Yep, thanks for helpful table on my talk page.-- hnnvansier ( talk) 06:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

hello khoihoi is it possible for me to award some one a barn star please reply on my talk page

many thanks,

Secthayrabe Ø

Hello Khoikhoi an unkown user has sent me this rude commet:

The Byzantines were Greeks. they also had other people like Armenians but mainly Greek. and Turks came from Asia and attacked the Byzantine Empire. read a book, Iranian. 150.140.227.137 ( talk) 14:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply

i'm not plakidas. don't accuse people so easily. 150.140.227.137 ( talk) 20:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I am confusied at this rude racisticm so could you help me to find out who he is and punish him thanks so much please relpy on my talk page as soon as possible,

Secthayrabe Ø

Hi Khoikhoi,

Here we go again. Couple of hours after I have restored the article an anonymous user has reverted back again to the ancient version. I fear the cycle starts anew. What am I supposed to do? Any advice? Can you do something about it? Thanks. Omer182 ( talk) 21:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your interest Khoikhoi. Omer182 ( talk) 20:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Sorry to keep you engaged Khoikhoi, but couple of hours after I have restored the article for the second time since unprotection, the User Namsos has affected a revert. This one is one of the previous four. I will restore the article again but I am nearly sure various identifiable users and anons will revert in turns. This is a clearly recognizable pattern as witnessed by the history of the article. Omer182 ( talk) 15:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi! The site with the results of 2003 Abkhazian census also has the results of all other censuses, including the 1886 one so I've added this ref.

There are two refs after the sentence 'Most of the Samurzaq'anians must be thought to have been Mingrelians, and a minority Abkhaz' - to the books by Mueller and by Cornell. I'm not sure since I don't have an access to these books now but I think that one of them was used as a source for that sentence (Mueller's one, maybe) and one for the 1886 data but was misplaced later for some reason. Could you check the book by Cornell for the 1886 census data? Alæxis _¿question? 06:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Please see my request at Talk:Cyrus cylinder#Tags before you dive into the article again. Thanks. -- ChrisO ( talk) 08:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC) reply

It is more than obvious that the anti-jewish section is unencyclopedic. Here are some of the reasons:

1. The style is more of a news-flash.
2. It contains information purely cited.
3. It is a strong point of view pushover.
4. There are some grammar mistakes and mistakes in punctuation. ( forgive me for mistakes in my own writing here)
5. It seems like this section is not about anti-jewish racism but instead an attack on arabs.
6. It contains dubious information that is apparently intended to misguide the reader.
7. IT DOES NOT BELONG IN PAN-ARABISM

Contrieng ( talk) 14:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi,the 2005 Yearbook is the last one where the Georgian Department of Statistics shows separately four numbers: total population, population in territories controlled by the central government, population in Abkhazia, and population in South Osetia. The yearbooks for 2006 and 2007 unfortunately show only the population excluding Abkhazia and South Osetia and do not show any new estimates for the breakaway regions. So what I say in Abkhazia#Demographics about estimates not published after 2005 refers to estimates of Abkhazia population by the Georgian Dept Stat. If you would like to see the 2005 data (which are not on-line any more), please give me your e-mail and I will gladly send you the page from the 2005 Yearbook with the detailed population numbers. You can find my e-mail on my user page. Hope this clarifies the situation. Regards, -- Zlerman ( talk) 02:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the tip and the demonstration with Internet Archive. I have heard of it, but have never used it before. I will see how to incorporate the link through Internet Archive to the 2005 YB in the Abkhazia (and maybe also Georgia) references. Best, -- Zlerman ( talk) 03:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC) reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Iran

Dear Khoikhoi Mani1 was punished for massreverting, insulting users, war edits and thretening me physically. I have applauded for your non-partizan formula to block both of us, in addition I retracted legal actions when yoy aksed me. You said he won't fall back in the same behavior because he is warned. Now he is back and reverting 3 users edits, and insults me again. He reverts and says noone touches this after the devbate is over, but is blocking every debate and also insults people. He does violate a longstanding consensus about the issue and disrepct facts and also all users. I think it is a toxic environment. He has had some assets for wikipedia: he uploaded many pictures and he is adding the fa: to the English Wikiepdia. Yet his behavior in persian wikipedia is also very unfortunate (for example reverting back to his edits and not respecting the sources for the pronounciation of Saakshvili and South Ossetia) but Ok Persian wikipedia has other admins (whihc are by the way very friendly to him!). Although he had done some good jobs like uploading pictures and linking the Persian articles to the English wikipedia, I think these tasks can be performed by other users as well. The main fact remains: that he is back again with war edits, disrespecting at least 3 editors intelligence, insults, violating longstanding consensuses singlehandedly, blockading debates and leaving no way for conflict resolution, personal attacks etc... I personally can not handle him any more. respecting you I have not (yet) taken legal actions for his phsyical threats. But By this I demand puntive actions agains him. I hope you take responsibility and I hope you ban him and block his ID/ IP at least for a longer time. Sorry to disturb you with this problem, but I trust you you can solve this problem, by your abilities.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 11:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, Physical threats were referring to his late comment that he wanted to challenge me at the Hague's central Station. That's the way often criminal youth in the Netherlands invite for a fight. If I reported to police then he was arrested and interrogated for some days. It is a very sensetive issue in the netherlands, especially among thepolitically sensetive minority groups, with other words Muslims.

But it is not that big problem for me. The main thing is that his behavior has become more and more irritating and disresepctful. Honestly I see these problems, whenever he is around. Some people do not change easily. It remembers me of the banned Sehend1. I do not say that Mani is the same user, but it was also remarkable that the permanently (?) banned Sehend1 did not change his behavior. Dear Lhoikhoi I respect your decision, but last time we both got banned despite the fact that the trouble was caused mainly by mani1. Now he is completely onesided the problem maker and you give him only a warning. I do not think it is fair against me. I think Mani deserves to be paunished more severly. But as always thanks for your efforts.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 08:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, mani can remove his threats from his or my talk page but they are there in the history. But answering your question: I have never been affraid of him in anyway. it is only that he should learn to behave well. He has not been around for some times now, I wonder (and I doubt) that he is changed. let's see.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 05:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi sorry for bothering you again, but Mani1 is again back and he is again busy with his deletions on Iran article. Knowing his behavior in the past I can imagine he will go on endelessly with this behavior. It is up to you as an independent admin, but I ask gently to ban him again for some time. If he is not punished, then maybe permanently. His behavior is becoming really annoying and will cost us a lot of time and energy to restore his deletions, and perhaps again mass revertings. Thanks-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 19:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A#Iran while he has been insulting and attacking me for the last month and I have had said nothing remotely insulting to him, this Mani guy clearly does not want dialogue and meditation. In addition it is not up to him to set the preconditions. What I am asking is his punishment. I MEAN I have been threated unfairly. I have dedicated much time and energy in editing wikipedia. Now because of good will I had agree an initial mutual ban in wikipedia, but now he is violating the truce and has insulted me respeatedly. Seemingly I am not worth enough to be considered. What I want is that he gets banned and I think I am fair. I was banned for no reasion. And as Mardetanha is his friend he has managed to ban me from Persian wikipedia. That was also not fair. I think I am heavily punished while this guy is not. That is not fair. I want justice.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 09:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, I just wanted to say that mani1 has vilated the revert rules. depending on when a day begins or ends, he has reverted the Iran page from the consesnsus of the editors to his political POV, 3 or at least 2 times in 24 hours. I wonder if his repeating violations of the rules are not enough reasons to ban him permanently. Thanks.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 10:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC) reply

