Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Barış! To the best of my knowledge, Murat Karayalçın does have immediate Hamsheni roots, although he was born in Samsun. For Mesut Yılmaz, I do think that he has a Hamsheni connection but it's very distant and is really not worth mentioning. He has Bosniak connections too and even a Russian grandmother, but after all he is not mentioned in the articles on Bosniaks and Russians:) You will see that User:Macukali wrote a beautiful article on Hamshenis in the Turkish wikipedia. It is always better to have someone who has direct knowledge of the people who constitute the subject matter. Cretanforever 21:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, As I see, you are posting many POV messages, comments on talk pages. Are you admin? WhiteHero 21:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

?? Can u be more specific? Baristarim 21:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_16, You are managing discussions, posting many comments. Is this a voting or looking for consensus? See you.WhiteHero 22:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, what? which article?.WhiteHero 22:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

No, I am not admin.. :))) But you have an interesting take on things. Interestingly, some users out there might agree with you :))) It is not a vote per se, people can say "keep" or "delete", but at the end of the day it is the concensus that is important, not dry votes.. Welcome to Wikipedia by the way, if you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me.. Baristarim 22:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Dont worry about that, i got confused.. try using the ":" instead of "*" for replies.. Cheers! Baristarim 22:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you Russian,Tartar,? I think your name is real. Thanks for your advices. Bye.WhiteHero 22:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Not quite :)) Have a look at my userpage: User:Baristarim, I am originally Turkish, but grew up in the US and live in France at the moment. My name is Baris, Tarim is my last name. No problems, any time :)) Baristarim 22:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Check your "last" wiki mail.I hope you can help for this case.WhiteHero 22:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Please take a look. Regards Must^TC 10:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The name is certainly Allāh ud-Dīn - that's the correct transliteration from Arabic. I know that many people spell and pronounce it worng. The ud- is actually an al- ... but al-Dīn is usually turned into an ud-Dīn in Arabic. I guess you are referring to Allāh ud-Dīn Kay-Qubādh. The second part of his name, Kay-Qubādh, is taken from Persian Kay Kubād, a mythical Iranian hero. In Ferdousi's Shahnameh, it's mentioned as Kay-Qubādh - very obiously Arabicized.

Tājik 14:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're mistaken in such statements like this and this. It may even be true is some countries, but not in the U.S., where the Wikimedia's servers stay. Take good care. --Abu Badali 21:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I did read the entire discussion, thank you; all 150-odd kb of it. In the end, I feel the arguments for deletion were stronger than the keep arguments; if you want my advice, break apart the ancient portions of the turkic history from the modern history - they're just too disparate to consider in the same timeline. You're welcome to challenge the closing of the tfd at WP:DRV. --humblefool® 10:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Please take a look Talk:Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Regards. Must^TC 18:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, your assumptions are wrong. I was simply checking all the articles which have been recently tagged with "{WPTR}", I'm a member of WikiProject Turkey myself. --Mardavich 00:05, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

"It is funny that you should mention the Ottomans, since Greeks have a much more legimate right to lay claim to the Ottoman legacy than any other nation in the world. It is them who ran the economy, navy and politics of the empire, so when the young Turks abolished the Ottomans and Greeks, their civilisation went down to zero. It is the Greeks who inherited directly many aspects of the Ottoman culture, and its most important geographical part. Turkey has a very good case too, so let's call it equal... Of course I'm partly kidding, I'm just using those claims as an example of how original research and imperfect education can lead into silly beliefs. Baristarim it's obvious that you weren't brought up in Turkey, you're missing the fundamental notions of the Turkish national self-image, let alone a basic understanding of modern historiography. Your imperfect knowledge on the topic prevents you from acknowledging the irony of your claims. However I'm glad that you realises in what degree Ottoman society and state were founded on and preserved by the modern Greek (late Byzantine) element."

This is what I replied to your recent ranting. It was removed from the template page because it was already "closed" a few hours earlier. I'm posting it here for you to read it. So that you know. Miskin 00:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I know that you were only trying to wind up Hectorian by pretending that you believed in such stuff. I'm not insulting nor attacking you, I'm just playing your game, reminding you that I'm aware of it. Miskin 23:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey man, I noticed the little conflict over at that page, and I have to agree with Mardavich this time. I'm not sure what the Azerbaijani language has to do with Turkey, besides the fact that Azeri and Turkish are both Turkic languages (but then again, so are Turkmen, Yakut, Kazakh, etc.). On the other hand, most Azeris live in Iran, not Azerbaijan. Anyways, you're the judge. Ciao, Khoikhoi 07:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but at the same time, there are more than half a million Azeris in Russia. Anyways, you can continue with your work. :-) Khoikhoi 07:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Baristarim, Ishalah haliniz yakhchidir. I appreciate your change of tone. The Iranian template is there because there are more Azeri-speakers in Iran than in any other country, Iran is Azeris' main home. If we add Turkey, then we'll have to add Russia, Georgia, there will be no end to it. The project templates have to be used more specific in order for it to be worthwhile and substantive. --Mardavich 08:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Please take a look ;
  • here

and

• • here

Regards Must^TC 10:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Barış, benim sayfama bakarmısın, türkiye ile ilgili cat list yaratmaya çalışıyorum, hepsine bot ile template yerleştireceğim. Listeyi geliştirebilirmisin .User:Mustafa_Akalp/deneme selam Must^TC 18:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Selam, I just noticed the Laicist Turks who are murdered article today...can you think of a better title for that page? Thanks, Khoikhoi 00:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I was just passing by :) I suggest a move to a general title like "List of assasinated Turks". The descriptions of assasinations will make the reason of assasination clear on an individual basis. Atilim Gunes Baydin 14:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Barış, diğer project templatelerinede bir göz atabilirmisin.ör. {{WP India}},
Farklı uygulamalar konusunda fikir verebilir.
Turkiye ile ildili maddelere, Template ve kategori ekleme konusunda bir çalışma yapıyorum. Tek tek maddeleri taramak zor. Bir kullanıcı Bot sğlayabileceğini söyledi. Anladığım kadarı ile; bir liste halinde toplanan( Categori listesi, maddelistesi gibi) tüm sayfalara verilen bir template veya cat bir anda yerleştirilebiliyor. <Cat> listesi hazırlamaya çalışıyorum; şöyle bir yol izledim; wikisearc de "Turkey",i kategoriler arasında tarattım, Excele kopyaladım, Excelde temizleyip başına ve sonuna wiki fotmatına uygun eklemeler yaptım, text olarak kaydedip Mustafa Akalp/deneme sayfasına yerleştirdim.
Sırası ile Turk,Turc,Turcic,Turkish, gibi bu işlemi tamamlamayı düşünüyorum.Uzun bir yol, Daha kısa/kolay bir yol olabilirmi.?
Turkiye ile ilgili kategori ağaçları varmı yoksa böyle ağaçların yaratılması, bunun bir manuel ile birlikte Proje sayfasında yerleştirilmesi uygun olur. Selam Must^TC 11:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Tanıdığın adminlere de yardım için bir bak. Bu template için fikrin ne?

