Misplaced Pages

User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Archive 4: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:09, 11 December 2006 view sourceFuture Perfect at Sunrise (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators87,175 editsm hello again← Previous edit Revision as of 19:24, 11 December 2006 view source RunedChozo (talk | contribs)581 edits hello againNext edit →
Line 279: Line 279:
you may remember User {{userlinks|RunedChozo}}. he was recent blocked again for three days for persistent edit warring. he has just returned from his block and has resumed wholesale reverting yet again . ] 19:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC) you may remember User {{userlinks|RunedChozo}}. he was recent blocked again for three days for persistent edit warring. he has just returned from his block and has resumed wholesale reverting yet again . ] 19:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
:For the moment, I've rather protected the ] page - there seemed to be rather intense revert-warring going on from several sides, and RunedChozo was not alone against a consensus apparently. ] ] 19:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC) :For the moment, I've rather protected the ] page - there seemed to be rather intense revert-warring going on from several sides, and RunedChozo was not alone against a consensus apparently. ] ] 19:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations on being nothing more than a tool. I reported Itaqallah for blatantly lying in his edit summaries, not that it seems you care. ] 19:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:24, 11 December 2006

Page semi-protectedEditing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account.
Archive
Archives
  1. – July 2006
  2. – October 2006
  3. – November 2006

Speedy - Elmira Sanieva

Thanks for the edit to Elmira Sanieva. I felt the notability wasn't sufficient, but others may disagree. I will try and use Prod in the future. I am a little confused about the redirect page though. RichMac (Talk) 10:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear FPaS, Thanks for your explanations. Some times I confuse the templates. In this position which template is appropriate. Please help a little bir for user warning templates.
I dont understand the rules exactly some times; an anon user; suspected as sockpuppet, make personal attacks and immediately after unblock attacks to many page in a vandalist manner.Why we keep like users here.? Regards. Must 19:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Kara Koyunlu

Dear FpaS, as you can see, there was a Turkish history template there. Iranian history Template which some users to use there is not relevant with article, any other Iranian history template may be relevant since the area is now Iran. To try the cancelling Turkish template, to add an Iranian irrelavant template is not good faith. Regards. Must 20:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Coaching huh?

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to User talk:Mustafa Akalp, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.  :-) NikoSilver 20:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Why is it that every time I see "NikoSilver (Talk | contribs | block)" in an article history listing, my index finger starts twitching towards the right? Fut.Perf. 20:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Haven't been trying hard enough for you, huh? :-) NikoSilver 20:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps if we did a revert-war over me removing your warnings from my talkpage? Fut.Perf. 20:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
How silly. You won't stand a chance with all those different warnings out there. Αργία μήτηρ πάσης κακίας. We better start writing some article instead... (it's more likely we'll engage in revert warring this way). NikoSilver 20:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Cooperation board launched

A new (and overdue) Greek and Turkish cooperation and notification board has been launched here. Stop by, have a look and sound off! Cheers! Baristarim 07:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Abakwi language

Hi, I've written a note to you and Alan at User talk:Alan McBeth#Abakwi language. -- Ngio 09:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


Salvator (horse)

Thanks, you did the right thing. Handicapper 17:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Elsi mate

Des to e-mail su... ;-) Khoikhoi 21:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

superconductivity

Hi, i checked the article. The page is related with a research group of Hacettepe University and their activities. As you said, direct copy. Regards E104421 00:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

PMA

Thank you

for the unblock, hey if you see vandilism how do you take it off? --Blackshaq 04:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

/q/ and /k/

In Aq Qoyunlu, the q is the only correct spelling, because the White Sheep Turcomans were an ORIGINAL Turkic tribe, and q is an ORIGINAL Turkic sound (now only lost in Anatolian Turkish).

The name Alā ud-Dīn Kay-Kubād is Perso-Arabic: the first part, Alā ud-Dīn, is Arabic. The same spelling is also used in the article Aladdin (here as 'Alā 'ad-Dīn). The second part, Kay-Kubād, is Persian - the name of a legendary Persian hero of the Epic. Q is NOT an original Persian sound, it is Arabicized (Indo-European languages usually lack the /q/ sound). The name Kay Qubādh may be found in certain historical documents - traditionally written in Arabic - but his name was deffinitly Kay-Kubād - that's the correct Persian pronounciation.

By the way: a "k" with a dot below is - as far as I now - a normal /k/ sound. An "h" with a dot below (--> ḥ) means that the /h/ sound is not silent, like in "ḥoney" (unlike "hour").

