| Revision as of 07:58, 22 February 2007 editOrphanBot (talk | contribs)654,820 edits You've uploaded an unsourced image← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:25, 22 February 2007 edit undoDominic (talk | contribs)Administrators29,558 edits ArbitrationNext edit → | ||
| Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
| This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 07:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC) | This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 07:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == Arbitration == | |||
| I have opened an arbitration case regarding the current editing dispute you've been involved in. Please make a statement at ] concerning the conflict with the other parties listed. Thanks. ]·] 10:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:25, 22 February 2007
 Archives |
|---|
topchubashev
I have updated Topchubashev entry. please have a look. thanks for any comment. Elsanaturk 16:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Turkic speaking
Salam. Although I'm completely Persian but I agree with you on Safavids are Turkic speaking language. Although they used Persian as their cultural and political languages.
- I suggest to read Lewis qutation:"The center of the Islamic world was under Turkish and Persian states, both shaped by Iranian culture. The major centers of Islam in the late medieval and early modern periods, the centers of both political and cultural power, such as India, Central Asia, Iran, Turkey, were all part of this Iranian civilization. Although much of it spoke various forms of Turkish, as well as other local languages, their classical and cultural language was Persian." --Sa.vakilian 19:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- I can help you If you have problem with Persian. I try to be just and obey WP:Verifiability.--Sa.vakilian 06:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Paytakaran
I've written a reply to you at Talk:Paytakaran#Grandmaster, a question concerning 1a. The Transhumanist 05:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
panturkist+panturanist issues
Hi, Grandmaster, I have a certain deal, what do you think, we should gather together all our arguments against panturk+panislamist accusations of User:Azerbaijani and his biased sources, because as I see all our arguments are dispersed among various talkpages, and when all these dispersed arguments would be collected, I do not know how, but, some among you, experienced user would request for mediation. because this guy has a certain intention to distort azerbaijani pages, and no talkpages can stop him/her from his "activities". so i think the only way to stop it by wikipedia administration I'll send this message to other wiki azeri users Elsanaturk 19:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC) Elsanaturk 20:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Amirov.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Amirov.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 07:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Beylaqan
Neither Beylaqan (town) nor Beylagan (town) (see Beylagan) have their own article. Perhaps such articles could help in relation to the Paytakaran dispute. Then links could be provided to them in context within your draft. If you create these, please be careful how you apply synonyms to the places - it may be best to provide any alternate names in the body of the article and not as parenthetical annotations following the lead word, as they might be presented out of context when provided as direct synonyms). The Transhumanist 13:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- That might be a good idea, but still I think that the new article should be linked to the article about Paytakaran. Grandmaster 13:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Once the article(s) on the towns are created, you can propose their addition as links to Paytakaran. The Transhumanist 13:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I already created a stub, please see a link in your first post. Grandmaster 13:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please see Beylagan (town). Grandmaster 13:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I thought Paytakarn (city) was in ruins a few miles away. The Transhumanist 13:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- It is. The ruins are a few miles away from the modern city of the same name. Grandmaster 14:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- The same name? But the modern city doesn't have the name Paytakaran, does it? The Transhumanist 14:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, it is called Beylegan. The name of Paytakaran existed in pre-Islamic times. After Islamization the name of the city was spelled as Beylegan/Baylaqan. Grandmaster 14:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- The same name? But the modern city doesn't have the name Paytakaran, does it? The Transhumanist 14:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Biographies
The proper format for the birth place on biographies is "city, country". I am sure you know this already , because I have seen you change the place of birth of many historic figures from Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan. --Mardavich 08:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you look at it in historic perspective, there was no country called Iran or Persia back then. So according to the same requirements we should say Ardabil, Ak Koyunly state. I think Iranian Azerbaijan is ok, it says that it is in Iran. I don't understand what your problem is with word "Azerbaijan"? Grandmaster 08:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- What is in Iran today is Iran, "city, country" is the proper format. Remember there was no country named Azerbaijan like 20 years ago either, so by your logic, the place of birth of all the famous Azeris should be changed to Soviet Union, and Nagorno-Karabakh should be used as the