...). If the Jews control/led the world, they would had created Israel much earlier... Anyway, an Ottoman Turkish wikipedia could be created, why not?
who would object to that? there are Latin, Aromanian and Esperanto wikipedias for Christ's sake!;-)... (id est: a dead language, a language that has never been written and an artificial one!).
Hectorian 03:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Rollback
Khoi, you may want to stop using rollback against regular editors, or we all know that sooner or later, due to some user or other, you'll end up with an RFC up your rear end. Take care ;-) --
Tekleni 23:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)reply
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 05:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)reply