I'd rather go with Encyclopaedia of Islam this time. Iranica is simply using the spelling of historical documents (that's also the reason why I put the Arabic spelling before the original Persian one in Ala ud-Din Kay-Kubad); the EI, however, seems to use the original Persian spelling. Another related Persian name is Kavadh.

Tājik 11:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. But the original Shahname seems to be using کیقباد, with a qaf, or is that not the same guy? . (Not that I can read a word of it, mind you ;-) Or what else do you mean by "original Persian spelling"? And one English translation of the Shahname even renders it as "Kai-Ghobad" , which also seems to be a spelling used occasionally by modern Iranians. - Anyway, we are not talking about the Shahname hero, but about the historical Seljuk guy, so the relevant data would first of all be how his contemporaries would have spelled his name, and what the conventions are for Latinizing that in the relevant modern literature. Fut.Perf. 11:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I really do not understand the conflict, because both versions are right. The article itself says:
  • Alā ud-Dīn Kay Qubādh I (actually Alā ud-Dīn Kay-Kubād; Turkish spelling: Alaadin Kaykubad), Seljuq emperor (1220-1237).
So, where is the problem? :)
Tājik 11:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi, For the 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh (Kaikobad) issue, I propose using the name Kaikobad for the article and 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh for the real name of Alaaddin Keykubat (in Turkish). Kaikobad gives the correct spelling for Kay-Qubadh. I already checked Britannica, there the name is written as 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh, in addition to this Kaikobad is written in paranthesis. If the English Misplaced Pages is concerned, in my opinion better to rename the article as Kaikobad I. Tajik has advocated using a Persian title, he is not standing up for common English usage. He can call him whatever he likes on Persian Misplaced Pages. Here we should choose the common English usage. Regards. E104421 15:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not edit-warring for the name. Tajik renamed the articles without any consensus. Furhermore. i just reflected what's written in Britannica. That's it. Anyway, i'll read the guideline. Regards E104421 18:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The dh is more suitable cause the t is pronounced as d, just as in the case of mehmet and memed. Regards. 21:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The dh is pronounced like the English th. Tājik 22:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD?

What's AfD? (edit: OK, i got it: articles for deletion) That entry is a hoax, BTW. (edit: Thanks for your help in nominating it for deletion) --88.149.168.128 10:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Help me

Hi, the mother of Blagoj Nacoski gave me a foto of him which is free of copyright, what license should I use? --Ditirambo 13:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the user ZoguShqiptar700 is vandalising the page of the Republic of Macedonia, what can we do? --Ditirambo 09:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey Syntax Error

Take a peek: User:NikoSilver/Nationality quiz. :-) NikoSilver 14:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

fr:Wikipédia:Demande de suppression immédiate

Hello FPaS! I've just nominated the unencyclopedic user page of User:Bestlyriccollection for deletion, but unfortunately he copied his stuff to the French Misplaced Pages (and other wikis) as well. Could you help me to make a speedy deletion request over there? Thanks in advance! Kimchi.sg 07:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no experience whatsoever with frwiki, I haven't seen anything of this case, and I won't be around much during the next few days anyway, so I'm afraid I'd rather not get much involved with this one. Do you just need someone who writes French? Mine isn't too good. Maybe I should downgrade my FR Babel box? Fut.Perf. 08:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... downgrading is a good idea. :-P I shal look for someone else instead. Kimchi.sg 08:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome + Kutavicius

Thanks for the welcome and the assist with the Kutavicius article. I am a fledgling wikipedian and look forward to learning and contributing more to this wonderful project.Canticle 12:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

my subpage

Dear FPaS, Sorry for inconvinience. It is a work,just to make list of categories which include Turkey/turkish related articles, to insert some templates them by using bot. regards. Must 05:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Factanista

User:Factanista has just made uncivil comments about on his talk page. In Croatian, he said I consider that propaganda of yoursdisgusting and regardless of your GreaterSerbianpropaganda. These are personal attacks. --PaxEquilibrium 21:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