In addition next to theatening me and stalking he deletes my own talk page, which is some kind of vandalism.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 21:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, thanks for your actions. It is a minor dispute but Mani1 has no intention to resolve it or to cooperate. It was ME who from the beginning assumed good faith and agreed with mediation. It was Mani1 who rehjected all efforts. And unfortunately it is him who is tolerated disproportionately and it is ME who feels left alone and treated unjustly. By the way the dispute is between 5 people and him and he vandalizes my page (He is deleting me in mY talk page, it is not that he complains why I delete my own talk page!) and threatens me. And talking about being calm: It is ME who is calm, It is he who began the conflict and is still busy with his disruptive behaviors. It is HIM who violates one revert rule, not me. I am Calm in all aspects. But honestly I feel not treated justly. Now very nicely it was me who gets the same ban as him. In persian wiki he was even better off, because of his friendship with the admins there. All I say it is not fair and I have certainly no time and energy any more. This is the way some people stop putting efforts in Wikipedia. Thanks -- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 12:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 12:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello Khoikhoi, you left a notice on my German user page regarding an edit in the article Abkhazia back in 2005. However, I surely did not make this edit. I have the SUL account Bjs on different Wikipedias, but User:Bjs (usurped) of the English Wikipedia is another person so that I had to login here aus User:Bjs-en. User:Bjs (usurped), however, seems to be inactive most of the time. Greetings -- Bjs-en ( talk) 13:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Could you take a look at the removal of referenced material by Murat/Hudavendigar. Apparently he/she thinks a simple statement on the talk page allows him/her to removed multiple referenced material. [1] Thanks. Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply

I'll contribute to the draft, thanks for notifying me. -- CreazySuit ( talk) 08:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hiya. I was gonna decline the unblock per checkuser, but I'm not sure where the checkuser-confirmed report is. If you get a chance, drop a link by there so it'll make it easier to deal with any other unblock requests. Cheers. =) -- slakr^{\  talk /} 06:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC) reply

nono, not doubting that... just wanted to be able to go, "see! look! a checkuser said you are!" by dropping a link in the user's direction. :P -- slakr^{\  talk /} 06:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Aleko Gvaramia is the current rector, that other guy was the first rector ever of the ASU, that is, he became rector when the ASU was first created back in the seventies. sephia karta 16:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi. Some on the french wiki proposed to change the name "Embleme du Tibet" into "Embleme du gouvernement tibetain en exil". Do you have any reference showing that the Emblem of Tibet was used (and therefore created) in Tibet ? With thanks -- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 17:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello, lately there have been many vandlaizing attempts on the Assyrian People page. 204.107.82.210 has been putting very disturbing comments on assyrian related topics. He has used profaninty, and he has mocked the assyrian antional heritage with his incompetent posts that belittle and insult assyrian related topics. I am not familiar with how to block this individual from posting these outrageous posts. Please if you can do something to put protection on the Assyrian People page and somehow block this user from editing it will be very helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nineveh 209 ( talk • contribs) 20:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply

You might like to take a look at this, especially the talk page. I really don't care if Lambert or Grayson is correct or Cyrus a hero or villain (actually I think it's silly to talk about him as either), but I don't think editors should be making decisions as to whose translation is right or wrong, or that editors should be doing wholesale reversions of sourced text --or that other Admins should block a page just after the removal of all sourced text. I have a real problem with User:Ariobarza as he still doesn't understand WP:OR (see Persian Revolt where he wrote "According to the account of the struggle6 which is most circumstantial and on the whole most probable". Thanks. Doug Weller ( talk) 08:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Frankly, Khoikhoi, I'm beginning to wonder if you understand WP:OR, WP:V and WP:NPOV as well. Please demonstrate on Talk:Battle of Opis that you do, and please cease feeding the resident nationalists with bogus notions about them being qualified to judge the "credibility" of academics. These aren't obscure areas of policy we're talking about - they're some of Wikipedia's most basic principles. As an admin you can't possibly claim ignorance of those. -- ChrisO ( talk) 00:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Yes, those numbers are correct. The Abkhaz who lived there left/were expelled from it in 19th century ( Muhajir (Caucasus)). Then Armenians, Georgians, Russians and others were settled there; Georgians left/were expelled after the 1992-1993 war, Abkhaz weren't particularly interested in it (Sukhumi itself and Gagra district were much more attractive) so Armenians became a majority there. The same is true for Kodori Valley (~Gulripsh district) and, partially, for Gagra district. See this site for the detailed results of censuses carried out in Abkhazia. It's in Russian but unfortunately I don't know about an English-language site with the same info. Alæxis _¿question? 09:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Could you protect my user page? I finished creating it and I don't want anyone to mess with it. Thanks. Neko85 ( talk) 18:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Semi protection is enough. Most vandals are young boys and don't bother to create an account... Neko85 ( talk) 17:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Infinite, please :). Neko85 ( talk) 14:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC) reply

A very interesting question. My photos are definitely of the old synagogue (which, I think, stands on the far side of the rail tracks) and they were taken on June 23, 2006 at 11 am (Israel time on my camera) or 13 am Dushanbe time. I even have a photo of the gabbai (the synagogue caretaker) posing for me in front of the door and the plaque. I have heard about the demolition, but I don't have any information on that. Maybe there was another old synagogue? I am going to Dushanbe on October 2 and I will do my best to check this out for you. I will let you know after October 10 – maybe with new photos. Meanwhile we obviously have a problem... Best, -- Zlerman ( talk) 05:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC) reply

• More on the same subject: please look at the two links from the Dushanbe synagogue page -- Tajikistan’s Only Synagogue Saved in Nick of Time and Web site of the Jewish Community of Dushanbe, news section. Both definitely show "my" synagogues -- the ornate doors are unmistakable; the second link shows destruction in progress around the core of the synagogue, but the core still stands. So maybe all the surrounding buildings were destroyed, but the synagogue that I photographed in June 2006 still stands? -- Zlerman ( talk) 06:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Talk:Bukharan Jews is full of a heated controversy about Bukharan vs. Bukharian. I wouldn't get too worried about this, not even to the extent of trying to keep consistency within a single article. I am afraid it's useless.

On our subject, Dushanbe synagogue: my visual memory from June 2006 tells me that there were buildings (small) standing to the left and to the right of the synagogue that I photographed, but everything in front of the synagogue was a huge vacant space. I attributed this to the proximity of the railroad tracks, but now I see that the reason may have been different. In any event, I will re-visit the site between October 2 and 8. Will keep you posted. Meanwhile, we have the update tag and the latest piece from June 2008 (which needs verification and followup). -- Zlerman ( talk) 00:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC) reply

• Just a quick note upon return from Dushanbe: there is no trace of the old synagogue at the place where it was two years ago: only two small buildings remain standing in the north-eastern corner of the huge rectangle that has been cleared for the Palace of Nations. According to the site watchman I have spoken to, the synagogue and another adjoining building were demolished three months ago: fits the June 2008 news item in the article. I will have a shot at updating Dushanbe synagogue with my latest info, and then you can take it up from there. Have you heard from the user whose parents were among the founders of the synagogue? Regards, -- Zlerman ( talk) 06:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Re yours on my talk: no, the government has not provided any alternatives, other than allocating the land plot. It is now the responsibility of international Jewish organizations to come up with financing for the new building. It seems to me that there is no formal place of worship for Jews in Dushanbe as of today (except maybe an Ashkenazi synagogue hidden somewhere – I have seen a passing mention of this, but already after my return). In practice, this is not a great tragedy, as Judaism is very lenient in this respect: 10 Jews can come together for community prayer anywhere, including a private apartment. Incidentally, don't you think that the whole story of the controversy surrounding the fate of the Dushanbe synagogue should be shortened even further? -- Zlerman ( talk) 02:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC) reply