Must^TC 12:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Mustafa, the correct spelling is "Turkic". --Mardavich 08:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

It's funny you should ask that, as there was indeed a proposal for a Greek and Turkish wikipedians board of cooperation, now withdrawn. However, the idea was very promising, and I still think it would be a good idea to revive it. I guess you could create one at Wikipedia:Greek and Turkish wikipedians board of cooperation or at User:Baristarim/Greek and Turkish wikipedians board of cooperation - it's your choice. You wouldn't create it directly, as the main namespace is for actual articles.

As for an Armenian-Turkish cooperation board...I think we'll have to wait and see how the first one goes. ;-) Cheers, Khoikhoi 05:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem! You might try contacting Michalis Famelis about this, as well as the other former members. Khoikhoi 06:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Michalis withdrew the proposal because he was longer interested in it and he didn't have any time to spare for it. See his full message here. As for the project itself, I think it looks great! I liked a lot of the points you made - although I think some of the images make it look to crowded. Maybe you could reduce the size or remove some of them? Another option is that you could move some to a gallery at the bottom. I also like the idea of having a template for the project. Cheers, Khoikhoi 06:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

This is just a silly edit-war. Please look at Parishan's old comments on the talk pages of those two pages, he's from Azerbaijan Republic. The template is just there as a navigation bar linking the dynasties that ruled Iran by timeline, when you remove it, the time line from 1300's to 1400's goes missing. Ak Koyunlu's capital was Tabriz, Kara Koyunlu's center was in Iran. Yesssss, they were Turkic, just as were many other rulers of Iran, there is no contradiction there. I'm Turkic and I'm Iranian. Iranian Azeris cherish the fact that Iran was ruled by native Azeris for many centuries. In the spirit of cooperation, please stop reverting those pages and ask Mustafa to do the same, this is a pointless edit-war. --Mardavich 08:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Chokh tashakur for your help Baris. :) --Mardavich 08:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey Baris, thats good idea to create a cooperation board between Turkey and Greece but I'm worry when Turkish wikipedians and after Turkic wikipedians notice board will be created? It's actually more needed because you know there are too many of iranian nationalist and their POV and vandalistic edits, cheers Zaparojdik (talk · contribs) 13:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Baris, The cooperation board is a good idea. Thanx. I'm also agree with Zaparojdik (talk · contribs) that we should take care of the turkish history related articles. E104421 18:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation, Baris:). i am thinking about it and i will leave messages concerning this in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History of Greece as well as to the board's talk. Ciao Hectorian 21:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to add my 2 cents, but I think that's a great idea. I'll help if needed (though I'm American) --AW 04:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I joined up. Great idea. Free smyrnan 10:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice Baris:). it was rather long using the other way. Ciao Hectorian 01:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the greek+turk link--Slogankid 12:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Baris, benim katkilar listesine bir goz atsana. Benim editleri revert edene bir bak, kime yardim ediyor. Ben konusma sayfasina o herife not dustum, sen de bir goz ativersene. Bu adamlar ortak calisiyor. Bir de Turk Ordusu sayfasini karistirmaya calisan biri var. E104421 23:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Guys, I want a translation of this sentence. Anyway, please do not form reverting parties blindly reverting to each other, it is a bad style. Better try to find a way for a mutual understanding with Iranians so you could work together instead of pushing each other. Alex Bakharev 04:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. Don't forget to fix the double redirects (as well as the double redirects of the talk pages). Khoikhoi 02:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You still haven't fixed them... :-) Khoikhoi 04:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, a double redirect is something like this. You need to see them all by going to Special:Whatlinkshere/Aras River. Khoikhoi 04:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll come to help you later. Currently very busy. Appreciate your efforts to improve articles, keep it up.

have a look at the talk  Aristovouλos   ^(T) 18:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Dude no personal calls, just 2 question. Why is there a wolf on TMT's emblem?

And how the following translates?

please translate:

Türk Milleti’ni simgeleyen BOZKURT’u sembol alan TMT; Kıbrıs’ın Türk kalma ve Kıbrıs Türkü’nün var olma mücadelesinde Türk Milleti’ne karşı tarihsel sorumluluğunu başarıyla yerine getirir... Tıpkı “örgütlenmesini” daha önceleri Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli’nin dergahından çıkarak “Anadolu’da tecrübe” etmiş gibi... Sanki Hz. Türkistan Ahmet YESEVİ’nin ocağından geldiğini ispatlar gibi... TMT’nin kurutulmuş oğlak etiyle beslenen Bozkurtlar’ı, Kuvay-ı Milliye’nin dipdiri ayakta olduğunu gösterir gibiydiler... thanks  Aristovouλos   ^(T) 18:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Look dude. The web-site's name doguturkistan.net translates into "eastturkistan.net" - East Turkistan is in China. Extremist web-sites cannot be cited to give the impression that it is a hundred percent confirmed fact. All I am saying is that it would be better if we could use some impartial books on the Cyprus issue as sources. Eastturkistan.net has nothing to do with this, they could be simply trying to "recuparate" political points by connecting itself with TMT. I am not saying they did or didn't use any particular symbol, but you cannot simply say "ultra-nationalist pan-turkist" where as the EOKA-B article, an organization that was recognized as terrorist not only by TR but also UK, has this for the intro "EOKA-B was a Greek Cypriot right-wing pro-enosis paramilitary organisation formed in 1971 that ..." See the difference in tone? That's all.. Baristarim 18:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Better, Baris, however for the lives lost, i think it is a minor contribution to include Turkish Cypriots killed by TMT... We have a turkish Cypriot newspaper stating that... lives lost is a different issue thought isnt it?  Aristovouλos   ^(T) 19:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Look at the final version, at the end of the intro I said why the wolf was used :)) I tried to clean up a little bit, however the article seriously needs a clean-up sources and timeline wise. Lives lost is not a different issue, I have no problem with them being mentioned in any way. The problem is that the article is in dire encyclopedic situation. Don't get me wrong, I am willing to help out with any revision or rewrite of the article, I am just trying to make it look more formal and serious. As for the lives lost.. There is no problem with them being mentioned, all I am saying is that we should have some good sources on this, otherwise, others, today or in the future, will have an excuse to edit-war citing the unreliability of the sources. The article would also need a good restructuring to have seperate "background, organization, acts, timeline and aftermath" sections. That way all of these could be easily aboarded. However I am not a Cypriot, so my knowledge can be lacking with this subject. I will try to contact some other users to see if they can lend a hand. Baristarim 19:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

ok, sounds good  Aristovouλos   ^(T) 19:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