This is really funny actually. The User:PaxEquilibrium is currently highly aggressive and offensive towards me. He even accused me of being a sockpuppet of some other user. He has made also several uncivil comments recently and some time ago about my "nationalistic" stance. Btw. if you wish I can translate you the discussion in Croatian(and Serbian on his part) on my talk page and you will see it has nothing to do with incivility. --Factanista 21:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I think that putting me in an ethnic group (to which I do not self-identify) and then generalizing it by "....your GreaterSerbian.." (identifying me with the rest of the nationalist extremist members of this ethnic group like Vojislav Šešelj) is highly offensive - also, I'm not the one that's been heavily disruptive to Misplaced Pages (earning 3 blocks) recently - nor have I been skirting 3RR violations. --PaxEquilibrium 22:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
First one needs to know the context of the discussion we led, do not spin my words around. Second it is your estimate that I am "heavily disruptive" to Misplaced Pages. One can look at my contributions and see that I have if anything heavily contributed to Misplaced Pages not the opposite. And last do not try to portray yourself as innocent as you are the one who initiated this, you made personal attacks towards me and whats more you accuse me of being a sockpuppet of some other user with absolutely no evidence. You also don't have quite an ideal record on Misplaced Pages. --Factanista 22:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
It is not my estimate - but the estimate of all the users that blocked you recently. Furthermore, yes, inspection of your contributions show a history of edit-warring and incivility (just like those admins said on your talk page).
This looks like another skirting 3RR to me: 20:58, 1 December 2006, 21:10, 1 December 2006, 21:30, 1 December 2006, 21:56, 1 December 2006. --PaxEquilibrium 22:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
As I said you don't have quite an ideal history yourself. And funny you link to that page since it can be seen that you too are edit-warring and also skirting 3RR with unlogged revert. --Factanista 00:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Really? Diffs, please. --PaxEquilibrium 12:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Kaltsef blocked indefinitely

After having to block Tureg2 (talk · contribs), Tureg3 (talk · contribs), and UOGORTH (talk · contribs) tonight, reverting userpage vandalism, etc. - I have honestly had enough of this user. Therefore, I have decided to be bold and ban him myself. Please let me know if there are any objections. Khoikhoi 10:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Your cover has been blown. You may want to hide your face with a Kaltsa now. (I hear it comming: "put a kaltsa in it") :-) NikoSilver 18:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You forgot "schizophrenic web vandal". ;-) Khoikhoi 23:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on my pages

Thanks for reverting that! They'll probably strike again in about 45 minutes, so if you're online then (I wont be), please watch out. Thanks! Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 14:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkic peoples

Turkic peoples

It was not me who had edited a "massive revert", but the ones who edited the article before me (just go through the article's history). By now, Khoikhoi can be regarded an expert on Turks-related article. He was already into editting those articles before he became admin.

What I did was reverting to a version that was already there before certain nationalistic-motivated changes were forced on the article (claiming that Mughals were "Turks" is pure nonsense and contradicts the article Mughals and Babur, as well as Akbar).

This is what User:Sikandarji (himself an Oxford academic specialized on Central Asian history) says:

  • "... Oh Christ, not here as well. See the dispute on the Talk:Babur page - you can't describe the Timurids as "Turkish", that's simply idiotic. ..."
  • "... How can a dynasty belong to a linguistic family? In any case by the time of Akbar the Timurids only spoke and wrote in Persian (Akbar had to have Babur's memoirs translated from the Chaghatai because he couldn't read them). If you must give them an ethnic label (and I think that's a bad idea) then call them Turco-Mongols, but they represent such a mixture of ethnicities and languages that it doesn't make a great deal of sense. ..."

Tājik 20:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense to me - just please make sure you communicate concerns like these in a constructive way, especially when you're opposite another user you have so strained relations with. Just my advice. Fut.Perf. 20:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Noone calls them Turkish but Turkic dynasty, that's why Mughals were mentioned in the Turkic peoples article. Sikandarji read the Turkic as Turkish. Here what Britannica states:

Timurid Dynasty: (fl. 15th–16th century AD), Turkic dynasty descended from the conqueror Timur (Tamerlane), renowned for its brilliant revival of artistic and intellectual life in Iran and Central Asia. After Timur's death (1405), his conquests were divided between two of his sons: Miranshah (d. 1407) received Iraq, Azerbaijan, Moghan, Shirvan, and Georgia, while Shah Rokh was left with Khorasan. ... The Mughal dynasty was founded by a Chagatai Turkic prince named Babur (reigned 1526–30), who was descended from the Turkic conqueror Timur (Tamerlane) on his father's side and from Chagatai, second son of the Mongol ruler Genghis Khan, on his mother's side. ...