The idea of the Dagestanian peoples (not just the Nakh, AFAIK) migrating from the Mid East, and perhaps even being the inventors of agriculture, is not a fringe view, though I don't know how widely accepted it is, or how strongly it's held by those who accept it as a possibility. I think Nichols wrote something on this, but it's all pretty vague right now. kwami ( talk) 07:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I'd have to review what those edits were. We'll see. kwami ( talk) 07:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Okay, a few clods of manure: "Rise of the Sino-Caucasian culture"?? If there were such a thing, which is highly doubtful, there is no evidence for it. And it would certainly be much older than 5-6ka. I haven't seen the ref in question, but I seriously doubt that agriculture was the domain of the Nax, which almost certainly didn't yet exist—it would instead have been NEC. In the 2nd edit, he's conflated Nax & Vainax, a distinction which AFAIK is still maintained in the lit. In the third article you didn't give me a diff; I only see something about Soviet soldiers capitulating, which can be deleted as OR since there's no ref. kwami ( talk) 08:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi,

I put two more to checkuser Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/MarthaFiles who seem to have been missed, user:Malindas (who returned to rvt Sabra and Shatila massacre) and user:Rapidisimisimo (who was already blocked, I goofed). But it occurs to me, obvious sock, could I have just asked an admin to block without requesting the cu? Jd2718 ( talk) 11:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC) reply

A subsequent report Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/MarthaFiles resulted in two more positives, but only one was blocked. Could you review and block, if appropriate, Carington ( talk ⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki), (abuse of multiple accounts), who is restoring the same edits we've seen before? Jd2718 ( talk) 08:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC) Fayssal got to it first. Jd2718 ( talk) 12:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Could you check the latest additions to the references made by Nostradamus1?

• Cotterell, A., The Imperial Capitals of China: A Dynastic History of the Celestial Empire, 2008, The Overlook Press
• Paludan, A., Chronicle of the Chinese Emperors, 1998, Thames & Hudson Ltd. Thanks. Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Actually, his reference of the "Chronicle of the Chinese Emperors" is 'supposedly' taken from page 600 [2], when in reality the book only has 224 pages!! http://www.amazon.com/Chronicle-Chinese-Emperors-Reign-Reign/dp/0500050902/ref=si3_rdr_bb_product

As for the Cotterell reference, I might have to find it somewhere. Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Khoikhoi, there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#ChrisO.60s_conduct_2 regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- CreazySuit ( talk) 20:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC) reply

That was a really, really bad decision. Please revert yourself and leave the article alone. -- ChrisO ( talk) 22:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Not sure if you noticed since we were probably working at the same time, but you made this edit when the page was under full protection. Obviously, that's kind of a big policy violation so you might want to revert yourself. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 22:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Well, I'm not hearing back from you so I went ahead and put it back to the protected version. I don't want to see you get screwed over what was probably a mistake. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 22:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC) reply

No, it wasn't a mistake. Check out his edit summary. He's promoting the same NPOV-violating line that CreazySuit and his pals are - namely that only one interpretation is "true" and all others are "false" and must not be mentioned. -- ChrisO ( talk) 22:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC) reply

• http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/nes263/spring03/dmm75/page6.html
• http://fontes.lstc.edu/~rklein/Doc5/nabonidus.htm
• http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/introduction-to-the-old-testament-hebrew-bible/content/transcripts/transcript22.html
• http://shl.stanford.edu:3455/9/662

Although for a long time scholars questioned the authenticity of Cyrus's proclamation, the tide turned in favor of its validity particularly with E.J.Bickerman's vigorous and learned demonstration that it was compatible with what is known from elsewhere about such edicts. -- "From Joshua to Caiaphas", p2., by James Vander Kam

Ezra 1 preserves a genuine edit of Cyrus., -- "The Edict of Cyrus in Ezra 1", p175, by E.J.Bickerman(1946)

• http://www.bh.org.il/Names/POW/bickerman.asp

Kansas Bear ( talk) 23:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello my friend :) how are you ? you must read "modern" articles.Cuz in Turkey 250-500,000 Lazs are living today.50 000 peoples were 1983.And Laz language used by 33,000 Lazs at 1983.But now we are living 21 st century.And Protestan cENTER:jOSHUAPROJECT SAYS:153,700 PEOPLES ARE speaking Lazs.Ok please true read.Loves good night.I am "banned" KolxisLaz.Please listen and understan me please :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.238.54.75 ( talk) 09:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC) reply

My modest additions, all referenced properly and discussed and explained at length, are again sytematically being vandalized here. I have edited this one sentence and 3 references 15 different ways to satisfy all involved already. Some are intent on carrying out an edit war no matter what and make no secret about it. They seem to enjoy an immunity that I do not. Please read the comments and edit history of Bitlis. What exactly would it take to keep these proper references, all vetted, in the article? Note that no one has even disputed the validity of these references, they just "do not like them"! They have not even challenged the references officially, through proper wiki tools but just deleting them. "Report to US Government of Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland, 1919, U.S. 867.00/1005", "WWI-era mass grave with 20,000 skeletons found in Bitlis", "Armenian Violence and Massacre in the Caucasus and Anatolia Based on Archives (1906-1918), The Turkish Republic Prime Ministry General Directorate of State Archives Departmant of Ottoman Archives Publication,, Publication No: 23, Ankara 1995". Can you at least help keep the sentence and references there until they are succesfully challenged? Thanks.-- Murat ( talk) 12:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Two of these "references" are from one site. Here is the Sutherland "source" [3] and this is the NY times "source" [4]. The third "reference" is a statement by an official from a hostile government. The Zaman source, with its commentary from "Törehan Serdar, head of the Association of Victims of World War I Massacres by Armenians", is undoubtedly an attempt at POV pushing.. This was discussed:

The majority of editors disagree with the context you have added please refrain from adding unsourced or unaccepted information to articles. We add facts that are verified or that are agreed in the scholarly world. -- Namsos ( talk) 02:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC) [5] [6]. Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Again, the references are real. Facts are real and not personal opinions. If you still find a problem with them, by all means challenge them formally and properly. Personal opinions about the "acceptability" of references is not good enough a reason to delete them wholesale. What is acceptable here is well defined. If the relevant facts I have contributed, all backed by mainstream scholars and easily accesible sources seem incorrect in any way, then by all means expose them, prove them wrong, but keep your personal views and judgements out of it. Be specific about what you find to be incorrect. Best way to fend off POV and propaganda is to confront them with real facts. That is what I try to do.-- Murat ( talk) 05:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC) reply

He was in Bitlis when the first Armenian massacre occurred...., The Harvard Graduate's Magazine, by William Thayer, p116

..in the summer of 1915, was the town of Bitlis, rapidly made Armenian-free either through wholesale massacre or death-march deportation., Genocide in the Age of the Nation-State, by Mark Levene, p118

But the most extremem fear has prevailed ever since October 26, when the news of the Bitlis massacre has reached us., Report By Dr. Grace Kimball

Simultaneously the massacre of Armenians behind the Turkish lines began. The whole population of the district round Bitlis was murdered, so too were all males in Bitlis itself., Crescent and Iron Cross, by E.F. Benson, p 28.