What about changing your name into savastarim? After your comments on atatürk talk page I cannot believe in your good will or any invitations to cooperation boards! Strange manners, indeed! [[Apocolocynthosis 08:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)]]

I am sorry if you feel that way and I am sorry if I offended you in some way.. However you also have to understand that with the state of looping and irrelevant discussions taking place on that talk page and some other talk pages, it is not so easy to take it easy sometimes, and things can get out of hand easily :) I didn't know you before your statements to that talk page, what can I say? On the other hand, I cannot change my name to Savas, my name is really Baris in real life :)) If you have any concerns or questions about a particular question or anything else, please contact me and I will be try to have a look at it. Cheers! Baristarim 19:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Baris, this was in my to-do list. I hope this will encourage users to write better articles about Turkey. I guess, the second thing that we must do is improve article in some kind of collaboration. Cheers --Ugur Basak 09:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

İstanbul'da görev yapan bir tarih öğretmeniyim. Projeye katılmak isterim fakat büyük katkı yapacak seviyede ingilizce bilgim yok--Tarih 20:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Baris, I have received your very ugly message about Gülen. It only shows how far you are from being a good human being. Littleraindrop 23:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Why are you getting so offended, are you Fethullah Gulen by any chance? Only in cults do people get offended by criticisms and insults aimed at their "teachers".. If I was attacking you in any way, please point it out.. Baristarim 23:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

How do you call that as criticism? Language of your new message in my talk page is also abusive. Can't you talk in a kind manner? Littleraindrop 22:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Barış, you've been nominating articles for GA, but most of them will be rejected due to Wikipedia:What is a good article?. The most important thing for an article to get GA status is being well referenced and NPOV. Cheers --Ugur Basak 00:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Barış GA nomination page is on my watchlist. I've been watching it since i've written TK1476 GA article. If you want to get 3rd person views, you can check Wikipedia:Peer review. But peer review thing isn't working very very good. My best advice is first handle "well referenced" part, because everyday GA is becoming somekind of FA:) Even they can speedly de-list some of them due to reference problems. Also they are de-listing GA articles for same reason.--Ugur Basak 00:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I had to smile because of your edit summary, which hasn't happened before on that page as far as I remember. Never saw {{Round In Circles}} before; not sure it will help, but who knows? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Baristarim, I hope you're doing fine! I just reverted some very serious misinformation recently added by User:220.240.8.182, removing the mention of the fact that the Caliphate was constitutionally abolished in 1924 from the introduction and claiming that Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı is "the current successor entity to the Office of the Caliph" (in the Caliph article), and is "the successor of Caliphate and the highest ruling authority of the Islamic World" (in the Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı article). It seems he attached this link [1] as a reference to his claims, but, obvioulsy, no one bothers to check this link, and there is no such claim to be found on the site pointed by the link. Could you also please keep an eye on these two articles for a while? Regards, Atilim Gunes Baydin 13:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This "Wiki"-"pedia" project is simply a very, very bad idea. Atilim Gunes Baydin 13:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, this case is different, because there already exists an article called Meander River (it is not a redirect like last time). Do you think that the Turkish or Australian river is more well-known? If the most common name for "Meander River" is the Büyük Menderes, we should probably not have a disambig. page. Khoikhoi 05:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, sure. As for Atatürk, I've asked another admin to do it (I can't do it myself or it would be considered an "abuse of admin powers" - see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freestylefrappe). Khoikhoi 05:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't me but an anon's posting, I was only an admin responding to an edit protected request. I have added an unsigned2 template to avoid future confusions. --WinHunter ^(talk) 14:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, just saw we made similar comments to that user. I think you shouldn't be sarcastic about it though, we don't want to discourage anybody. Even with the smiley face and such, I think it could be taken the wrong way --AW 16:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

That's true, I laughed when I saw his comment on the talk page! --AW 16:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you took my actions regarding my user talk page to be hostile. It is my user talk page and therefore my space to edit as I please. However, I didn't mean to offend you and I'll keep in mind your important advice you gave me regarding GA and FA status. Kindest regards, Clevelander 21:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The Byzantine province in question was called 'Armenia'. Secondly 'Seljuk Turks forces' is gramatically wrong since 'Turks' cannot be used as an adjective to 'forces'. It should be either 'Seljuk Turkic' or 'Seljuk Turkish' or 'Seljuk'. Miskin 22:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, the vandalism is usually the same for me. As for my enemies, I deal with a lot of banned users...which ones specifically were you talking about? Khoikhoi 06:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

As for Ushtria Çlirimtare e Çamërisë, I saw it—hilarious! :-) Khoikhoi 06:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Merhaba, wikipedia Turkey projesine katilmak istiyorum. Sadece listeyi edit ederek adimi eklemem yeterli mi yoksa baska bir sey yapmam gerekiyor mu? Tesekkur ederim Caglarkoca 13:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Merhaba, nasilsiniz? I tagged a dozen Turkey-related articles today for the Wiki Turkey project, please rate them appropriately, I'm not yet familiar with your rating system. Also, why did you remove the Persian pronunciation of Fuzûlî's name? It's such little unnecessary edits that starts edit wars, Fuzûlî's a notable and beloved figure in Azerbaijani and Persian literatures. --Mardavich 14:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Question about your NPOV tag. The others (OR, Sources) are clear. If I start working on this (no promises, these sources might be tough), is there really a POV problem? Jd2718 15:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

The origins can be fairly well sourced, as can their history through the 18th and 19th centuries, but I share your doubts about the modern (post-Lausanne) period. So some of the material may need to be removed. I will do some work and try to maximize what can stay. Jd2718 16:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 49	4 December 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections open	The Seigenthaler incident: One year later
Wikimedia celebrates Commons milestone, plans fundraiser	Wikipedia wins award in one country, reported blocked in another
News and notes: Steward elections continue, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I saw your edits to both of these articles, as well as the Armenian Genocide article, changing the name of Constantinople to Istanbul. My source says Natalie attended the St. James Orphanage in Constantinople before 1900. The Constantinople article says that the name change to Istanbul occurred in 1930. I see no reason why we need to Turkify the name of Constantinople in 1900 to Istanbul. It seems revision of history to me. Serouj 10:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem buddy. I'm not trying to cause trouble either, but changing every instance of "Constantinople" to "Istanbul" in Armenian-related articles seems to me a bit peculiar, at least on the surface, although you may not intend it... Please see my reply under Shahan Natalie talk. Thanks. Serouj 10:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkokritokoi başlığını değilde Giritli Türklerin İslamize edilmiş yunanlılar olduğu ile ilgili cümleyi revert etmek istedim. Bunu yarın öbür gün kıbrıslı türkler içinde söyliycekler. Bunlar amaçlı söylemler. İçten pazarlıklı, yalancı, üçkağıtçı pezevenkler. Saygılar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.102.104.48 (talk) 11:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