Yeah, okay, but I must agree with Tajik here, Sikandarji's well backed-up expertise (, complete with very relevant specialist literature) really trumps this, in my opinion. Fut.Perf. 21:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Nobody is against this, but the information is correct. Babur was Chagatai Turkic. The Timurid dynasty was Turco-Mongols. For this reason, these should be mentioned, not removed/deleted/disputed. The paragraph related with Mughals are deemed appropriate for the Turkic peoples article. For me, etnical labelling is not necessary. However, in my opinion, it's worth noting the language spoken by both the elite and the people, in addition, the language of literature. Since these contitutes an important part of the culture. Regards E104421 21:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Just a note, Khoikhoi reverted the vandalism here, not the paragraph. The paragraph related with Mughals was already deleted before Khoikhoi. E104421 22:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
No it is NOT relevant. First of all, Babur was not a "Chaghatay Turk", he was MONGOL. That's why his descendants became known as "Mughals" which is just the Persian word for "Mongol". The only thing that was Turkic about Babur was his Chaghatay language. However, since Babur's descendants were NOT Turkic-speaking anymore (his grandson Akbar did not understand Chaghatay and was forced to translate his grandfather's Baburnama into his own Persian mother-tongue), the Mughals were NEITHER Turkic in origin (they were Mongols, of coursed mixed with various other peoples - from Central Asia to India) NOR Turkic in language (except for Babur, ALL other Mughals were first Persian-speaking and later Urdu-speaking; Bahadur Shah II is considered one of the greatest Urdu poets in history!). Britannica is not an authoritative source and contradicts itself in many articles. This is what another article of Britannica says about Babur:
  • "... The first Mughal, or Mongol, emperor of India (1526–30) and founder of the Mughal Dynasty there was Baber. ... As ruler of the principality of Fergana in Turkestan, his birthplace, Baber first tried to recover Samarkand, the former capital of the empire founded by his Mongol ancestor Timur Lenk ..."
The most authoritative source available on Timur is the article in the Encyclopaedia of Islam, written by Prof. Dr. B. Manz, the leading expert on Timurid history in Central Asia . In that article, she makes it very clear that Timur was a MONGOL, and that his MONGOL origin from the MONGOLIAN Berlas tribe was - in his view - his legitimacy to rule. The claim that he was a "Turk" is a recent phenomenon of Turcohile writers and Turkish nationalists. And besides that, the MUGHALS were a totally different dynasty who lived in a totally different time.
There is absolutely NO point in mentioneing the Mughals, who were Persian-speaking Mongols, in the Turkic peoples aticle. Tājik 22:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
If that's all you have to say ... Tājik 22:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey guys, I really don't need you two continuing your fighting on my talk page for the rest of the evening. Fut.Perf. 22:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Byzantinistik

Hallo, and many thanks for your note! As for the debate - yet another go-around on the subject, "Who did the Byzantines think they were"? (Personally I've always suspected they were Aztec, but I'm waiting a few years before I go public with that one ). In any case, casualties were light. --Javits2000 00:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Aztecs, huh? Good idea. It will certainly improve our chances of finally getting Mel Gibson to make a movie about them. Fut.Perf. 00:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"Angry Bahraini"

Thanks for the explanation re the Angry Bahraini. Best regards, --06:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Do you think you could unprotect my talkpage. I was discussing this with Khoi the other day - I don't think talkpages should be s-protected, as I remember a time when I had opened a new account (something I very rarely do :p) and was not able to edit a talkpage; it was very frustrating.--Euthymios 11:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know it shouldn't be done lightly. Okay, I'll unprotect yours, if you don't mind having your page history cluttered with the junk all the time. Fut.Perf. 11:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Do you think you could block and delete the created articles .--Euthymios 11:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Also, could you unprotect my userpage - I'm enjoying all this attention ;-) --Euthymios 11:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Mine too bitte. It actually helps filling up this cat, which BTW needs the attention of a sysop to block all these (they are reverters of the cabal texts in all our talkpages). NikoSilver 11:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay. I'm not sure if we need to bother any longer keeping track of all the IPs. They are throwaway dynamic IPs from Greece's largest DSL ISP, as far as I can see, which means they only need to be blocked briefly the moment he uses them - once he's got a fresh one he probably couldn't go back to the old one even if he wanted to, so it's no use blocking afterwards. Fut.Perf. 12:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks from semiprotecting my page, Future Perfect at Sunrise;-). (the bad thing is that i liked it when i saw 'I have one new message'...). Ciao Hectorian 11:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Umm... FP, how about unprotecting our (my and Niko's) userpages?--Euthymios 12:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Also, while you're at it, could you also unprotect Bulgarian Human Rights in Macedonia (you may want to leave it s-protected for obvious reasons).--Euthymios 13:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
You sure about the userpage? It's only going to create more work for everybody reverting the junk... Well, okay, if you insist. Fut.Perf. 13:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


Secure Computing

Please explain your opposition to a disambiguation page between the articles "Secure_computing" and "Secure_Computing", especially when one is a redirect to something by a different name. P41 00:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it doesn't do much harm, but what good does it do? Ask yourself who is ever going to see that page. Let's say somebody types "Secure computing" into the search box. Let's say there's a 60% chance he really wants the general concept and a 40% chance he wants the company. With the solution I propose, this user now has a 60% chance to immediately find what they are looking for; in the other 40% they need exactly one further mouseclick. On the other hand, if they are first led to the disambiguation page, then everybody will be slowed down by that extra click. Dab pages like that are really only useful if there's more than two entries. Fut.Perf. 07:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Stathis Psaltis