In the town of Bitlis most of the Armenians were massacred...., Armenian and the Near East, by Fridjof Nansen, p324

1. Bodies were found near Bitlis, no mention as to whether the bodies are Turk, Armenian, Kurd or otherwise.

2. You give a report from people that arrive 4 YEARS after the massacres. This couple do not mention seeing bodies. Although, they apparently talked to "inhabitants" that had lived there during the "massacres" inflicted on them by Armenians. Yet, oddly these "inhabitants" were still alive....

3. The head of the Association of Victims of WWI Massacres by Armenians, is probably the most biased person they could have interviewed. I'm sure with that title his statement is "personal opinion", unless he's clairvoyant and can tell Turk or Armenian from skeletal remains.

4. And the most prejudiced "source", "Armenian Violence and Massacre in the Caucasus and Anatolia Based on Archives (1906-1918), "The Turkish Republic Prime Ministry General Directorate of State Archives Departmant of Ottoman Archives Publication,, Publication No: 23, Ankara 1995", which I'm sure clearly explains why the Ottoman Empire was moving Armenian women and children away from the front(clearly they were a threat to the Ottoman Army), yet apparently didn't move any Muslims(see #2, "inhabitants") away from the "rampaging hordes" of Armenians!!

Don't talk to me about personal opinion when your posts mention "Armenian nationalists" and propaganda. You are the only one allowing personal opinion to blind them. Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Unblock Request

well i found his main account- Dave1185

hes up to no good again, trolling, and harrasing me when hes not even an admin! ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ ( talk) 21:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC) reply

A anon user is changing the map and vital statistics of the Ottoman Empire article without first reaching a consensus. Could you intervene? Thanks. Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Do most scholars agree with Kiss on this? What exactly is the current academic consensus according to most historians on Petofi's ethnicity? Because I checked Google Books and many sources seem to agree with the article in that his father was Serbian, but we should try to follow what the current academic consensus is per WP:UNDUE. Do you know if I can obtain a copy of Petofi adattár online? As for the use of Hungarian name for Slovak cities, the reason is that it would be anachronistic to not use the the official names at the time. As far as I know, Hungarian was the official language at the time, so the towns/cities were known by their Hungarian names. Today however the Slovak names are used. Khoikhoi 02:55, 24 August 2008

About the names of Slovak cities/towns. Are you kidding? There are millions of cities where official language used to be whatever in the past, but it is always called by its proper name. And when we talk about official language. The official language of Kingdom of Hungary from c.1000 to 1526 was Latin. From 1526 to c.1700, present day Slovakia, Croatia and part of Hungary formed Royal Hungary which was under Habsburg rule and the official language was again Latin. From 1700 to 1844 in the Kingdom of Hungary, which kind of remained under the Habsburg rule, the official language was Latin. The exception was the short period from 1784 to 1790 when the official language was German. From 1844 to 1849 the official language was Hungarian, then from 1849 to 1867 it was again changed to German and finally from 1867 to 1918 it was Hungarian... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasooon ( talk • contribs) 23:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC) reply

A little help on the "proto-Ingush migration" stuff when you get the chance. I'm at 3RR. kwami ( talk) 00:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Never mind. Looks like we found an acceptable compromise. kwami ( talk) 01:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Ah, not really. He isn't being sincere in his edits. I can't tell if he's trolling, or just doesn't know the basics of verifying research. 06:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, why was Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Armenia articles by quality statistics deleted and how do we go about recreating that page?-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 19:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC) reply

My bad. Because it's here now: Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Armenian articles by quality statistics.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 19:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC) reply

A mediation has been opened on Battle of Opis, an article with which you have been involved recently. I have listed you as a party but please feel free to remove yourself if you do not want to participate in the mediation. Please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-10-06 Battle of Opis for the details. -- ChrisO ( talk) 00:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC) reply

This user has been constantly reverting my edits thrughout these pages. My paragraph entry in article "Armenia-Turkey" was completely removed, with no explanation or justification. He has sated that I need to get his permission in effect to make any edits. My entry was factual, informational, referenced and tied to many other articles in wikipedia. Please have him/her stop these disruptive edits.-- Murat ( talk) 05:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC) reply

You mean your continued effort to change any and all articles related to Armenians, into slanderous libel? That the Armenian Genocide didn't happen, that Armenians revolted, and NO massacres or individual executions occurred prior to April 17, 1915? Then you should read An American Physician in Turkey;

Jevdet Bey thought this a good opportunity to get rid of some of the chief men of Van. He invited four prominent Armenians, among them Ishkhan, to go to Shadakh as a "peace commission" with an equal number of prominent Turks, and compromise the matter which had arisen between the Armenians and the Government. He sent them off with a guard of honor, had a feast prepared for them in the first village at which they stopped, and at that feast had the four Armenians treacherously murdered. The following morning, Saturday, April 17th.....

BTW, that's called a PRIMARY SOURCE. Take your personal prejudice of Armenians elsewhere. Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Here are Murat's edits/deletions, removal of the word massacre [7]

An attempt to subvert the topic of an article [8]

Edited to his own POV, contrary to the reference given! [9]

Removal of Enver Pasha's statement backed by SIX references, [10]

Addition of "revolutionary leaders" to sentence, contrary to the reference given! [11]

Removal of sentences AND the reference! [12]

Removal of a picture(since it was drawn by an Armenian)! [13] Which was also reported here [14]

Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Khoi, the edit war and stalking goes on at full force here as you can see. Wholesale reverts of anything I have added continues though none of the specifics have been challenged and no improvements or corrections have been attempted. There is obviously no good faith. Their reference backed up edits are good, but mine are not? None of my entries are challenged through a formal process, but reversed without a discussion AND concensus. How can they be allolwed to remove content repeatedly and edit-war freely?-- Murat ( talk) 11:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I commented on Murat's edit here Talk:Armenia–Turkey_relations#Armenian_view:_the_only_view. His edit was neither factual, informational, or referenced by valid sources. Meowy 22:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikkoi,

This is to let you know that user Eupator has again engaged in a wholesale revert taking the “Hemshin peoples” entry back to an ancient version for the fifth time on October 7th Wholesale Revert 5.

Just to remind you about Eupator’s attitude, this user has not done a single contribution to the entry and the relevant discussions… He/she has appeared through a wholesale revert taking the entry back to an ancient version (of about a year ago) on July 4th, 2008 Wholesale Revert 1. He/she has then repeated this action on July 5th Wholesale Revert 2, August 3rd Wholesale Revert 3, September 11th Wholesale Revert 4, These reverts has basically taken away an entire section plus a big amount of fully referenced material. This user never presents what he/she objects in the version he/she persistantly erases. In response to Eupator’s reverts, I have asked for his/her arguments on the talk page, to no avail.

This user was joined by 3 others who took turns making such wholesale reverts. ( Here is a link where you might see one of my appeals to you earlier about the developlment of the Hemshin peoples entry, in case you want to refresh your memory).

Following your protection of the entry in its ancient version and pursuant to your advice I have also asked for mediation which was blocked by Eupator and users who have the similar attitude ( Rejection Report).

If you recall, in our last exchange with you, you had told me that you would talk to these users . In fact in the time period between September 12th and Oct. 7th, no such wholesale reverts were made. Well, now Eupator is back with the same attitude.