Ok, anladim. Haklisin. Istedigin gibi edit edebilirsin.. Cheers! Baristarim 11:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I am curious;-). what did the anon said in his/her edit summary? i understood only the word "yunan"... Hectorian 12:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Baristarim,

(so do cyprus and armenia according to UN maps.. In fact, Cyprus is considered to be wholly in Asia geographically.. added the same tag to some other regions)

Thanks; I completely forgot these!  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 12:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what happened there. I was reverting the extra images, in the mean time you made significant changes, then you tried to fix it whilst I tried to fix it e.t.c. And of course it didn't give me conflicts....I'll back off and let you sort it out, if you don't mind. Cheers. yandman 14:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments - after looking at the Turkish pages for the provinces, I have noticed some naming differences and such which I will have to go back and correct the maps. If you wish to assist me to point out discrepancies, I would greatly appreciate it! Rarelibra 15:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out that it was not my version as you state, but an alteration to the original made 48h ago by an anonymous user (82.13.151.249). And it made no references to the origin of the product (this is outlined in a separate paragraph further down) (remember, you remarked: and your version implies that it is equally Bosnian, Turkish and Armenian at the same time. It is eaten much more in Turkey, as well as being Turkish as its name implies.). In Cyprus for example, Turkish delights have a universal presence (most Greek-Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot restaurants will have it on the menu) and whole communities make a living out of its production (which is most probably a legacy left from the Ottoman rule of the island). Remember I am not questioning the origins of the product I am just trying to relay the fact that you wont find it in traces in neighbouring countries and that it is actually a common desert. I am afraid it looks like you might have taken this as an insult to the Turkishness of the product. I see it more of a compliment as its continued production illustrates remnants of bygone Ottoman influence in the area. Anyway I agree that the version you have left now is probably a true reflection. Cheers, StephP 16:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I generally do many upkeep tasks around so I tend not to have too much time to analyze the whole issues, I take a look and try to fix it. That's why I had done a simple revert in the first place, then when you pointed out that "traces" could be an understatement, I tried to fix it. Sorry if it might not have seemed correct to do such a revert.. However, I agree, so I tried to improve it a little bit. Cheers! Baristarim 16:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding this edit and this edit: stop stalking. See WP:STALK. If you do not stop, you will be reported to admins.

Tājik 18:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever.. I have all those pages on my watchlist (if any admins are interested they can have a look at my watchlist if it is possible), and I suddenly saw numerous edits by you on those articles simply titled "rv" or "rv vandalism". There is no stalking, it is the articles that I am watching, not you... You can report anything to anyone you want, I had those articles on my watchlist for ages, it is not my fault that we seem to be running into each other since we are interested in similar articles.. Whether u believe me about the stalking is your choice, but there is nothing wrong with having such cross of interests from time to time between users. Don't be accusing me of stalking, if you hadn't started your wiki session only by blind reverts, I wouldn't have had to revert you. Simple really.. Cheers! Baristarim 18:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Afghanistan is not on your watchlist and was not on your watchlist. That edit was your first edit ever in that article and proves that you were spying on me ... We can ask and admin and let him judge. Is that OK with you? Tājik 18:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Definitely OK with me as long as he can have access to my watchlist to see when I added it. It was my first edit, yes, however, I had that article on my watchlist for over ten days, I swear on my honor. Whether you believe me after that is not something I can do anything about. I am smarter than to simply open your contributions list and headdive into articles that you have edited right after you have. I don't mean that in a conspiratorial way, I am just trying to say that I am not going to go to articles that I have no knowledge about just to piss you off. I have had Italy on my watchlist as well for the last three months, however I have still not made a single edit. I just keep it there to see what is going on and to see if I can revert some random vandalism if I come across. In any case, let's drop it.. More arguing is not what we need. Baristarim 18:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I do not care what you think about the Iranica or about the Encyclopaedia of Islam. You guys only recite Britannica when it serves your purpose. But whenever Britannica oposes your views, you suddenly change your minds and delete the info (for example Britannica's second article on Babur which clearly states that both Babur and Timur, as well as the Mughals were "Mongols" and not "Turks"). Besides that, you have been told many times that there are "good sources", like Britannica, and "excellent scholarly" sources, such as Iranica or EI, which not only cite other scholarly source, but also the author of the article who - in 99% of the cases - is himself an academic expert on the toppic. Britannica does neither cite an author (because Britannica's articles are NOT written by experts or academics) nor any secodary literature or sources.

As for the edit in Afghanistan: my version makes clear that - unlike the information of the CIA Factbook or Britannica - the EIr clearly cites its sources regarding Afghanistan's population and makes clear that it is mostly based on official governmental census numbers from 1960 to 1980. Britannica does not give ANY source and simply guesses the numbers. THAT's the difference. And THAT's the reason why Britannica is only a "good" source while Iranica is an "EXCELLENT" source. Tājik 18:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Say whatever you want. 10 days ago, we had a controversial edit-war in the article Afghanistan, in which countless sockpuppets of User:NisarKand tried to vandalize the article. Of course, during the whole time, you were absent, not interested in the article. And now, when you friend E104421 started to edit the article, within a few minutes you jumped in with your usual nonsense about the status of Encyclopaedia Iranica. Sorry to say that, but all proofs are againt you ... no matter how often you swear on your honor. I only repeat my first words: PLEASE STOP STALKING! Tājik 18:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

First of all, talk with more respect. I have tried to approach in a conciliatory way, however you are not up to it I see. I have been reading the Iranica link that was mentioned in the Afghanistan article. For vandal-wars. Look dude.. Similar vandal attacks also happen in Italy and France articles that I have on my watchlist, I never edit them since there are enough people fighting vandals for those pages, I have other fish to fry.. Ok? I am not the vandal patrol for every single article. Even for Turkey article I rarely do vandal reverts. Nobody is stalking you, so cut down on the paranoia. I have asked you the reason for your edits on other articles, instead of blindly reverting them, like in Allah ud-Din ... So please don't insult my intelligence by saying that I just open up your contributions list and head-dive head-on. A) I have no time for such low-level play B)There are smarter ways of doing that. All of those edits showed up when I refreshed my watchlist: Afghanistan, White Huns and Timurid articles all titled "rvv" by Tajik at one-minute intervals. Do not reply to me if the only thing you want to do is to shout.. Baristarim 19:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Kocaelispor Communist Party of Turkey (Official) Samsun Mehmet Fuat Köprülü Halki seminary Kayseri Erciyesspor Adana Elections in Turkey Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Diyarbakır Ertuğrul Turkish People's Liberation Party-Front/Revolutionary Coordination Unity Araks River Vestel Manisaspor Van, Turkey Coat of arms of Turkey Labour Party of Turkey Yozgat Kaza

Cleanup Sait Faik Abasıyanık Growth of the Ottoman Empire Antalya Merge Ottoman wars in Europe Russo-Turkish War, 1877–1878 Gazi Osman Pasha Add Sources Conscription in Germany Şanlıurfa Mosul Wikify Tanbur Annan Plan for Cyprus Joseph Hill Expand Tulip Era in the Ottoman Empire Stagnation of the Ottoman Empire Ağrı Province

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 22:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Ooops, revert if you'd like. Didn't realize. --Free smyrnan 06:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Stop being a hypocrite, Baristarim, and stop messing up the template "History of Iran". The articles Kara Koyunlu and Ak Koyunlu use both spelling, and - what's even more important: scholarly sources only use the "q"-spelling.