Well, I suppose, although this user's pushing of the article Errrrr didn't help. Thanks, NawlinWiki 17:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on my user page

Thanks for reversion and semi-protection! Can you please also semi my User talk:Nwwaew/Archive 1 and User talk:Nwwaew/Archive 2 if possible? Thanks!
Oh, and if you're wonderirng who keeps vandalizing my userpage, its a couple of kids at my school who discovered my editing Misplaced Pages one day, and decided they want to "take me down". So far, they've used numerous sockpuppets and usually fill my page with so many barnstars it slows my computer down. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 02:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok

οκ σταματαω, αλλα γιατι πρεπει να διαγραφει το template αυτο? Και η δανια εχει αντοιστιχο αλλα κανεις δεν λεει τπτ --KaragouniS 14:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

ok pal, I just informed the other Greek users about the delete proposition. We should have been asked before they propose it. Anyway... --KaragouniS 14:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ne

Hahaha, yeah, I guess you're right. :-) It just means that Misplaced Pages distracts me from Misplaced Pages. Khoikhoi 19:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

Αν βρω μια εικονα στην ελληνικη WP και την κανω upload εδω, τι lisence tag πρεπει να βαλω? Mitsos 10:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

In principle, the same license they had over at el - but check whether that license is correct and plausible. You could also consider uploading it directly to commons.wikimedia.org, so that it will be accessible to all projects automatically. Fut.Perf. 10:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but I can't see a lisence tag in this image. Mitsos 11:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Den katalabenw giati den bgainei to link. H eikona sto arthro gia to Griva einai. Mitsos 11:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, problem. I guess the only way is to go and ask the original uploader on el: where he got it from. You need both a source, and a license. For licensing, you might be able to argue "fair use" - since the guy is dead, old copyrighted photographs are the only thing available; if we can't possibly replace it with a truly free photo, fair use for illustrating the Grivas article should be okay.
BTW, the link was broken because of the pipe character ("|") at the end. You don't use that for html links, just for wiki links. Fut.Perf. 11:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... and I have no idea!

Thanks for unblocking my IP, and for softblocking it so that such things can't happen again. In response to your queries, I have no idea, but am getting rather annoyed by these vandal accounts. It is possible that the IP address is 'shared'. ><RichardΩ612 11:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It is a BT connection from home, and there is no chance that anyone could have hacked our network. I know of nobody who would want to put attacks here, so it probably is coincidence, or someone is spoofing the IP . I wouldn't worry about it, now the IP has been softblocked, it should all stop. ><RichardΩ612 14:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Go ahead, I don't mind, but I doubt that they will find anything because we already know what IP these are coming from. Even so, it can't hurt. ><RichardΩ612 20:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Request

Can you semi-protect my talkpage and my userpage? It gets vandalised all the time. Thanks Mitsos 11:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Oghuz Turks

  • I reverted only 2 times, the 3rd time was not a revert but an edit.
  • I asked him to provide sources and to use standard English splling and not the Turkish spelling he is using (even contradicting Mahmud of Kashgar).

Tājik 17:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sharif Linux

Thank you for expressing your opinion on that article. Could you please unprotect that page which was protected in an unfair manner beside these articles: Zahra Kazemi, Mohammad Ali Najafi, WikIran? As you know better than me protected pages are harmful for wikipedia. 18:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hm, I'm not totally at easy unprotecting so shortly after the protection; especially now that I'm "party" to the debate; Khoikhoi evidently had reasons for putting the protection in place. For the Sharif Linux page, let's first see how the other side reacts, we need to be sure it won't immediately go back to revert-warring. I haven't looked at the other pages yet at all. As for WikIran, forgive me but that page is such an ugly mess I'm loath to touch it even with a five-foot pole... Fut.Perf. 18:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

hello again

you may remember User RunedChozo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). he was recent blocked again for three days for persistent edit warring. he has just returned from his block and has resumed wholesale reverting yet again . ITAQALLAH 19:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

For the moment, I've rather protected the Muhammad as a diplomat page - there seemed to be rather intense revert-warring going on from several sides, and RunedChozo was not alone against a consensus apparently. Fut.Perf. 19:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on being nothing more than a tool. I reported Itaqallah for blatantly lying in his edit summaries, not that it seems you care. RunedChozo 19:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)