This is now without doubt a clear and persistant violation of wikipedia rules and policies and I ask your help in this issue. This user now needs to be warned seriously on his/her talk page and/or be blocked from editing the entry considered. Thanks for your help. Omer182 ( talk) 20:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I honestly think that the only way the article can be improved is if Omer is blocked from editing it for a while, maybe 2 months, in order to let other editors get it to a stable version. The amount of work that would be needed to bring Omer's version, or the pre-Omer version that Eupator has been reverting to, into decent shape is daunting. And to attempt it under Omer's self-perceived "ownership" of the article would be well nigh impossible. However, I realise that Omer has not broken any rules seriously enough to make such a block likely. I haven't tried editing the article for a while. With Omer nit-picking at everything / rewriting anything any editor adds to the entry / trying to insert his POV bias into everything, to try and rewrite the article section by section would try the patience of the best of us. Basically, the article is fucked. Meowy 20:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Hey Khoikkoi,

I was actually surprised to see the old Obama Family page I started awhile back. There was a huge argument on the talk page about the merits of the page, and it ultimatley resulted in its deletion. I cant say I know for sure the correct spelling of "Fraser" or the dates of the deaths of Michelles parents but I will do a little more research on it. Im also not sure how to do the family tree brackets, Id like to see Michelles family tree brackets filled in sometime.

Hey Khoikhoi, user Hudavendigar (aka Murat) continues to delete [15], [16] the illustration on the Kars article by dismissing it as personal "memorabilia" and calling for a consensus, which is obviously a silly and inadequate objection since there is nothing wrong with the illustration itself but by its author. Numerous users have already agreed on its talk page that the image is very helpful to the article (including you) so perhaps you can help him understand this issue. He has been disrupting a wider ranger of Armenian related articles and a topic ban, for at least a few months, seems to be in order because numerous warning have not stopped the vandalism. Thank you.-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 17:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC) reply

The removal of the Kars illustration wasn't vandalism imho, and he did give legitimate reasons for it. It is many of his other edits that are problematic. And his recent canvasing to get support for those edits amongst editors whose names suggest that they are Turkish (for example, User_talk:Ayça_Leovinus, User_talk:Tangomaan, User_talk:Deliogul, User_talk:Turkish_Flame) and who have never edited any of the articles Hudavendigar has been having his edit warring on. Meowy 21:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Is it better to unlock the Iran article and force Mani to follow 1RR? He seems to be the only one who prefers removing reference to other languages in the infobox. Should the whole page be locked because of the disruptive behavior of one editor?-- Agha Nader ( talk) 01:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC) reply

• Please vote at the Religion (2) section of Talk Page of the article Turkey, viewing Version 1 (my re-edited version for a neutral prospective) and Version 2, and decide which is the preferred version for the Religion section of Turkey at the below of the page, Agree or Disagree for Version 1, Thank you!!! Mohsin ( talk) 15:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC) reply

68.5.250.146 ( talk) has resumed edit warring at Mazandarani language. We've been through all that before. -- Ankimai ( talk) 09:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Since the talk page was not moved with the Joseph Wurzelbacher article, I added {{db-histmerge|Talk:Joseph Wurzelbacher}} to the top of Talk:Joe Wurzelbacher. If you can fix it, that would be great. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 11:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Some anonymous person keeps trying to delete the "see also" link to Robert Levinson in the Kish Island article. From what I can see in the discussion page, there was consensus (with one notable dissenter) to have some wording in the Kish article on this issue? That never materialised, but the "see also" part remained. Now that is under attack.. I write as you had some involvement last time around - currently it's revert/edit war (again) -- Commking ( talk) 05:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply

There was a number of people who felt some text - however brief - was warrented, and only a single objector? Looks straight forward - we don't need to compromise? I am happy with your edit in any case. Many thanks. -- Commking ( talk) 02:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I don't have a problem with that - tweak as you see fit. I was reverting a different edit which removed quite a bit of information that should be there. We just need to make certain the section doesn't fall into undo weight. - Classicfilms ( talk) 20:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

It's fine with me. I'm wondering if the way to handle undo issues is to move this to a new section such as Obama endorsement - this is quite a significant endorsement and that way, in a new section the issue of undo becomes remote. If you agree that would be the way to handle it. Here is a useful link.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=6066689&page=1 - Classicfilms ( talk) 20:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I can go either way about specific information concerning the soldier or Palin. I do think, however, that the other existing quotes are relevant for the long run of the article and are not recentism or undo since they talk to long term issues concerning the campaign. Does that answer your question? Thanks for your feedback by the way, - Classicfilms ( talk) 21:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Why not just add an introductory sentence that offers the themes you feel are missing? If the Palin comment is really a problem, remove it. It was really a minor point and if you feel it complicates the paragraph then I don't think it will change much. How's that? - Classicfilms ( talk) 22:36, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Maybe use this TIME article - it establishes notability for this section along with the ABC article above:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1851832,00.html

Let me know if I can help in the rewrite. - Classicfilms ( talk) 22:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

In regards to Granny Obama being an Anglican, basing this on a newscast I watched while I was in Kenya. I've been googling for acredited source it. Found some for her being a Protestant, but yes she is an Anglican. 99.241.15.245 ( talk) 23:26, 19 October 2008 (UTC) reply

( And Madelyn): I'm game.  ${\displaystyle \sim }$ Justmeherenow (  ) 03:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Looks good - Thx  ${\displaystyle \sim }$ Justmeherenow (  ) 03:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

(Part A): I had......

(Part B): Why not? They're notable due their relationship to Barack through Ann.  ${\displaystyle \sim }$ Justmeherenow (  ) 03:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I had my encounters with this user in the past and see no hope in reasoning with him. He removed referenced content as here. Could you take a look? The content is exactly within context. There are three sources. I will make them four but will not make a difference to this local nationalist.-- Nostradamus1 ( talk) 00:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Could you, please, take a look at this user's behavior. He removed content and stated that he is "NOT going to argue on the same things". see this. He is not asking citations but removing content removing these paragraphs twice already.-- Nostradamus1 ( talk) 23:15, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Unfortunately this is still going on. These three users have been reverting all my contributions related to Bulgaria. This one removed my citation request as here by commenting rmv lame fact tags that go with the refs (?) + others that are just laughable and about well-established facts. What are these "established facts"? Aren't they supposed to at least discuss them? I merely requested the page numbers in my citation request. They are also reluctant to engage in formal mediation.-- Nostradamus1 ( talk) 01:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading Image:Ann, Madelyn, and Stanley Dunham.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof ( talk) 04:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Just stopped by to thank you for the warning you left on my talk page. I appreciate the fact that you also warned the other party regarding their part in the dispute, and for understanding that this is indeed just a garden variety content dispute that some seem determined to metastasize into something bigger. I'd also like to mention that one of the three accounts that initiated much of the dispute over at the Press TV page has been found by an administrator to have been a sockpuppet ( User:Bukhari), which I think in no small way proves what I've been saying all along on that article's talk page. At any rate, thanks again. Causteau ( talk) 07:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Concerning the same matter, I would like to point out that this is a dispute that I am not interested in. I got into the Press TV dispute trying to moderate, but found it impossible because one editor seems unable to work towards a compromise, or even to listen to arguments. Rational arguments such as "a source from 2000 cannot contradict that an event happened in 2004" are dismissed by attacking something else instead. That's no way to edit an encyclopedia, and it must stop. Elonka has more background, and Causteau is hiding behind her as if she had said he is always right. I contacted her at Press TV (2), but she doesn't seem to have time.