If you are so much into "wikiuniformity", as you pretend to be, leave the template alone and first start to change "Seljuk Turks" to "Seljuk dynasty", because that's how the article is called. Right now, there are countless articles that use "Seljuk Turks" instead of the correct "Seljuk dynasty" ... even the category is called "Seljuq Turks" instead of "Seljuk dynasty". Prove that you are really into "wikiuniformity", as you claim, and finish that first!

Tājik 13:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

That is normal, since Seljuq Turks refer to the people as a whole, not just the dynasty. There are two different articles for Ottoman dynasty (House of Osman) and the Ottoman Empire. Same thing. In the near future, there will be another article created called "Seljuk Turks" that will be about the people in the same way, don't worry. Scholarly sources do not only use the q-spelling I am afraid, FPAS himself said that for .edu searches, the outcome was even between the K and Q spelling, see the relevant talk pages. Of course, I can see your point if you consider the Iranic as the only scholarly source and the Bible of God :)) In the English language, there is no difference in pronounciation between Q and K in that particular word structure, and that's what counts: English. And most common name obviously. Baristarim 13:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The Seljuqs were not a "people", they were family, named after their ancestor Seljuq. Their clan was not called "Seljuq" but "Kinik" (even that's mentioned in the article). Do you have ANY sources for your claim? Id o not think so ... The problem with you remains: you falsefy facts, you reject scholarly sources, and you stalk ... and you try to hinde all of this behind hot air ... Don't talk, act! Why don't you show me sources from your most favourite source, the Encyclopaedia Britannica, that could actually support your hot air that the Seljuqs were "an entire people"?!

Besides that, I consider the Iranica (in this case, the talk is not about Iranica, but about the Encyclopaedia of Islam ... but it does not matter anyway, since you reject both ... I mean, since you reject every single source that's written by an educated academic) an excellent work, because it's written by ACADEMICS and because it ceites SOURCES. Britannica neither gives any reference to its authors nor to its sources - THAT's the difference.

And your comparison with the Ottomans is really hillarious. The Ottoman Empire was not a nation based on ethnicity (even if Turkish nationalists propagate nonsense like this) ... the same goes to the Seljuq EMPIRE. However, the article I am talking about is about the SELJUQ FAMILY. In any case, the expression "Seljuq Turks" is wrong ... and - let's come back to your own ideology of "wikiuniformity": there is no article called "Seljuq Turks".

Stop being a hypocrite and follow your own words.

Tājik 14:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

As I told you before, please talk with more respect. If I am not mistaken, you just stalked me to the Baklava page.. And you did not try to look at the references on the bottom of the page of that article. I had the Afghanistan article on my watchlist before your edits my fellow, there was no stalking.. I said they are referred to as people in usage.. In any case, I had enough of your attitude, as I said before: DO NOT POST MESSAGES TO ME IF THE ONLY THING YOU WANT TO DO IS SHOUT.. Is that so hard to understand? Gees.. If somebody had told me that, I would definitely think more than twice.. :)) I never said that Ottoman Empire was based on ethnicity, so do me a favor and stop the straw man... Britannica also have its academic sources, who do you think is writing it? Aliens? :)) Baristarim 14:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the dispute in Talk:Turkey, I'm not discussing this because of a bias against Turkey, it has to rather with the fact that such edits can have socio-political and historical implications on modern territories. For example, to imply in the infobox that Ottoman Empire is aka Turkey, implies that all countries of the Balkans and the middle east were actually stolen from Turkey. The suggestions/ideas of OttomanReference verify this. Miskin 19:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The Khwarizm Shahs are not part of the Turkish history, and there is no need to mention a Turkish spelling of the name. They are known as the "Khwarizm Shahs", and since this is a Persian name, only the Persian spelling should be added.

There are many scholars who have worked on the history of the Khwarizm Shahs, most of all because they were the reason for the Mongol attacks on the Islamic world. This does not mean that every mother-tongue of those scholars has to be mentioned in the article.

The Khwarizm Shahs have never ruled over Anatolia and their history has nothing to do with the history or language of Turkey.

Adding their name to the article is just like adding Swahili, Japanese, or Armenian to the article - it has absolutely no point and no importance.

Tājik 01:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Baris bey ben anlatayim size ne oldugunu. Surekli Turk ve Yunan mutfağı sayfalarını edit eden kisiler hep aynı dikkat ederseniz. Ve bilinçli olarak siyasi amaçlarla sayfalarda değişiklik yapıp duruyorlar. Ben Miskin bey/bayan ile çok çok uzun süren tartışmalar neticesinde tam tavırlarını anlayabildim. O yuzden hangi edit'i niye yaptıklarını çok iyi biliyorum. Bir kere kesinlikle Ottoman "influence" kelimesini kabul etmiyorlar. Neden? Tamamen siyasi milliyetçi sebeplerle. Yok Döneri bunlar Avrupa'da tanıtmış. Yok Türk kahvesi değilmiş kahve asla Türk olamazmış. Olsa olsa Arap olabilirmiş? Adamlara kaynak getiriyorsun bu kaynak geçerli değil diyorlar. Yok yogurt aslında Bulgarlardan geçmişmiş? Tabii bunlar öyle olmuş olmasını tercih edebilirler ama gerçek bu değil. Bu kadar basit. Commonality ne demek bir kere? 1. Commonality olsa olsa Türk-Yunan mutfağı arasındadır (çağdaş mutfaklardan bahsediyorsak eğer?). Yani Osmanlı mutfağı v. Yunan mutfağı olabilir mi? Turkish cuisine page'in başlangıcında öyle bir giriş vardı ki ilk başta akıllara zarar. Osmanlı mutfağı sanki fusion mutfağı gibi takdim ediliyor. Adeta Amerikan mutfağı. Bunların izin verdiği oranda birkaç değişiklikle toparladık durumu. Ayrıca hem bir zamanlar Osmanlı mutfağının parçası olduklarını iddia ediyorlar hem de "commonality" vardır bunların arasında diyorlar. Parçası olduğun bir şeyle nasıl ortak olursun. Commonality değil, Ottoman influence vardır dedik, kıyamet koptu. Dolma, döner ve şiş'in etimolojik açıklamalarını sürekli silip duruyorlar vs.