place of birth of anybody born in that region. --Mardavich 08:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- According to that logic it should indeed say Azerbaijan SSR, USSR. Please explain what is so wrong with mentioning Iranian Azerbaijan, that you remove it from many pages? Grandmaster 08:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with Iranian Azerbaijan, it's a region and the term should be used in the proper context, the proper format for the place of birth on biographies however is "city, country". If you don't want to follow that format, then you'd be contradicting yourself if you keep changing Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan on the biographies of other people. That would be flip-flopping. --Mardavich 08:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't mind, but it should be in historical perspective. Ardabil, Ak Koyunlu state. There was no country called Iran at that time. Grandmaster 08:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the state had been called Iran, since the time of the Samanid dynasty, by all the rulers from the "The Great Seljuks of Iran" to Timurids. There is historical evidence to prove this, such as coins. --Mardavich 09:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ak Koyunlu. Plus, I still see no reason to remove the word Azerbaijan from the birthplace of Ismail. Wiki rules do not prohibit to mention Azerbaijan. Grandmaster 10:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's about proper and common format. Otherwise, Wiki rules do not prohibit using Nagorno-Karabakh instead of Azerbaijan either. --Mardavich 10:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Show me the rules, please. Grandmaster 10:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's about proper and common format. Otherwise, Wiki rules do not prohibit using Nagorno-Karabakh instead of Azerbaijan either. --Mardavich 10:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ak Koyunlu. Plus, I still see no reason to remove the word Azerbaijan from the birthplace of Ismail. Wiki rules do not prohibit to mention Azerbaijan. Grandmaster 10:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the state had been called Iran, since the time of the Samanid dynasty, by all the rulers from the "The Great Seljuks of Iran" to Timurids. There is historical evidence to prove this, such as coins. --Mardavich 09:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't mind, but it should be in historical perspective. Ardabil, Ak Koyunlu state. There was no country called Iran at that time. Grandmaster 08:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with Iranian Azerbaijan, it's a region and the term should be used in the proper context, the proper format for the place of birth on biographies however is "city, country". If you don't want to follow that format, then you'd be contradicting yourself if you keep changing Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan on the biographies of other people. That would be flip-flopping. --Mardavich 08:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- According to that logic it should indeed say Azerbaijan SSR, USSR. Please explain what is so wrong with mentioning Iranian Azerbaijan, that you remove it from many pages? Grandmaster 08:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Soviet
What do you think about this is it wrong too? "Armenian leaders remain preoccupied by the long conflict with Muslim Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, a primarily Armenian-populated region, assigned to Soviet Azerbaijan in the 1920s by Moscow." Artaxiad 11:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Why don't you check these sources: User:Grandmaster/Karabakh. Grandmaster 11:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Urartu
Why it should be removed,
| “ | It's outdated. It mentions the folk-history version of Khorenatsi and his "Hayg" theories. Furthermore it states an invasion theory. The more advanced of theories point to an establishment of "Armenian" hegemony due to alliance with the invading Iranians. Many invading tribes from the north had already destroyed the centers of Urartian civilization. The Armenians, whether part of the Urartian confederation or not before its destruction, didn't need to "invade".-Arthur, Historian Artaxiad 06:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC) | ” |
- I think you should provide alternative quotes. Also, try to get third party users to review this and get their opinion. Grandmaster 06:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- There's no one on wiki these days, especially since half the Armenian users are blocked and Azeri :) not sure who will reply instead of us. Artaxiad 06:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- As of now, 4 Azeri and 2 Armenian users are blocked. So there will not be much activity on certain pages. And is the above post a quote or what? Grandmaster 06:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Its from some guy i asked, he's a historian he knows alot on Urartu, Armenia, Karabakh etc. Artaxiad 06:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- As of now, 4 Azeri and 2 Armenian users are blocked. So there will not be much activity on certain pages. And is the above post a quote or what? Grandmaster 06:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's good, but you need a quote from a published source. Try checking some books on the subject. Grandmaster 06:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Behbudov.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Behbudov.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 07:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Arbitration
I have opened an arbitration case regarding the current editing dispute you've been involved in. Please make a statement at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Armenia-Azerbaijan concerning the conflict with the other parties listed. Thanks. Dmcdevit·t 10:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)