As to my 3 reverts, please explain how you got the number. My edits on this article were: One partial revert (removing 2 of 3 sentences added by Causteau). A necessary correction (removing a single word) that I forgot to do at once. One rerevert to force talk page discussion. (2 reverts so far, do we agree?) Then Causteau removed one sentence for having had a fact tag too long. I reinstated the sentence once I found a reliable source, and nobody seemed concerned about this. Do you count this as a third revert? Should I have taken the reference to the talk page instead, asking someone else to put the sentence in again? Are obviously uncontroversial reverts no longer allowed when an edit war has started? This is a serious question, because I am not used to this kind of edit-warring, in spite of considerable experience with the Homeopathy situation. (Perhaps it's different because of the community restrictions there?) -- Hans Adler ( talk) 08:19, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Khoikhoi, I replied to you (again) on my talk page. Since then, Causteau has been working hard to prove the point that I made there: That they need an admin to tell them very clearly that their interpretation of 3RR is completely wrong and will get them into serious trouble: "And WP:3RR does not apply to re-inserting material from reliable sources -- that is how Wikipedia functions: on verifiability!" [17] So far only I told this editor that they are wrong; since they don't take me seriously they feel justified. Now they are explaining their theory to Andrew Lancaster: "Restoring a good-faith insertion of a reliable source […] from an instance of bad faith editing whereby some editor removes said reliable source due to, in his words, some non-existent 'wording' issue does not qualify as 'edit-warring'." [18] (That was in response to Andrew Lancaster: "That approach you've just described as your own is called edit warring. No editor of Wikipedia has any special right to repeatedly revert any correctly verified and true edit just because the edit being reverted to is also true or correctly verified.")

I made 3 reverts on the article in question, one of which was a partial revert and one of which was definitely not edit warring. Nevertheless you warned me and educated me about the fact that non-controversial reverts also count for the purposes of 3RR. OK. Now can you please explain to the ruthless edit-warrior (who has had 3 previous warnings and made 4 controversial full reverts in this case) in words that they cannot simply rationalise away that the theory on which they are operating is not sound? That's what I tried to achieve with my challenge to Causteau in the ANI thread; your "symmetric" intervention before Causteau's response has allowed them to ignore it. -- Hans Adler ( talk) 11:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Correcting an improper BLP issue is certainly important, and I wouldn't view that as a wheel war. -- Avi ( talk) 19:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I'd appreciate it if you could you take a look at the Farsiwan article and the two versions, Tajik's (the current one) and mine Bejnar's, (the one he just reverted), and the talk page and let me know if I am off the wall? -- Bejnar ( talk) 22:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Would you mind discussing your this edit in this talk page please. We are trying to keep cool and discuss. Thanks Taprobanus ( talk) 00:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I know you are a reasonable person and these are difficult subjects to deal with:) but this was my reason for it

Vaharai bombing

• Mass murder is also defined to be intentional and indiscriminate murder of large number of people by government agents. Examples are shooting of unarmed protestors, carpet bombing of cities, lobbying of grenades into prison cells, random execution of civilians. (see R. J. Rummel, Irving Louis Horowitz, Death by Government, Page 35, ISBN: 1560009276) Looking at carpet bombing of cities as a cited example, it indicates that it was a callous disregard for civilian casualty. If you read the Government reaction section of the article, it was admitted by the government and the fact is cited with RS sources) that it knew it was firing into a civilian infrastructure and in war situations such casualties cannot be disregarded.

• "The military fired at the civilians to force them out of the area", this according to Harry Miller a Jesuit priest and neutral person from the area. [19]

now considering an RS source that says mass murder is what it is and a rS source say that the soldiers fired in knowing that civilians were there, want it qualify as mass murder ? 00:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Sri Lankan riots of 1958

The same category was removed from Sri Lankan riots of 1958. I think I can categorize it as mass murder based on this where a pogrom is considred a mass murder and this cite which says that it was a pogrom in its scale. Thanks for yourclarification Taprobanus ( talk) 00:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Fair enough, thanks Taprobanus ( talk) 03:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Navaly church bombing

Care to elaborate on your revision on the above article ? It might help if you took a second to take a look at the talk page. Perhaps reading what is said, that too repeatedly, may help. Thanks Watchdogb ( talk) 22:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Hey Khoikhoi! Thanks for your message about the new Obama assassination plot. It seems to me it definitely warrants its own page altogether, so I moved the first page from 2008 Barack Obama assassination scare to 2008 Barack Obama assassination scare in Tennessee. Then I made a whole new page called 2008 Barack Obama assassination scare in Tennessee. I plan to add more info from more sources about the latter page in the next few days. What do you think of this course of action? -- Hunter Kahn ( talk) 05:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the kind words! I agree with you about the disambig. page, that's probably something I'll do fairly soon. As for the Raymond Geisel case, I'd be inclined to go ahead and make a separate page for that one too (it's currently mentioned very briefly in the Denver page), but I can see how others might argue its not relevant enough to warrant it. Maybe this is something I should try to seek some sort of consensus on? How would I do that, short of starting a thread in the talk pages of one of the other articles? -- Hunter Kahn ( talk) 14:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

You wrote that I am " in no position to use your administrative tools on users involved in editing the Battle of Opis page or related articles." All I did was warn him. That is something anyone can do, and I didn't use my administrative tools. And although I take your point, are you really suggesting that I can't block vandalism on this or related articles? I'm talking here about vandalism as we define it, obscenties, mass deletions, you know the stuff. Doug Weller ( talk) 17:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Thank you khoi khoi. I think blocking the violater is a good strategy. However I am not sure if Mani will respect it or not. It is important that he knows that what is there is the consensus. For him consensus is what Mani himself thinks. Any way I hope this time you will block him, if he again restarts the edit war. I am really tired of it.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 08:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC) reply

you can either explain why you vandalize aghyokush and thaddeus with fake azeri names or continue edit warring like azeri admin. i am limitless to ips and am preparing dozens of accounts for partial protect. you can either answer questions and accept reason like human being or revert like maniac supporting azeri propogandization. you cant block every single article can you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.122.253.212 ( talk) 20:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I do not know whether you question this to me or not because it is new to me. In case you have an issue with Kjoi khoi (I assume that this is the case), you better open up a new heading.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 20:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks Khoikhoi, for those date corrections. I imagine there's gonna be a bit of fighting over these dates for the next few hours. GoodDay ( talk) 23:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks again. GoodDay ( talk) 23:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC) reply

This article has been rewritten. Please visit the AfD discussion to see if your concerns have been addressed. Thank you. -- Banjeboi 22:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC) reply

...is that sufficient to block a user? I thought about it and decided not, but watchlisted...  Frank  |   talk  21:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Blocked. so, you get some fanmail from him too? -- GraemeL ^(talk) 21:05, 7 November 2008 (UTC) reply

[20] This change has been added by Nostradamus1. The reference added is written only in Bulgarian and apparently is not verifiable by an independent source. On the Big Excursion talk page, I have listed SEVEN different sources that state that it was ethnic Turks demonstrating. Thus the sentence referenced by Hupchick, "Beginning in May 1989, "amid organized, neo-fascist mass public demonstrations", is incorrect. "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." [21]. Also, sources for English wikipedia need to be in English, do they not?