Ben bu işe çok tesadüfen bulaştım. Turkish cuisine sayfasını mümkün olduğunca toparlamaya çalıştım. Normalde bana ne Yunan sayfasından ama bunlar zırt pırt Turkish cuisine sayfasında baklava, etler, mezeler vs. ile ilgili değişiklikler yapıp durduklarından başladım bunların sayfasına da bakmaya. Tabii milliyetçi-şöven biri değilim kesinlikle. Benim en yakın arkadaşlarım Yunanlılar yurtdışında. Ama bu sayfalarla sürekli uğraşanlarla birilerinin ilgilenmesi lazım diye düşünüyorum. Konuşup anlaşmayı denedim olmadı. Durum budur. Bilin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Z y (talk • contribs) 10:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

If you have any specific complaints about my additions, then I invite you to bring them to the talk page. Kindest regards, Clevelander 01:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

My problems is not with Turks (if you take a look at my user page, you'll see that I am descendant of Bayat Oghuz Turks who were part of Kizilbash army of the Safavids), but with Turkish nationalists.

You people need to understand that the Turkic peoples are NOT "one people" or "one migrating people", but a whole bunch of unrelated peoples who simply happen to speak realted languages.

I know that the Turkish state propagates pseudo-scientific nonsense, claiming that all dynasties and peoples were actually Turks. But this is BS.

The Turkish people (citizens of Turkey) have nothing to do with Central Asian Turks except their related languages. They are NOT genetically related; they are NOT historically related.

The Khwarezm Shahs were a dynasty of unknown origin that rose out of the chaos following the collapse of the Seljuq Empire in Central Asia. If they were Turks, then deffinitly not Oghuz.

I do not know why you are pushing for the Turkish translation of the name. The Khwarezm Shahs have NO IMPORTANCE and NO RELEVANCE to the history of Turkey. By the time of the Khwarezm Shahs, the Seljuqs had already established their Rum-Seljuqid dynasty in Konya.

Your claim is totally irrelevant and illogical. It's like giving certain Spanish dynasties of South-America Persian and Bengali names, only because their languages are related. The people of South America and Persia are neither genetically nor historically related - only their languages are related. The same goes to the Turks of Turkey and those of Central Asia: ONLY the languages are related. And in case of Khwarezm Shahs: they were - if their Turkic origin is confirmed - of Qipchaq or Qarluq origin, but certainly not Oghuz!

A Persian translation of the Scythians was rejected because of the same reasons, and I fully support that decision. The Scythians were related to the Persians, but they were not Persians! The Khwarezm Shahs, on the other hand, were a totally Persianized dynasty - either of Turkic or Iranian origin - and they have relevance in the Iranian history pages. The Persian name must be given, the Turkish name is totally irelevant and only servs Pan-Turkist propaganda.

Tājik 12:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not misinformed ... in fact, it's the Turks themselvs who are totally misinformed, and much of it has to do with the sick nationalism introduced by Atatürk.

The number of Turkish citizens who may have some Central Asian (=original Turkic) origins is less than 9% (the source is given in the Turkish people article). The Turkish language itself with its lack of original Turkic sounds, the massive adoption of Arabic, Persian, and European loanwords, etc, is the best proof that the overwehlming majority of modern Turkey-Turks are not "Turks" by origin.

But this is not the point. The point is that Anatolian Turks want the entire Turkic history of Central Asia to be "Anatolian Turkish". That's why you push for the Anatolian Turkish spelling of the name "Khorezmshahs" although it has absolutely no relevance: first of all, it's only the Turkish pronounciation of the Persian original, and secondly because it's the typical Anatolian pronounciation ("H" instead of the correct "Kh") of it - although the Khorezmshahs had absolutely nothing to do with Anatolia.

What you fail to understand is that the Turkic languages are only one family, NOT the same language. An Anatolian Turk won't be able to understand Yaqut Turkic ... the difference is as big as between modern English and modern French. What you are doing is the same as claiming that French, English, German, and Italian are "dialects of the same language" ... which is pure nonsense.

Tājik 19:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Because it contradicts the article Anush Tigin Gharchai ... and besides that, has no importance. The Khwarezmshahs neither acted as Persians nor as Turks (they started several "Jihads" against "pagan Turks" in Central Asia; see Encyclopaedia of Islam).

That's the best solution.

If you want keep that paragraph, you should also add that conflict in the Anush Tigin article. But may I remind you that you did not want to accept that?! Tājik 21:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Of course Iranica is authoritative, and therefore the article says "most likely". Funny that YOU have suddenly discovered the superiority of Iranica. As for Turkey: the Turkish people have nothing to do with the Khwarezmshahs ... their history are "Turks" starts with the Ottoman Empire, because they were the ones who - as "Beyliqs" - linguistically Turkicized the population. Claiming that the Khwarezmshahs are part of the Turkish history, is like claiming that the Indo-European migration into India is part of the history of Brazilians. Tājik 21:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Here we go again... Please stop trying to put words into my mouth and cut down on the straw man. I have never said they were part of "Turkish" history.. Gees. Anyways, had enough for today, will continue this later... Baristarim 21:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

You last edit is OK ... the Turkic origin has minor importance, what's important is that he was a slave and not where he came from. As for "Shah": no, he was not the Shah, but only the governor who ruled in the name of the Seljuq Sultan. His son Muhammad became the first Shah of Khwarezm after the Seljuq sultan Ahmad-e Sanjar was defeated. Tājik 12:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I blocked him for 31 hours. As for Tajik, it appears someone else looked at the case. Khoikhoi 06:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

For your efforts and initiation of the Greek and Turkish Wikipedians cooperation board, i added a barnstar to your user page. I hope, it's ok for you. Regards E104421 13:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I will continue to do my best.. Cheers! Baristarim 13:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The info was added by a banned user. WP:BAN states that "any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves". Can you please revert yourself? Thanks, Khoikhoi 18:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem! I like the sound of being "the administrator". ;-) Khoikhoi 19:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, please don't talk to banned users. This only encourages them to keep trolling. Khoikhoi 21:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, same guy/gal. If their IP starts with a "81" or "213" and they come ranting to you about "antiTurk", "Ermeni", "koykoy", etc...then just please ignore (or revert). Khoikhoi 21:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh, well he should probably not be going for any articles. ;-) Khoikhoi 09:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Baris bey, "Turkey" sayfasinin hava, deniz, toprak fotograflarinin coklugu nedeniyle Turkiye ile ilgili yanlis bir goruntu cizdigimizi dusunuruyorum. Bunuda Turkiye'nin gokdelen ve modern mimari ornekleriyle kirabilacegimiz kanisindayim. Istanbul sayfasi bu konuda cok iyi ama Turkey sayfasi hala geride bence... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ltimur (talk • contribs) 00:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Please take a look for Yılmaz Güney and Yılmaz Erdoğan, User:Ozgurgerilla has many disptruptive reverts and personal attack , I made report at here, please translate the Turkish idiom "allah belanızı versin" there. Please note that idiom is plural, targeted to not only me, to group of users. Thanks for your time and help.Must^TC 20:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your time to review the article. — Indon (reply) — 02:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

For sure there is good reason to have it moved, that is its name after all. Not much for me to add to the debate though, views seem to be clearly expressed by the Turkish and other editors. Great work on Turkey btw, good to see a full set of references on that article for once. My workload has just slashed considerably from today onwards so i should be able to contribute some more. I have a couple of books on the Ottoman Empire, i will see if i can add anything to Suleyman the Magnificent, with a bit of expansion, referencing and tidying up that looks like real FA material. Cheers, --A.Garnet 02:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 50	11 December 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Board of Trustees expanded as three new members are appointed	Wikimedia Foundation releases financial audit
Arbitration Committee elections continue, extra seat available	Female-only wiki mailing list draws fire
Trolling organization's article deleted	WikiWorld comic: "Redshirt"
News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

3 hours sleeping is not enough for a person. Please take a rest. Must^TC 07:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Barış, Template:Infobox River TR'yi düzeltebilirmisin. Bu wikipedia'nın neresinden tutacağız bilemiyorum. Biraz suya sabuna dokunmadan bölgelerle,dağlarla,nehirlerle uğraşayım dedim, içinde hiç bir şekilde "Turk" geçmeyeyen yüzlerce madde yazmışlar. Bulmak mümkün değil.Tek tek maddelerin içindeki bağlantılarla tesadüfen ulaşılıyor. Template eklemekten yoruldum. Kolay gelsin.Selam.Must^TC 16:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I took a look and the only new images were very similar to that of the infobox image, which makes it more like filler. Also, section-splitting the storm history would go against the project's policies. I did add a reference to the third storm and second hurricane. Impact is also scarce as the only real references available are the NHC archives. CrazyC83 17:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all the support that you have given to me about Wikipedia. I will try to coopearate with you as much as I can. Do you have an email that I can reach you? And is it appropriate to write in Turkish in the talk pages of Wikipedia English? Caglarkoca 16:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Barış, please go on User talk:Alex Bakharev and considering my messages there"(Yılmazs(Güney and Erdoğan)"&"Civility", please translate correctly Allah belanı-zı versin in english. I need your urgent help. Must^TC 18:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. For Turkish I currently have "Sınırları sikeyim" could you tell me the difference between that and "Sınırları sikerim" ? - Francis Tyers · 19:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

because you seem to be all out to highlight negative aspects in turkey. Singling out Kurds and arabs for backwardness is racism.

There is no rule about putting literacy figures which makes turkey look bad (along with a racist attribution of it to Kurds) and Laz are a discernable ethnicity on the black sea. You do not own this page.

I dont care about kurds actually (i am neutral to them) but i dont want Turkey depicted as some backward ass third world shitehole that your trying to make it look like. I will do anything to stop it. Delete my messages to your pathetic heart's delight, but you cant stop me emailing every single kurdish editor on this page about your sadass additions which not only bash turkey but also lay the blame on kurds

Trying to make it look bad? I have been spending hours to clean that article up so that it can reach FA status. When I rewrote the economy section, I also put in many mentions of the economic development. Expecting me to remove the illiteracy figures simply because I am Turkish is also racist since it assumes that all Turks are part of a "gang" to advertise Turkey. Take a deep breath, and raise the issues in the talk page. All that information that you have mentioned was sourced by hard-rock sources (Turkish government and the BBC), so they will stay. It is not my fault that the literacy figures among women in southeastern Turkey are low.. But they are, and such figures form an integral part of demographics. Don't forget that turning a blind eye is worse, maybe it should be mentioned so that some people will do something about it. In any case, that is not relevant, I only put them there since other country articles mention them too, there was no political agenda. As for the ethnicity list, see my notes on the talk page of Turkey. I didn't touch when you modified Zaza to Circassians, however that list is not going to get any longer, that's my main concern. There is no need to mention twenty ethnicities.. I am sure that when that article gets to FA and is displayed in the main page of Wikipedia, than you will see that it is a better way of "advertising" than some dubious edits in a lame article. That's all I am saying. Baristarim 02:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I've blocked Rowerfc for 24 hours for personal attacks. I also left a comment at Talk:Kızıl River. BTW, are you talking about Terkko (talk · contribs)? Perhaps they are the same person. I'll ask someone to do a check. Cheers, Khoikhoi 04:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sayın Barıştarım

Bildiğiniz gibi 3 ay önce Osmanlıca vikinin açılması için bir oylama başlatılmıştı. Bu ay başında yapılan yeni başvuru formatı değişikliği sebebiyle bütün eski başvurular iptal edildi. Yeni yönetmelik gereği Osmanlıca viki için tekrardan başvuru yaptık. Daha önceki oylamada kabul oyu vermiştiniz. Bu oylamada da [2] bu projeye destek oyu vermenizi rica ediyorum sizden Çalışmalarınızda başarılar dilerim.--Tarih 16:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I have initiated a move request for an incorrectly named article. If you want to participate, go HERE and check it out. The name in wiki is "Lake Scutari", which is totally incorrect. The name is supposed to be "Lake Skadar". Check out the article I referenced. Rarelibra 16:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Baris, Sorry for my late message,I had trip yesterday,.

• I send message to that user(blocked,I saw).
• I saw your comments in edit summaries also.These words can bring only discredit to you,please refrain and calm.

Regards. Must^TC 07:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Gonna wait a little longer on your semiprotect request. I blocked the main offender IP and the others have final warns. Let me know if it happens again -- thanks, NawlinWiki 15:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

My Edit in Turkey page: 18:02, 16 December 2006 172.193.24.83 (Talk) (Correct name is Turkia, like Estonia, Austria, Australia, but changed to a slang name of Turkey by mocking Europeans making fun of Turks in the 16-17th century with the starting decline of Ottoman Emp)

I really believe Turkish Parliament should pass a prompt legislation with immediate international effect on the name of TURKIA to bring an end to this mockery of slang name of TURKEY imposed on us by the English speaking! When I say I am Turkish, half of the time I hear 'Oh you are a turkey arent you!!) If we were not unhappy with it, our airlines would have write Turkey Air on it rather than Turkish, trying to avoid the externally instigated humiliation.