Non-English sources

Because this is the English Wikipedia, for the convenience of our readers, editors should use English-language sources in preference to sources in other languages, assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality, so that readers can easily verify that the source material has been used correctly. Where editors translate any direct quote, they should quote the relevant portion of the original, non-English text in a footnote or in the article. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations made by Wikipedia editors.

Also, Nostradamus1 is removing a reference, call it POV pushing! He's reverted my reference 3 times now [22]. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 04:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I will be removing the Yalamov, I., The History of the Turkish Community in Bulgaria (in Bulgarian), 2002, ISBN  954 771 024 1 Parameter error in {{ ISBN}}: checksum reference, in the Big Excursion article. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the Dreams reference - don't know how I missed it. Tvoz/ talk 01:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC) reply

The section is totally unacceptable. I already indicated on the talk page that corroborating sources would need to be found (Ayers' blog being inadequate), but the adding editor saw fit to put it back in slightly reworded. I've removed the section again - he will need to build consensus first. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC) reply

In Kenya there are many traditional place names that refer to an area inhabited by a certain ethnic community. Usually there areas have no well-defined borders. Alego is one such place area, inhabited by a Luo sub-tribe (Jo-Alego). I suppose Alego Constituency defines the area quite well. Nyang’oma Kogelo (often spelled simply Kogelo) is a small village in Alego. Julius Sahara ( talk) 15:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Obama Sr. wasn't born in Alego. Sorry, it's page 218 of Dreams from my Father where he writes about his Granny Obama telling him about where the family moved from Kendu Bay to Alego and Obama Sr. was already born. Also this online newspaper from The Standard also interviews a friend of Obama Sr. who says that Obama Sr. told him he was not born in Alego [23] 99.241.26.125 ( talk) 20:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi,

I'm rather unhappy about the sorry list of candidates at Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Candidate_statements. Would you consider running? Διγουρεν _{Εμπρος!} 22:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC) reply

The referenced information you deleted states that Odinga and Obama are "first" cousins not "distant" as you claim. While the Cheney relationship may be pertinent and easy to reference, using it as a reason to delete the BBC referenced Odinga relationship is a violation of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Please explain further deletions on the talk page. of the article. Glen Twenty ( talk) 05:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Take your evidence of Obama "family members" to the related article Talkpage, we should discuss it there. Glen Twenty ( talk) 05:53, 11 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Please read the talk page, there appears to be at least one source which is acceptable, the October 30, 2008 LA Times article. Perhaps it would be better to discuss which sources to remove, such as that description on Gun and Olive branch, etc. -- Avi ( talk) 06:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Please read the sections you are deleting, and try to help them conform with WP:BLP instead of outright deletion. Glen Twenty ( talk) 06:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC) reply

While it is true that the birth certificate is of the short-form variety, I do not see how that is relevant. Nevertheless, it is an accurate statement so I see no reason to challenge it. The other edit was quite a different matter, and I reverted it. In addition, I placed a warning on the editor's talk page about misleading edit summaries (NPOV my ass). Thank you for pointing these out to me, though I must say that I am not a regular editor of the campaign article. I usually prefer to concentrate on policing BLPs. -- Scjessey ( talk) 20:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Could you please take a look at Talk:Cuisine of Azerbaijan and advise me on the best course of action in this unpleasant case. Thank you. -- Zlerman ( talk) 07:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, Khoikhoi. Do you remember in talk:Artsakh, were Rober Hewsen was admitted as a reliable and neutral source for the history of Nagorno-Karabakh? However, user Grandmaster tries to desregard this western scholar when he does not fit in with his point of view, even calling him an "Armenian nationalist". I request your intervention here. Thank you beforehand. Greets -- Vacio ( talk) 10:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Given your familiarity with a recent 1RR situation with Piotrus and myself, I believe this warrants attention. Thanks. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 19:55, 21 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Khoi I am in need of some assistance rght now in regards to the History of the Assyrian People. Dab has changed this name without any discussion or consensus until after the fact he did it. This page prior to being masively changed by this user was strictly dedicated to perserving and explaining the history of this persecuted people from ancient times to the present. He is continually disrupting articles from Wiki Project Assyria to fit his narrow minded views. Can you help revert this article back to the name it was before it got changed to this new name which is problematic on the grounds that not all assryians speak syriac and there are over 2.5 million syriac speakers in india who are not assyrian. This title is very misleading; there is already an articel on Syraic Christianity and there is no need to reiterate this information on every Assyrian related Article. Please get back to me and also Dab although helpful at times is continuing to disrupt pages from this project to meet his so called fair and balanced views. thanks your participation in this will be appreciated. Nineveh 209 ( talk) 21:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Hindu High School., by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Hindu High School. is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo ( CSD R3).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Hindu High School., please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot ( talk) 19:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi,

Someone is reverting my edits on "Casualties and losses" section of Iran–Iraq_War.

All I want to do is to say:

• Official figures mentioned specifically and distinctly from the rest
• Academic sources like that of Prof. Brown assertion of estimates. I am yet to find another academic and reliable source conflicting with the view
• Unofficial estimates from outside Iranian government vary widely.

However, as it is a very popular belief that close to a million people were killed in the war (I always thought the same until I came across academics backing official numbers), I am facing edit wars from a new Wiki user, Scythian77. He uses foul language at times and is a little bit annoying.

I thought you might be interested in the topic and since you would be an unbiased person on this, please assist me to presenting it properly and also if it is necessary to enforce Wikipedia etiquette.

Persian Magi ( talk) 01:33, 25 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I added something like six valid references giving figures between 200,000 and 900,000 dead, and you simply delete them in favor of the Iranian government's "official" casualty count of around 180,000 dead. That is a single figure from a rather questionable source. I have no problem using that source, so long as it is Incorporated into the total figure, such as between 180,000-900,000 dead. You clearly do not wish to do so, preferring the absolute minimum number possible. Your rational seems to be in favor of giving the Iranian government the "best" possible image it can have in the historical terms of the war, and that is defiantly not the purpose of Wikipedia. This is not an outlet for political propaganda. It is that simple. The Scythian 04:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC) reply

• About Scythian77's attitude, I agree with User:Persian Magi. You can also see an example of his/her inappropriate attitude here. Alefbe ( talk) 01:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Yah, that Scythian77 is just a big bad MEANIE! —Preceding undated comment was added at 08:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC). reply

This comment of Scythian77 is another example of his/her inapropriate attitude in Wikipedia. Alefbe ( talk) 00:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Apparently, Murat/Hudavendigar has a new game. Instead of simply using the title of books as references, he now invents page numbers to go along with them [24]! He has tried for months now to use these "references" and now simply pulls page numbers out of thin air. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi. There is an ongoing dispute regarding the first sentence of the Tatars article, and I thought I should invite you to comment since it revolves in part around a citation you added back in August [25]. I recently added the full text of the citation in an attempt to slow the edit-warring over the phrase "Turkic" versus "Turkic-speaking" [26], but instead, the citation has been falsified [27], removed outright multiple times [28], [29], [30], [31]254835466 (despite attempts at reasoned discussion on the talkpage Talk:Tatars#Turkic_vs._Turkic-speaking and continued at Talk:Tatars#Tatars_are_a_Turkic_people) and finally replaced with sources of questionable impartiality [32]. The ultimate phrasing of the sentence makes little difference to me, but I dislike the mistreatment of reliable sources that seems to be happening here. Thank you, Kafka Liz ( talk) 13:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, could you have a look at Politics of present-day states? A couple of anons keep deleting the entry for Abkhazia, without further comment. Perhaps semi-protection for a week is a good idea? Thanks! sephia karta | di mi 18:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply

User:Ioeth semi-protected the page. sephia karta | di mi 19:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Please be aware that it is now possible to modify a block without first unblocking the user. To do it:

1. Navigate to the block user screen for that user.
2. Choose the appropriate settings for the user's block.
3. Mark the "Re-block the user with these settings" box.
4. Click on the block button.