Hi Baristarim. Nice to meet you and thanks for your comment which I answered as below; Have you read the Muazzez Ilmiye Cig, who translated the memoirs of a Sumerian teacher who wrote the history of the emmigration of his people upon sustained drought in their native land in the northeast next to a big sea where colored eye people (scyhtians likely) were their oppressive neighbours (fits to the east of Hazer and Black Seas)? If this was not Central West Asia, where can it be?

Could be true, I am not a professional historian nor an anthropologist. However, I suggest that you raise edits that might seem "controversial" in the talk page, especially for big articles. That's all. I was not judging the merit of your edits, I am only acting in a way so that the page doesn't become the scene of an edit-war. There have been so many edit wars over Ataturk and Turkey that, the article got protected a hundred times. :) Happy editing, however!Baristarim 16:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate it. Also, about your reversal of the'national identity of Kurds', I would like to remind that the national identity of any citizen of Turkish Republic is defined as Turk (like American) if they were part of founding the nation, and the Kurds agreed officially to this, by means of Turkish constitution since the time of Ataturk. PKK and any separatist activity in Turkey has nothing to do with any national identity. I would encourge you to please consider working further on the sentences you reversed as well as perhaps aiming to take them out completely because it has nothing to the with Ataturk, in my humble opinion. Best personal regards 194.81.124.199 16:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

What happened to my contributions that you kindly edited and approved? They are all wiped!

Well.. All I am saying is that it was the version adopted after weeks of discussion on the talk page, and I just cannot take another dispute of the kind :)) I wrote the Turkish Constitution article, I know what you are trying to say however. In fact, I was wondering about the mention of the PKK, I thought that it was going to be taken out and just leave the mention of the Kurds in general. I wonder who put it back in (or if it was never removed in the first place). I will try to take a look at it tonight or tomorrow and maybe contact some of the other contributors. I cannot be in all the places all the time! :) Baristarim 16:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Baristarim. Also, I think there are some other sentences appear very lopsided erroneous and in conflict of better statements touching on the same issues in the article on Turkey, again on headscarf, religous gruntling etc in the legacy section which may also be better off deleted. When you have a chance, can you please take a look at that too? Nice talking to you. 194.81.124.199 16:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure. I am currently working on the main Turkey article, and it has been taking me a long time to get it to a good standard. With some more work it should make the FA. I will look a bit into Ataturk article tonight, and contact another user that has contributed more to the article. When I will be done with the Turkey article and all of its problems have been taken care of, the next on my lists are WikiProject Turkey renovation and Ataturk article.Cheers!Baristarim 16:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

What happened to my contributions that you kindly edited and approved? They are all wiped!

Hi Baristarim, in regards to User:194.81.124.199, Please do not bite the newcomers --AW 16:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

He's definitely not a newcomer, see his contribs. A 2nd edit in which he makes a block threat? A 4th edit in which a user brands another as a sockpuppet and slanders Khoi? Come on... yandman 16:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

:)Baristarim 16:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think a "come on" is necessary. He's only made a few edits since he started in November, and what I was commenting on was the users' edits to Ataturk and Baristarim's response, which was "Selam. Sumerians didn't immigrate from Central Asia. If you want to be taken seriously in Wikipedia, refrain from making such claims :)) Cheers! Baristarim 16:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)", which I think could have been said in a different way. But if Baris is engaging in conversation with him, that's great. --AW 16:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

It is being taken care of. The Ataturk article still needs a lot of work in any case, so there are many disputes in the horizon I am afraid :)Baristarim 16:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I bet you're right! --AW 22:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Your last edit in Haji Baktash Wali is OK. Let's hope that the other guy does not mess it up again. As for List of Turkic states and empires:

• Safavids were NOT a Turkic state. We had this discussion one year ago, and none of the leading scholarly sources supports this view. What seems to be true is that many important members of the family spoke Turkish as their native tongue, including most of the Shahs (not all of them; the Safavids were mixed with all kinds of other royal families).
• The Ottoman Turks were deffinitly Persianate Turkic ... in fact, they are one of the best examples for the deffinition of the word Persianate.

Tājik 16:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Bu adamlar laftan anlamıyorlar. Kaynak gösterilmiş bilgi ekliyorum, onu bile siliyorlar. Wikipedia'da yeniyim, bu konuda ne yapabiliriz, pek bilmiyorum. Apaçık kompleksleri var Türklere karşı. Bunlarla nasıl mücadele etmeliyiz ?--BlueEyedCat 04:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Its alright i can understand im just trying to balance out the scale not to seem bias against Azeris or Armenians. I also added azeri authorities arrested 80 criminals that shows that the Azeri authorities took responsibility of trying to do good for there families and arrest the criminal mobs. Nareklm 06:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

How come I edited Talk:Gay rights in Greece and a few minutes later you turn up? Were you following me? If so I’m flattered that you find me so intriguing :-D //Dirak 11:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

He's right behind you. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 11:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

??? I had that article on my watchlist since October. I have nearly 5000 articles on my watchlist. So cut down on the paranoia, I had enough of people accusing me of stalking. It is the articles that I am watching, not the people :) Baristarim 12:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

So Eirenaie (presumed Greek translation of Baris), I'll tell you something -- feel free to check my edits and follow me (I know you are doing it anyway, I know everyone is as well...) and I will do likewise (as if I'm not doing it already...). Wikistalking requires the mens rea of intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. If all you have is the intent of keeping an eye on users with a history of POV edits and (N)POV pushing yourself then I see no reason why it should be wikistalking. If it is, then half the wiki is liable to be banned, so it doesn't make sense.

As for Turkish, I hate it I hate it I hate it... agglutinative languages are the dregs of all (European) languages. Changing suffixes, the first suffix one learns "-dir" becoming "-tür" in the appropriate circumstances and people who don't have a background in vowel harmony languages are wondering WTF that is. Then after you've added a few suffixes the word is unrecognizable (especially if it ends in -k, for example if you know köpek means dog, try picking it out in the phrase şu kemik köpeğindir if you don't know what you're doing). I don't think I've ever uttered a full phrase in Turkish correctly (thankfully most people in Turkey know some English nowadays so it's not really much of a problem).

Finally, how did you get 5,000 pages on your watchlist? I'm only about 2,000. //Dirak 16:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Buradaki çabalarından ve katkılarından dolayı tebrik ederim.--Doktor Gonzo 18:19, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

There's a few replies to your comments there. Titoxd^(?!?) 19:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem! -- Clevelander 00:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Baristarim, you've got to turn your anger down a few notches before posting here. These edits (and their summaries) are really over the line. Why do you feel it is necessary to attack me for the opinions I've expressed on a survey someone else has launched? Stay calm, stay civil, avoid appeals to emotion and avoid bad language. I'd like us to be able to work together, but lashing out like this will not get you anywhere. Cheers. yandman 11:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)