This way, there is no chance that, due to losing the connection, you won't be able to reblock immediately, leaving the user unblocked for a while. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hey, thanks. I actually didn't know that. If you're referring to User:Mussav, I've actually left a note on his talk page offering to unblock him. But thanks anyways. Khoi khoi 07:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Actually, I noticed it with Mussav, but this is something that is worth knowing for future situations. This is a recent feature, and I believe that there are many admins who don't know it yet - if I see behavior that indicates non-knowledge of this feature, I inform the admin involved. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi there! I noticed you opposed me and didn't say why. I was wondering what concerns you had about my candidacy and if I might be able to clarify anything? Thanks! -- Hemlock Martinis ( talk) 07:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks Khoikhoi for unblocking me, I really appreciate it. :) Mussav ( talk) 21:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, I just noticed that you removed the infobox of iranians abroad from Iranian citizens abroad. Please let me know if you used that valuable data in another article or they were omitted. Regards. -- M samadi ( talk) 06:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply

is a sock of USer:David873. Confucionsarusnouirus ( talk) 22:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the email. If the case is not proceeding, than I see no reason for continuing the block; however you might want to bring up the issue on the administrators' noticeboards to get a bit more eyes on the suggestion. -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^{( talk)} 03:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hey Khoikhoi, it's Hunter, the guy who worked on the Obama assassination articles, which you helped me out with. I was hoping you wouldn't mind lending me some support with another issue. An article I've done a tremendous amount of work on, the 2008 jail break in Clovis, New Mexico, is being considered for deletion. As you'll see on the deletion page, I really don't feel it warrants deletion at all, but it would be great if I had someone else on my side. Any chance you'd take a look and consider whether you agree with me? Thanks! -- Hunter Kahn ( talk) 03:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply

i feel Persecution.. can you stop blame me without evidence I didn't touch that page from week or longer except if you're speaking on this amendment [33] any way I will discuss it in the talk page -- Bayrak ( talk) 05:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, there. Glad to see you're back. What are you up to at the moment? John Smith's ( talk) 21:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply

I saw your stern warning to Bayrak; that is precisely the sort of response I was hoping for from the administration here after I posted evidence of his double standard and agenda on Wikipedia. I was amazed by the coddling, misplaced assumption of good faith, and general indifference I had seen from other admins; Wikipedia would have less problems if they did not treat every new clown as a well-meaning but confused editor even after the clowning begins. Disruption frustrates good editors. Hopefully your warning will shape him up. Thanks again.

I recently entered a set of disputes related to Sikh extremism after I noticed a constructive editor give up her participation out of frustration. After introducing some academic opinions on the topic, and seeing it undone on the most worthless grounds (sometimes downright dishonesty about the content of my sources), I can understand the frustration. Could you perhaps take a look at some of these situations? You can find them in my contribs: Sikh extremism, Khalistan, and so on. My belief is that the misconduct of one or two editors bears responsibility for the fighting at these articles, rather than any great ambiguity on the part of the reliable sources. I hope very much that you can help. 67.194.202.113 ( talk) 06:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply

There is a new burst of activity on Laz people and Laz language, mainly involving use of what I consider totally unreliable and inappropriate sources. Please see what is going on (including Talk:Laz people#About Laz Population). If you agree with my position, please decide what needs to be done to protect the two articles from further disruption. Thank you. -- Zlerman ( talk) 03:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, Khoikhoi. Did you have any particular reason for this revert [34]? I think last version you reverted was OK and provided some arguments at article talk page. However there was no reply. Thank you. Biophys ( talk) 05:39, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi! Opinoso ( talk · contribs · logs) is striking again. Actually, he is under a 3 months block on Portuguese Wikipedia for content disputes and edit wars with Quissamã ( talk · contribs · logs). - Al Lemos ( talk) 18:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Here: Template talk:Obama family#Ugly. Thanks. Just tips me hat but then 〜on thought bows deeply … 23:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Khokhoi why did you remove my facts ? I added links.Read that writings.Romania has many regional languages.Read there Languages of Romania.I'm not vandal.Enough your attacks !!! And Yunus Emre wasn't an Alevi dervish.Read, read, read please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.184.241.107 ( talk) 07:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, I read that before. It doesn't mean he "declared" his candidacy like Mehdi Karroubi. He was trying to test the water, that's all it means. But we can add to his entry and election article about his activities. FYI, these days he reduced his electoral activities in favor of former President Khatami. Best, -- Sina ( talk) 23:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC) reply

I see that you have unblocked the above user who had been blocked indef for making legal threats back in August. The post of the original blocking admin, User:David Fuchs, seems to indicate some sort of an e-mail discussion that led to the unblock. However, looking at the contrib record of User:BehnamFarid, I do not see an explicit statement about him withdrawing the legal threat anywhere, whereas the original threat was made very publicly and maintained rather vigorously at that user's talk page. Could you please explain why you have unblocked him? Please do not respond by e-mail but rather respond here or at my talk page. I want the record of this discussion to be public. Thanks, Nsk92 ( talk) 00:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi Khoikhoi,

With regard to this block: [35], did not you suppose to ask a checkuser? I was watching this user and did not see any disruptive activities on his part. Thank you. Biophys ( talk) 03:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Thank you for reply. Biophys ( talk) 03:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello vikipedians read that carefully:

• Turkish is official language in Iraq ( Kirkuk city as "Turcoman dialect" with Syriac, Kurdish, Arabic | Turcoman dialect of Turkish became official language in Kirkuk with Syriac and here | guardian news

• Turkish one of regionla languuage sof Romania with Serbian, Hungarian, Greek, Crimean Tatar, Bulgarian language... | recognized languages in Romania-Europe

• Turkish is also officially recognized as a regional language in the Prizren District of Kosovo.

Turkish is official language in Iraq, Macedonia, Kososvo, Northern Cyprus, Cyprus and Romania. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.184.255.189 ( talk) 10:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC) reply

We are trying understand your indef block of an account Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sri_Lanka_Reconciliation#Indef_Block_of_Iross1000 here. Any explanation would be great. Taprobanus ( talk) 14:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Please do provide your input Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sri_Lanka_Reconciliation#Indef_Block_of_Iross1000 there. As of now, we are not aware of a reason for your indefinite block. — Sebastian 20:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

User talk:Iross1000. No opinion, just letting you know. Guy ( Help!) 20:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC) reply

This is not his name it is Only his title we must explain this in the article -- Bayrak ( talk) 00:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC) reply

So..? -- Bayrak ( talk) 00:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC) reply

I have some suspicion that User:Putinjugend is a sockpuppet of User:HanzoHattori. A check of the topics edited by this user show an overlap of subjects with those edited by Hanzo and his other socks, such as 2005 Nalchik raid. Can you take a look at this, and if need more info from me, let me know. -- Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 17:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Of course he is, but too late for you guys, he has long been retired: [36]. Colchicum ( talk) 00:19, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply