User talk:Baristarim/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello Baristarim! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! —Khoikhoi 00:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Request

Thank you for your useful intellectual contribution to the Turkish National Security Council page. The following is another request placed at the talk page with some metatagging for improvements. ( 'The author and third party readers are referred to the page history, article history and user history pages regarding why this article is more of a user page, reflecting the views of one single individual who prevents others from legitimate edits and good-faith entries. In respect to his protest, one meta-tag accusing him of misuse of the article as a user page is temporarily removed. The author is encouraged to address in a responsible way in the talk pages to each of the meta tags and mend the deficiencies for consideration of removal of metatag, rather than exhibiting further oppositional defiance.') Your continuing supervision and corrections will be much appreciated. You may remove this message at your convenience. Thank you and have great day.

I do also wish to thank you for constructive and well sourced edits. I hope you will keep an eye on the relevant articles. Bertilvidet 14:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment

Hi, I think your comment belongs at Talk:İzmir. I've also left you a welcome message below. —Khoikhoi 00:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Selam Baristarim. :) Regarding the İzmir article, see WP:V: the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. However, I agree that a better and more reliable source should be provided. Anyways, I hope you like Wikipedia so far, please let me know if you need help with anything. Kolay gelsin! —Khoikhoi 20:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

As for Pontian Greek Genocide, I was just talking about that yesterday. BTW, A.Garnet is another Turkish user who has been trying to make the article more neutral as well (the comment you left him made me think that you thought otherwise). I also support a rename, more details are at the talk page. —Khoikhoi 20:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW

New comments always go at the bottom of talk pages. If you post them at the top there is a possibility that no one will notice them. —Khoikhoi 21:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Pontian Greek Genocide

First off, please stay cool. Throwing insults at people isn't going to solve anything. The first place you might try to go is Requests for Mediation. Just follow the instructions there. Remember that no one will listen to you if you just yell at everyone, you should probably take a break first and then come back. —Khoikhoi 02:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Re genocides...

If you're interested in the many admirable accomplishments of the Young Turks, take a peek at Assyrian genocide. --Telex 14:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I think u should do what Telex says, Baristarim. U, as a "unique" example of democratic person (since i am not [1]), who tries not to push POV [2], not personally attacking to other people [3], and not promoting ethnic hatred [4] (after line 699), u will be able to admit what the Young Turks have done, right? BTW, what exactly pissed u off among the things on my userpage? Hagia Sophia? Or perhpas was it Lord Byron's poem? lol... --Hectorian 20:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you looked at the current state of the the article Armenian-Turkish_relations?? and pls also have a look at its talk page talk:Armenian-Turkish_relations... I rewrote it and enriched it, and there is also a comment by the guy who created the article user:Fedayee who confirmed that it was nice editing.. This deletion that u mentioned ONLY took place because I am new to Wikipedia and I didn't have much experience on how editing works.. The current state of the article CLEARLY shows this, that part of the article is still there and it has much more clarity... I have also copy-edited the PKK article from TOP to BOTTOM, something nobody was willing to do for AGES, if you have any evidence of bias there, pls feel free to change it... Pls stop trolling.. I have lived in Turkey, the US and France (still there) during my life, I went to schools that 99 percent of the people of this world doesn't have the luck to go and I speak three languages fluently, the Hagia Sophia picture definitely DIDN'T piss me off, in fact I see it as a good evidence of how intertwined Turkish and Greek cultures are, and as such, a wealth to be cherished, when I saw the picture, that's not at all what I was thinking, that kind of animosity belongs in the past... ANYONE, Turkish, Greek, French, Russian etc. that puts so many quotes about the greatness of his country is a nationalist, if you can point me to a Turk that has so many quotes on his page, I give you my WORD that I will write on his page exactly what I just wrote. I have not claimed to be the unique (or any) example of democracy and never will... And please let's not skirt the issue, being democratic doesn't mean blindly accepting every political claim of grievance put forward for the sake of political correctness.. You have still not been able to anwser my posts in the talk page... If, for one reason or the other, you got some beef with the Young Turks, pls keep it to yourself UNLESS you got the proof to back it up.. I have not even mentioned or defended, or attacked the Young Turks in any of my postings, where did this come from???? I most probably know about the atrocities that the Young Turks have committed or influenced much more than you do, I have made extensive research on European legal history, as I said I am an international lawyer, I have read hundreds of thousands of pages concerning history, law and philosophy to this day. As i said, again, you don't know me, you don't know what i do in life and you don't know what experiences I had in life to this point.. If you are assuming that all Turks are chauvinistic nationalists, than u r wrong and that's not cool; if u don't however, pls act accordingly.. What I am saying is, however, that allegations have to be substantiated... But, I am definitely not someone to lay down and give people free reign to settle old scores on the other hand, FYI.. If there is enough PROOF of anything, I WILL believe it.. I am an atheist and I believe that the only valid form of proof is the scientific one, and as such, claims have to be proven using the Scientific Method.. Why don't u spend your time trying to answer my posts rather than engaging in ad hominim attacks?? Regards..

Note: Look, I don't want to create animosity, if I did so, I apologize.. I didn't mean to offend u or anyone... But the inaction on this issue has pushed me over the edge.. If we (or other editors that have shown an interest in this page) cannot engage in a constructive dialogue, I will definitely seek outside help.. Baristarim 23:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW, as for the quotes, I have said nothing about them or their authors, I don't think that they are Greek nationalists nor do I think that the content of the quotes are incorrect, quite the contrary actually... I repeat again, I don't think that this issue is a who-is-better issue, it only gives me pleasure that such rich cultures have existed and continue to exist in our planet.. What I am SAYING, however, is the EXCESSIVE USE of such quotes by ANYONE about their country would be nationalistic behaviour, that's all. Pls don't try to portray me as a Greek-hater (culturally or individually) Baristarim 23:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no reason not to believe that the things that u said about yourself are not true. But as i do not personally know u, u also don't personally know me. i did not call u a nationalist, but u did. after personal attacks, now u have just accused me of trolling (first who ever accused me of that!)... Honestly, where do u think i can find good faith to assume? About the Armenian-Turkish relations article and its talk, be sure that i read everything before making that comment here. I also checked the history of the article: u did not do it once [5], but twice [6]. And, since u say u have studied philosophy, this is not a good sign: Το δις εξαμαρτείν, ουκ ανδρός σοφού... Don't think that my unwillingness to reply to your last comment on Talk:Pontian Greek Genocide is because i "cannot" reply... It is because i am tired in explaining the same things over and over again to the same people. As for my quotes, i have nothing to say... If those who said them are not nationalists, i am not either for reproducing them... If i used negative quotes for the Greeks (cause, of course, such quotes exist too), would i be a greek-hater? lol. Personally i avoid to put 'labels' on people, so i am not gonna call u anything. Nor am i going to accuse all modern Turks for what the Young Turks had done. All i care are the facts, and since they exist, i let them talk in everycase. Regards --Hectorian 00:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

So where does that get us really?? Pfff... We will be going around in circles till the morning, so let's call it quits for a while, I got stuff to do for a couple of days anyways.. I still think that we desperately need some outside review of this; I was talking to a French friend of mine about this today and as soon as I started talking he said 'ah, the Greeks and the Turks again, huh???' As for the article in question, my only intention was to make the article better, since my post on the talk page has been answered, I like its current form. When I said I didn't know the editing process, I meant that I should have probably written it in the talk page, before deleting (I wrote the comment on the talk page right after deletion), that's all, I give you my word of honor on that. I know that Mimar Sinan was most probably a Christian convert to Islam, I heard that when I was 10 from my father.. :) Don't forget, I am just getting the hang of Wiki. lol.. let's try to see the glass as half full.. Hmm, if u could give me the translation of what u wrote, that would be a good start, sadly i don't know any Greek :)) Well, have a good day... Baristarim 01:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that everything can be solved through dialogue, so i generally tend to be optimistic in any aspect of my life. About the article in question, i believe u that u had no bad intentions. This is what i believed at first place anyway... but I wanted to saw u that jumbing in conclusions and characterizations about other wikipedians is very easy... U are new here... u will learn things on time... (i have to admit that when i came in wikipedia i was somewhat close minded, not been very willing to see the views of the others). About Sinan, i have visited many times a work of his here in Greece. According to most accounts he was a christian convert to islam... According to my POV (and most of these accounts), he was not Armenian, but Greek:). however, i am not pushing my POV... The translation of what i said: 'making the same mistake twice, is not a wise man's characteristic'. Sorry if i had been too aggressive in some of my posts. Have a nice good day too and welcome in Wikipedia (since i have not welcomed u so far:)...) --Hectorian 01:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I am actually beginning to see what you mean :)) I truly hope to make a positive contribution to Wiki, and I also hope that's what will happen.. I hope to be able to collobarate with you as well where possible in doing so.. Thanks btw.. :)) Take care till next time Baristarim 01:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem concerning this [7]. as a matter of fact, your re-wording is even better. --Hectorian 00:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Late reply

Hi Baristarim. Sorry I couldn't respond earlier, I've been pretty busy in real life lately. It seems that you've worked things out with Hectorian, but of course the larger issue remains unsolved. When I first saw that article back in May, this is what it looked like. I think it's imporved in neutrality since then, but of course still needs a lot of work. BTW, in the Greeks article, the link worked for me. Am I missing something here?

I saw your work on the Adana article, teşekkür ederim! :) That page badly needed copyediting, as it was written mainly by a user who's English was...very bad. Anyways, I hope you continue to edit here. Thanks again. —Khoikhoi 05:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

For the Greek link, it's ok, I wasn't able to open the PDF link, so I managed to open the text version.. I will need some more time to look into that subject.. As for the Adana article, it still needs a few touches, I will get around to it in time.. But I did it as prep work for copy-editing the Istanbul article.. :))) Not that I mean any disrespect towards anyone, I just happen to be a bit of a perfectionist sometimes.. lol.. I will try to attempt it when I am in Istanbul actually, I am going there for one week this Wednesday.. Then I will also try to neutralize some extremely sensitive subject matter, such as the section about the football clubs of Istanbul. It seems that some fans contributed more than others :)) Well otherwise hope you had a good weekend... Baristarim 20:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, yes Istanbul. That article really needs some work. After the "Places of Interest" section it just seems to go downhill. Good luck on that. —Khoikhoi 04:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

As for the Pontian Greek Genocide article, I am actually trying to come up with ideas.. The best thing in my opinion would be the involvement of some trusted and impartial members of Wiki community who can contribute not just their ideas and views, but also their time and efforts by revamping the article from its current version and making the appropriate changes to make this an ordinary encyclopedic entry.. I don't know if the way forward is mediation, arbitration, dialogue etc.. On the other hand, I am worried about the consequences of this article if it stays in its current state.. I don't like the idea that a badly written article has the potential to pit Greeks against Turks. Look what happenned between me and Hectorian. If we met on the street most probably we would have gotten along extremely well from the start. Fortunately things calmed down. That's my worry at this point more than anything else. We simply deserve a better article. The best way is always letting complete strangers investigate the matter at hand, ex letting China-Japan wars to be investigated by a South American etc. Again that's my POV :))) Baristarim 20:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

The first step is probably mediation. As for the Armenian-Turkish relations article, check again. :) —Khoikhoi 04:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation and guidelines

Hi Baristarim, I hope I haven't been too ruff on you on your arrival. I have repaired some red links (hérouville -> Hérouville-Saint-Clair) and accorded some conjugations. I've referred to the guidelines and naming conventions which I advise you to familiarise yourself with, my comments were not against you but towards some of your edits. Although you do have a point concerning the translation of words into English, you must not remember that as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's editors have made a point ot be precise and accurate, as well as sourced. Most politcal and geographical terms are used in their original form as they do not literally exist translated, only in similar term. Commune and region are two examples of terms not translated as they are the official naming of administrative division, as are counties (where the French, comtés, equivalent exists). Enjoy yourself, regards, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

pontian genocide/massacre/whatever

Hi. First of all, I thank you very much for valuing my input. As I have said, however, that was my one and ONLY contribution to the debate. I truly don't care who "wins", I just want the title that *I* think is the least POV -- and after reading through the debate, I think that the suggestion that I re-iterated suits that description. Lest you take this as an indication of me supporting your point of view, please be advised (and I mean no offense) that I think that you have been the most inflammatory party in the debate. Whether you are right or wrong, I don't know -- and frankly I don't care very much -- but PLEASE keep a cool head when responding to others, and regardless of whether you think there's a Greek conspiracy writing the article (which I might actually agree with), please assume good faith. Personally, I think I agree in part with A.Garnet, who (in my humble opinion) has responded to all attacks very level-headedly, simply asking for independent facts. Whether or not I agree with the article's contents, it MUST be backed by independent facts. I will resolutely refuse to get involved in this debate on the talk page. But please, please, please take my advice to heart. I am really not meaning to criticize your beliefs or anything, and I am sure you hold them very strongly. To Wikipedia, however, this is (I am sorry to say) totally and utterly irrelevant. If it weren't, there's a lot that I would have contributed to a number of articles. I CANNOT, though -- I am inherently biased on 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.. I hope you understand that I was just trying to offer what _should_ be a totally neutral alternative to all the bickering. And again, it wasn't my suggestion in the first place. If it gets accepted, all credit for defusing the debate should go to User:Kilhan. Sincerely, Storkk 02:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Source

OK, no problem. Just be more careful, cause such things can be seen as made deliberately (i admit i thought this way). --Hectorian 21:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Have a nice weekend as well! Ciao. --Hectorian 21:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Response

Merhaba. :) You are correct, the dispute tags should stay up. You should also not give up...you really haven't been here for that long! Regarding Panayiotis Diamadis, it should definately be phrased in the "according to..." manner. I see nothing wrong with that. Therefore, please be bold and attribute the source properly. Hopefully you do it at a time when I'm online, so I can monitor whether an edit war is going to brake out or not. Anything else? Cheers. —Khoikhoi 07:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW, have you seen this? Some anon in Dijon just tried to translate some of the article into French! Of course, I've seen weirder edits... (scroll down to the very bottom). Hehehe. —Khoikhoi 07:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Hi,

Firstly apologies for the late reply, i've been away on a break. As you know the article does need a new title and also a complete rewrite, but there is strong opposition to this from the editors there. All i have asked for is impartial sources, these have not been provided simply because they do not exist. There really is little reason other than Greek opinion to allow that article to continue in its current state. When i have time i will get involved in the discussion again, thanks --A.Garnet 09:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC).

Reply

Sorry for the late reply, I am very very busy those days and will be busy before late. I admit that article need a heavy rewrite and probably a name change. I just could not understand the Greek conributors here on Wikipedia, there are plenty of available materials published about the fire of Smyrna and they are short of contributing there, but they seem really attracted by an article which current state rander it compleatly useless and unencyclopedic. Fad (ix) 02:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Only a handful of admins can do it, see m:Hiding revisions and Special:Listusers/oversight. —Khoikhoi 02:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Ecumenical Patriarch

Hi, and welcome back. i've waited a looong time to hear from a Turk honestly saying that he wishes the re-openning of the Theological School of Halki... I do not know, maybe cause u live in liberal France?:). I have read, watched and heard many things about religious freedom in Turkey (mostly about the Greek Orthodox, of course). But nothing can drive me more crazy, than some speeches of Turkish politicians! e.g., i heard today Erdogan talking about the 'religious persecution of the Muslims in W.Thrace' cause they do not elect their muftis! Hectorian 02:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Demagogic politicians i would say, but this may be just my POV:). Hectorian 02:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Nakba

That sounds like a good idea, I admire your persistence. :) Which admin vote? The one where everyone calls me an anti-Turk? Thanks for your kindness. —Khoikhoi 05:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

re:WikiprojectTurkey

I was just wondering how one can become part of the 'wikiproject' of a particular country (or a subject).. Is there some kind of a process or an approval thing? I want to join WikiprojectTurkey and wondering if you can help me show how (maybe it is very simple, I don't know:)).. I can particularly help with copy-editing, just check out my user page.. I am new to Wikipedia (couple of weeks), so I am just trying to feel my way around... Baristarim 04:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Barış, there is no procedure for approving membership:) just add your name to this list. Currently, project is like a dead project. We need more, editors willing to help:) Take care --Ugur Basak 09:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

"An Invitation"

Please, do not feed the troll

"Seriously man, I REALLY hope that we don't meet in real life coz shit can get ugly if we do..." OH MY GOD!!!! NOW I 'M REALLY AFRAID!!!! MUM!!!!!

I cannot understand the point of your message. Did you want to talk about something with me or simply to scare me (brr...). What's your problem with my edits on Pontian Greek Genocide? Do you think that because I 'm a nationalist and a white supremacist I must not be able to edit wikipedia? Democracy Rules! Mitsos 18:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You are a vandal, that's my problem... Calm, calm.. I shouldn't be feeding the troll... Baristarim 20:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Baris

There's a differene between trying and managing to. Your messages and their subsequent deletions were premeditated in my view. If they weren't, you wouldn't have repeated the same action twice; one in the article talk and one in Mitsos' talk. If it makes a difference to you, I have some Turkish wiki-friends; we even exchanged raki/ouzo over DHL. I also dissapprove extremity, whichever side it may come from. All in all, I understand your frustration, but I don't understand your action. In any case, you weren't angry because he vandalised, as you say, but because of his userpage, as you had said then.

And "vandalism" is a double-edged knife, I'm afraid. Both removing tags from really disputed articles and adding them to non-disputed ones can be considered as such. This is a content dispute, and Mitsos (with whom I disagree for his views) did what he thought was 'removal of vandalism'. Since you and A.Garnet are so persistent in this, you'll have to state your reasons. And be damn certain that these reasons are going to be adequately responded. We'll just have to spell out the sources to you, one by one...•N;ikoSilver• 20:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

See the talk page.. Please read the archives, I had stated my reasons... Baristarim 21:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Başlık konusu

Sticky it is...:) Biraz eklemeler yaptım, görürsün. Bence Burak Erdoğan ve Abdullah Unakıtan'ı çağırıp görüşlerini almalı ve soykırım gibi nahoş konularda Türkiye'nin savunmasını biraz da onların yapmalarını sağlamalıyız:) (şaka yapıyorum) Cretanforever

Fine

Thanks, I go along with your comments. Politis 15:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Naming...

Sayın Barış Tarım, Uyarıların için teşekkürler. Kuralları daha iyi incelemek için vakit ayırmam gerekiyor. Aynı konulara takıldığımızı görüyorum. Yardımına gereksinimim olabilir. Her türlü yardıma da hazırım. Saygılar. Mustafa Akalp 17:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Mustafa Akalp'ten

• Ermeni soy kırım iddiaları konusunda Cumhuriyet'te 2-3 gün önce duyurulan beş kitaplık bir çalışma var. (Ermeni ve Rus kaynakları kullanılarak). Kitapları en kısa zamanda bulmaya çalışacağım. Seninle de paylaşmak isterim.

Sevgi ve saygılar.Mustafa Akalp 18:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

yapmak değil demek. onlar doğru koymak soykırım içinde

Baristarim, bakmak e-posta

Re: Reply

I understand you very well. It is hard to stay cool sometimes, I've also been there! (tried to convince westerners our ex-king is not a king anymore... damn brits and bourgeois gentilhommes americans... :) ) It might have been unwise of me however to come into the discussion out of the blue. After all I'm no mediator, we have the cabal for that. Good luck with the dispute, even though I disagree with your side (never liked legalese). Some of my compatriots there don't seem willing to concede anything. As for, 87.203.171.38 I'm pretty sure it's User:Mitsos. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 19:21, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Naming Conventions..

Wikipedi kurallarına çok aykırı olurmu bilmiyorum ama,

Adlandırma ve diğer adların kullanımı konusunda bir yaklaşım öneriyorum 1- Bu konuda bir çalışma komisyon seçimi; eşit sayıda (2-2, 3-3 gibi)Yunan ve Türk aktif wipedist(bunların seçimi ilgili ülke proje gurubuna üye olanlar tarafından yada başka bir yolla yapılabilir), 2-Bu komisyon, kendi dışından Türk ve Yunan olmayan başka bir kullanıcı/yönetici üzerinde anlaşarak komisyona dahil eder. 3-Bu komisyon, sistematik bir yaklaşımla, tartışmaya konusunu kategorize eder. 4-Her kategori ayrı ayrı ele alınarak uzlaşmaya gidilir. 5-Uzlaşılan kategoriler listelenir.(Belli bir süre?, oylama?) 6-Uygulama gerçekleştirilir.?? Şu anda ki "Demokratiki" yaklaşımda, her kafadan bir ses çıkıyor. "Bilgi sahibi olmadan fikir sahibi olanlar(Uğur Mumcuya selam olsun)" ortalığı karıştırıyor. Genel olarak paylaşmadan önce görüşlerini almak istiyorum. Selam. Mustafa Akalp 08:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

If you bother to take a look at the etymology page of Istanbul, you ll see the Greek name. If there had been a big Greek population in Istanbul, it would be logical to have it in Istanbul article. But, there are less than 2000 Greeks in Istanbul. In Thessaloniki article, the Turkish name should have been placed in the etymology or history section. Actually, it was in the history section a month ago. What is your reason to have the Greek name in the first sentence of the Istanbul article? Osmanaral 03:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

You should have taken a look at the naming conventions discussion before writing it. I support the view by Politis. You still did not answer my question..What is your reason to have the Greek name in the first sentence of the Istanbul article even though it is in the etymology page? Osmanaral 04:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I have seen that you endorsed the Telex's view. Calm down - you are very excited. :) Who is moving who in Istanbul? That's not my worry. What are you talking about? :D And, am I so offensive? I am not changing the Istanbul article as you see now. I am trying to see your logic of having the Greek name in the first sentence of the article even though it is in the etymology page. The Istanbul article is not only for Greeks or Turkish. Adding the Greek name in the first sentence is only to the favor of Greeks. And, it is Greek chauvinism. If you are saying that it is for historical reasons, the Constantinople is more appropriate - which was used worldwide. By the way, do not think me as an Anti-Greek, I like Greek culture, music, etc. Osmanaral 06:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar time

		The Original Barnstar
		For your reasonableness, hard work, and efforts to improve Wikipedia on almost every level—I award you this barnstar. Tebrikler! :-) —Khoikhoi 04:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Bir şey değil. :-) As for the emails, things are fine. It turned out it was all just one (sick) joke on Cretanpride's part. I've been pretty good, just under a lot stress lately—how about you? —Khoikhoi 01:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

3RR warning/violation

Please, do not feed the troll

This is not really a warning but an announcement. You have violated 3RR in Pontic Greek genocide. If someone reports you, you risk getting a block. Miskin 23:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

No, I didn't, I honestly tried to improve the wording in every single one of my edits to the phrase it was not granted, it is obvious in my edit summaries.. Baristarim 23:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

.

Your whereabouts

I paid a little visit to your userpage and learned that you are an atheist originally from Turkey, who has lived in Saudi Arabia, USA and France... I just had to say that I immediately thought that you must be one of the most surreal people on this planet. :-) Best regards.--Húsönd 00:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

the EU and the genocide

Please read my reply on the discussion page. Thanks. Yandman 08:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

No not giving up

Not giving up, just very tired of all this. Thanks, --A.Garnet 08:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Constitution of Turkey

Hi, Baristarim. I've had a quick look to your recent contributions to the Constitution of Turkey article. I think the article is a lot improved now and the information you added seems comprehensive, well done!

Having said that, I have a few remarks / suggestions:

• The article still lacks a history section and there is still no mention of the previous constitutions of Turkey. I see on your userpage that you are a lawyer from Turkey, so I guess you should know better than me about tr:1921 Anayasası, tr:1924 Anayasası, and others. There should definitely be a mention of the first constitution by the first TBMM and all the following revisions up to the current one.
• It could also be good to create English versions of the articles on the Turkish Wikipedia I linked above and refer to these from within the main article.
• The external link you provided for the ratification of UDHR does not seem to work.

Regards, Atilim Gunes Baydin 13:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I will have a look at it, the history section still needs to be added.. I will have to make some research on it, since it is some old stuff, so caution has to be taken before transposing historical stuff to articles.. I hope that I will get around to it tomorrow.. :)) I will check the link right away.. Baristarim 13:27, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the link, I got a good one at that.. it is a complete review of the TC by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.. [8] Baristarim 13:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for a great work on that article! It really has improved markedly thanks to your edits. I'll come back with minor edits - but have no doubts that your hard work indeed is appreciated. Kolay gelsin. Bertilvidet 14:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. I checked the new UN reference regarding the UDHR. And it's good that you added the date of ratification (the reason I did click on the link was to find the ratification date and incorporate that into the paragraph). Please keep up the good work. Atilim Gunes Baydin 19:11, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Republic of Western Trace

Madde ile biraz daha ilgilenebilirmisin. Selam Mustafa Akalp 17:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop creating articles like that

Please don't do this.

Instead, you should create an article within your userspace. An example is instead of creating an article Turkey Constitution, you would create it as User:Baristarim/Turkey Constitution and when it was somplete, you would move it to the actual pagename.

Thanks. ~ Flameviper 17:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Madde

Sorry for my late reply, I've been pretty busy lately. First off, Miskin and Tzekai are definately not the same person—trust me on this. :-) The place to go in the future is WP:RFCU, however. BTW, can you do me a favor? Would you mind translating this to English? You don't have to do it if you don't want to, but it's really brief. Ciao! —Khoikhoi 04:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again. —Khoikhoi 05:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Alright then. :-) —Khoikhoi 06:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Hrisi Avgi

Hello Baris. Would you please try not to flamebait Mitsos, at Talk:Hrisi Avgi? I've put really a lot of work on that article and after my exams are over I plan to put it up for peer review, so I'd really appreciate it if you didn't help make the talk page a battlefield. It is a really controversial topic and it could easily turn nasty if nationalists start turning up there. I will remove your comments trying to keep the thing civil, I hope you don't mind. Btw, sorry for my flamebait at the pontian genocide, was just trying some lame humor there. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 10:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanx man. From what you tell me, maybe a Wikiholiday would be a good idea, you know to get yourself a bit more detached from the bad aspects of the wiki and return fresh, focusing on the (many) good ones. I've done it and it helps you know. And don't worry about ongoing disputes you're in, you real life is more important that some internet website. ("oh yesss precioussss, take a holiday -gollum! gollum!- preciousssss and then the pontian genocide and all the articleses will be oursssssss, yessss precioussssss....." -shit... lame humour again...) --Michalis Famelis (talk) 10:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Constitution of 1921

Hi again, I checked the article and it just seems wonderful! Yes of course, the link to 150 personae non gratae of Turkey could be more appropriate in the article of 1924. Please feel free to move / modify my contribution since you seem to know what you're doing. Merci bien! Atilim Gunes Baydin 10:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Republic of Western Thrace

Hello Baristarim. I think that Mustafa Akalp's idea is quite good. i do not know though which the process is to create the committee and what the process of discussion will be there. as for the Turkish Republic of Western Thrace, i really think that both me and Mustafa made a mistake... in Google UK, "Turkish Republic of Western Thrace" gives only 1 (one) hit, and that coming from a forum! however, "Gumuljine Republic" gives many more... take a look yourself, cause i think we'll have to move it back. Cheers! Hectorian 11:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, no offence taken. Miskin 18:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

OK!

Much work:) Cretanforever

Turkish Constitution of 1924

Hi, Baristarim. I think it's not a good practice to leave a portion of Turkish text in an article on the main namespace of the English wikipedia (obviously, when not a quotation or something). That looks pretty bad and I'm sure it's against several guidelines as well. The better way to do it is to create a subpage under your Wikipedia:User page and transfer the work to the article space when it's ready (or at least, totally in the target language). Just wanted you to know. Atilim Gunes Baydin 21:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, that was fast! I could also translate that into English but chose not to do so since I got the impression that you enjoy doing that yourself. Please let me know if you need an extra hand with anything. Atilim Gunes Baydin 21:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Re

Hello Baristarim, and thanks for the message:). Firstly, don't say that u are offended with the comparison i made with N. Korea. i avoid making personal attacks, and if someone saying something against Kemal, it is certainly not a personal attack for a Turk. i am not sure if he was the one who said that the sumerians were turks, but i am sure that he said that turks are aboriginal in Anatolia, so that was more or less what my the comment was about, and this what the turkish schoolbooks say (no need to mention that this is unhistorical and stupid...). don't be so sure that greek politicians ever said Greece for the Greeks that time... i've never heard it. as for his worship in Turkey today, i wouldn't say that "it is just some people", but it is just the state and army that are trying to make him appear as a "god". listen, there is no country in the world that did not have a national leader. and all the national leaders of each country contributed the most for the independance and freedom and democracy of their people... Italy had Garibaldi (the man who unified the country), Greece had Venizelos (the strongest leader we had), France had de Gaul (who liberated France from the Nazis), USA had Washington. but in no other country the portraits of a leader are in every single state building, in every single school (large portraits in the entrance!), in various places in the cities, in army camps, in coffee shops, etc etc; in no other country that leader and his ideas are mentioned by the media and the politicians that much and in every occasion. i know that Turkey needs to support his "personal cult"... for internal reasons. As for the 'Megali Idea', me, all the people i know here, and also the greek schoolbooks and politicians, do not like him, not cause he "single-handedly stopped the Megali Idea"... the 'Megali Idea' was a historical and political concept, for the Greeks, what made the most difference and harm, and what they do not like kemal and his ideas for, is the expulsion, extermination and uprooting of the Asia Minor Greeks. Hectorian 01:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

People of the Ottoman Empire

Please see Category:People by nationality. Demographics is science. "People" category is for individual people. Mukadderat 05:05, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

"People of..." is good style. "Hungarian people": who they are: People from hungary or Hungarians by ethnicity?. Also may be not good my English, but "Guinea-Bissauan people" or "Papua New Guinean people" sound funny for me. Mukadderat 05:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

fact !

selam lan , i see ur edit on article "Jeddah" ( cidde ) , first of all im not wahhabi and im against wahhabism but we all know that praying at someone's tomp (grave) , is againt the islam law , not against the Wahhabism only :) , thats why i think i have to return what u had edited :) teshekkur dostum :D Ammar 17:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Salam.. I am sorry, I think you are mistaken, I didn't do that edit :)).. i was just scanning through categories on wikipedia and updating them so that they are listed under correct categories, if you take a look at the history of the article you will see that it was another user that made that edit before I updated the category - take a look at his edit [9] and my edit [10].. As for praying at someone's grave, I know that it is against Islam, and not just Wahhabism :) On hindsight, I should have reverted that edit myself.. cheers! Baristarim 21:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

oops sorry mister :D hehe yeh i see its done by someone with an IP address , could be some bullshitter without a goal hehe :D sorry friend :) 212.138.64.176 22:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Selçuklular

I don't think anyone's denying that they were Turkish. For example, Khosrow said here that he never said "that Seljuks were Persians". They're just saying that they adopted Persian culture and language once they migrated to Persia. —Khoikhoi 02:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have a hard time trying to see what is good faith/bad faith [11].. Where is the line between adopting persian customs and being assimilated ? I don't know, there seems to be some really fishy POV pushing going on the Seljuq family had become extremly Persianized in culture and language, to an extent that they were regarded "Persians" by outsiders??.. I don't know but I just don't understand where this will to minimize Turks comes from, it is not like they came from Mars u know.. I had enough of this.. Baristarim 02:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't give up! :-( —Khoikhoi 02:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I am definitely not giving up for the moment, but I had enough of this minimization of Turks, u know, if you let some people have their way, they would get away with all sorts of historical revisionism.. There are way too many judgements passed Azeris are Iranian people that speak Turkish?? Azeris are not Iranian people that speak Turkish.. They might be Persian, but they are definitely NOT Iranian.. It is like claiming that ancient Romans are all Italians!!! French and Spanish are all originally (more or less) Roman, but they are NOT Italian.. I am just saying that you become aware of some other types of POV pushing that is taking place, some people make so that Turks are Iranians originally.. Nothing can be farther than the truth.. Iranians are shias whereas Turks are Sunni, so much for same culture, same religion.. Just because Turkey and Iran are neighbors, it doesn't mean that Turks are Iranians... Baristarim 03:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

You see, but many people see it the other way, that pan-Turkism is responsible for the historical revisionism. Regarding the Azeris, there are three main veiws as to what they are, see Azerbaijani people#Origins. The view that they are "just an Iranian people who happen to speak a Turkic language" is common among most Iranian people that I know. Regardless of whether it's right or not, it's still a POV, just like the POV that they're a Turkic people. As it's not up to up to determine which one is right or not, so we include both on Wikipedia. —Khoikhoi 03:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, you may have been to Azerbaijan, but have you been to Iranian Azerbaijan? Most Azeris live in Iran, you know. My friend is Persian and he told me that many Azeris in Iran prefer not to be called Turks—that's why to be safe, he simply uses "Azeris" as not to offend certain people. Also do not forget that there are Azeris loyal to the Iranian state, many of whom are even Pan-Iranists! Zereshk's father, for example, is Azeri. Another Iranian Azeri editor I know, Persian Magi is an Iranian nationalist as well. I understand what you said about pan-Turkism, however. I know that most Turks do not support it, just like most Hungarians do not support going back to the Kingdom of Hungary's borders. I don't know about Babur, but on the Nezami page, for example, there was a debate whether he was Persian or Azeri. Nezami wrote poems in which he insulted Turks, yet we finially came to a compromise not to state his ethnicity in the intro, because that's not what he was famous for—he was famous for his magnificent poems.

Regarding the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, it was because a robot edited the redirect page, so I'm trying to get it deleted to make way for the move. In the future you can just ask an admin to delete it for you. Kolay gelsin... —Khoikhoi 05:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. :-) Yes, I know that as well, such as the village guards, right? I think someone can be an Iranian nationalist and still be an Azeri at the same time (and still by choice). It really depends who you ask. As for the Iranian government, all they really care about right now is Islam, not pan-Iranism.

BTW, the Seljuq dynasty page does have the {{History of Turks}} template, it's just at the bottom fo the page. —Khoikhoi 06:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Selam Barış, Selçuklu Hanedanlığı'nı gördüğün gibi bazı propagandacı İranlılar kendi tarihlerine dahil ediyorlar. Eğer Khosrow II, Tajik, Ali doostzadeh, Arash the Bowman,ManiF ve Heja Helweda incelersen sürekli Türkler aleyhine kötü şeyler yazıyorlar örneğin Azerilerin aslında İranlı olduğunu iddia ediyorlar.Iranian Theory Regarding Azeri's Ben genelde tek başıma bunlarla mücadele ediyorum, umarım sende bu kullanıcılarla mücadelede beni yanlız bırakmazsın.Zaparojdik 11:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry baristarim but I dont want to spend more time arguing here than is healthy :) --A.Garnet 09:50, 30

September 2006 (UTC)

I know pov pushing has become quite an issue lately with Turkish related articles. I try my best to get my argument across, but it really is tiring. I mean this is an encylopedia, and i really dont have time to chase after nationalist edits all day. Its a shame Wikiproject Turkey has become inactive, perhaps someone could restart it by getting people to work on a article to FA status, at least that would be constructive and not a waste of time like it arguing with people who simply will not compromise their nationalist views. --A.Garnet 13:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Seljuqs

Please, do not feed the troll

Do whatever you want. But be clear that we will undo it. Changing the name of the article to "Seljuq dynasty" was voted and agreed upon, you can't just switch it back to "Seljuq Turks", only because your nationalistic feelings are hurt.

Your threats are meaningless to me and only prove that you lack sources and evidences. I have quotes authirtative sources - namely Encyclopaedia Iranica and Encyclopaedia of Islam, and if you delete these sources only because of your nationalistic behaviour, be sure that admins will ban you.

The Seljuqs were a dynasty, and this article is about the dynasty, not about their Turkic ancestry. Many other articles, like the Safavid dynasty and Ghaznavid Empire, have the same lemma. If youn't stand that, it's your own problem, not that of Wikipedia.

The way you are talking, the total lack of sources, your failure to provide a SINGLE OFFICIAL Seljuq source written in Turkish, or a single proof that the Seljuqs were Turkic-speaking ... all of these point to the fact that your major aim is to push for nationalistic POV. We have dealt with these kinds of Pan-Turkic nonsense before, and we will deal with it again.

This is not Turkey, where every intellectual is put into prison because of "insulting the Turkish nation".

Tājik 14:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, you can blame me for being a pan-turkist or whatever, but pls take a look at my user page, as well, I am atheist, and a well educated man such as you would know that atheists don't become pan-turkists, nor pan-turkists want them to do so.. I am also a communist, so throwing out such insults by calling me nationalistic POV pusher is also inappropriate.. Seljuq dynasty can be discussed under Seljuk Turks.. Please look at what I posted on the talk page of the article, I also put sources about Seljuk dynasty being Turks, and not from some loony encyclopedia like enc:Iranica (ica??) but from Encyclopaedia Brittanica, whatever you might believe I bring my sources with me when I talk, Brittanica also refers to Seljuks as a Muslim Turkmen dynasty, when I will add these to the article, they will all be well-sourced from Britannica and others.. And don't warn me like I am some sort of school boy, I most probably know more about the world and travelled it more than you have.. I know wikipedia, I never said I was going to remove any sources, everything that I will add have proper and good sources (not the weirdo Iranica encyc, Brittanica is ten times better than that supposed encyc), read my posts on the talk page before trying to push your pan-iranist views.. This is also not afganistan where everyone makes a living by the death of young people (heroin) Baristarim 14:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Sagol Baris, bende elimden geldigi kadar mucadele etmeye calisiyorum bu lanet Iranlilarla ama ne yazik ki Ingilizce'm pek mukemmel sayilmaz. Turko-Iranian sayfasi cok onemli cunlu Ozbekistan, Turkmenistan ve Azerbaycan'i Turk ve Iran karisimi olarak gostermeye calisiyorlar, bu resmen Turk dunyasini bolmeye calismaktir ve POV'dur bence Wiki Project Turkey'den yardim istenmeli. Tesekkurler katkilarin icin, Turklerde diger milletler gibi birlik olmali. Greetings Zaparojdik 17:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Please, do not feed the troll

I do not care what you are and what you believe in. But it's very clear that you are pushing for a pan-turkic POV. Only the fact that you call the renowned and well-respected Encyclopaedia Iranica "loony" (which, btw, is the standard speech of ALL Pan-Turkists in Wikipedia) proves that you are no expert on this issue, and that you are only here, because your Turkish-nationalistic feelings are hurt.

I do not care ... I am neither Turk, nor Iranian. I am from Afghanistan, born to a mixed Azeri and Pashtun family (that's why I chose the neutral name "Tajik"), and I am into oriental studies in real life.

I am only interested in the credibility of Wikipedia, and it just happens that in almost ALL Wikipedias, the articles related to Turks are totally messed up by Turkic nationalists. In the German Wikipedia, for examples, more than 100 articles were deleted because it was totally impossible to repait the mess. Several Turkish members were banned, including user de:Benutzer:Postmann Michael who has created most of the maps and graphs regarding Turkic history.

The English Wikipdia is not that wose, but it constantly being attacked by Pan-Turkist trolls.

You reject the Encyclopaedia Iranica, well, that's your problem ... leading experts on Oriental studies have a totally different opinion (see: [12]), and you can be sure about it that Wikipedia admins rather go with credible sources than some wanna-be experts who actually know nothing about the Seljuqs or Muslim history. You have already disqualified yourself by proving that you do not even know the difference between "Persian" and "Iranian".

Tājik 14:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

FWIW Britannica spells it "Seljuq", and lists "Seljuk" as an also known as. IMO the Wikipedia article has a serious defect: they omit that the term can also be spelt "Seljouk". --Tzekai 14:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

And you have already disqualified yourself by not responding to what Britannica says a Muslim Turmen dynasty and Seljuq Turks (seljuk-seljuq don't matter).. You are also here because your nationalistic views are hurt for some reason.. Turkey or Turkish people don't need a wikipedia article to tell them what is their history, so I couldn't care less about my nationalistic feelings getting hurt. You have also disqualified yourself by not understanding the difference between pan-turkist and communist and that they are completely incompatible.. Your attempts to discredit others by name calling won't get you anywhere mr pust-un. I also don't care where you are and what you do (hopefully not afganistan though as pointed above :)) but you also don't understand the fact that Iranians cannot impose on the English language, please go to a law and political sciences school to learn why Persian and Iranian would not be the same thing in English.. You can pretend that your definitions are valid, but so far you have not responded to my comments in the talk page.. I have my sources, Brittanica clearly refers to them as Seljuq Turks and as a Muslim Turkmen dynasty.. Even if your claims are true about iranica, Brittanica is still the standard as an encyclopaedia and your claim that they are some wanna-be experts who actually know nothing about the Seljuks or Muslim history (which, BTW, is the standard speech of ALL Pan-iranists in wikipedia) is not valid.. I will also add what I have mentioned about definitions with proper sourcing, and if you remove them be sure that admins will ban you. I have dealt with pan-iranism before and be sure that I will deal with it again.. This is also not the country where we build nukes in our garage so stop trolling... Baristarim 15:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

You totally miss the point, Baristarim. The discussion is not about the Turkic origin of the Seljuqs which has NEVER been disputed (see the very first sentense of the article: The Seljuqs ... Muslim dynasty of Oghuz Turkic descent that ruled parts of Central Asia and the Middle East from the 11th to 14th centuries.) The discussion is about wether the Seljuqs were still Turkic-speaking after decades of rule in Persia, or wether they were linguistically assimilated by the Persian majority, the same way the British and Dutch royals were assimilated by their subjects. THIS IS THE POINT. Your quotes from Britannica do NOT ANSWER this question. You cann call them "Seljuk Turks", "Seljuk Turkomans", or whatever you want ... this still does NOT answer the question.

You purposely ignore FACTS that there is not A SINGLE HISTORICAL DOCUMENT left from the Seljuq era that was written in Turkish.

Comparing the Seljuqs to other Iranian royals of Turkic origin, it seems clear that the Seljuqs, too, were assimilated by the Persians just as did the Ghaznavids, Ilkhans, Timurids, Mughals, Qajars, and Pahlavis. This was nothing uncommon in that region, because almost ALL ruling houses sooner or later adopted the Persian language as their "house languages". Even the Pashtun kings of Afghanistan, the Muhammadzai, had become Persian-speaking, to en extent that the last king of Afghanistan, Zahir Shah - though nominally a Muhammadzai Pashtun - does not even know Pashto.

What you are doing is very clearly a push for a Pan-Turkist POV. You may call yourself "communist", but your writing prove that in real you are a Turkish nationalist, ignoring facts!

Instead of quoting useless sentenses from Britannica (which have nothing to do with this discussion), try to find authoritative and historical documents proving that the Seljuqs remained Turkic-speaking! You own opinion and words are nothing but hot-air!

As for the spelling: it's Seljuq, not the modern Turkish pronounciation "Selcük". The "S" is pronounced like the "s" in "super", the !q" is pronounced like the "q" in "Qur'an". Modern Turkish pronounces the name wrong, because certain Altaic intonations have been lost in that language.

Tājik 15:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Atheism

Hi Baris, I'm glad to learn you are an Atheist, than let's join us at WikiProject Atheism Greetings--Zaparojdik 20:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, no problem :)) Baristarim 18:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for joining ;) Zaparojdik 22:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

(continuation)

Well, {{History of Iran}} is vertical (if it was at the bottom it would leave a lot of extra white space). If {{History of Turkey}} was in the middle of the article it would probably mess up the text. So you see, it's just a matter of aesthetics. ;-) I never knew about the tacit agreement, that's pretty interesting. You must not forget, however, that the Rep. of Azerbaijan still funds separatist movements for Azeris in Iran.

As for Persian Empire, I found two sources: [13] and [14]. Both of them seem to agree with you, but I'm not really sure...take care. —Khoikhoi 00:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Mehmet Yasar Buyukanit

Makaledeki "Buyukanit himself has not refuted the Sabbatean claims though--not even in his harsh commencement talk on August 30th." satirini cikarmakta israr etmenizin sebebi nedir acaba?

Tesekkurler... (Lutfen cevabi alta yaziniz) 24.128.249.120 02:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Cunku komplo teorilerine fazla yer verilmemesi gerekir. Insanlar haklarinda çikan her aptal iddiayi yanitlamak zorunda degiller.. Ayrica harsh kelimesi subjektif bir kelimedir.. 11 Eylulun amerika'nin duzenledigine dair birçok komplo teorisi var, ama bunlarin hiçbiri o makalede yer almamaktadir.. Ayni sekilde insanlarin hiçbir zaman Ay'a ayak basmadiklarina dair de teoriler var.. Aslinda iyi ki soylediniz, bu orneklerin isiginda, ilerde tamamen o komplo teorisini çikaracagim çunku o teoriyi ayakta tutan hiçbir bilimsel kanit yok, onun o makalede herhangi bir yer edinmesinin tek sebebi birkaç Islamist web-sitesinde çikan komplo teorileri, ve bu da yeterli degil .. O cumle, sanki bu teori dogruymus da hasir alti ediliyormus gibi bir intiba vermektedir.. Burasi bir blog veya gazete degildir, bilgiler ansiklopedik degere sahip olmak zorundadir.. Saygilar.. Baristarim 17:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks#Conspiracy_theories ile baslayalim o halde. Ben, 11 Eylul'un Amerikan Hukumeti tarafindan (direk yaptirilmis olmasa da) onceden bilindigini ve engellenebilecegini dusunuyorum. Engellenmis olsa Afganistan ve Irak Isgali icin kamuoyunu ikna etmekte zorlanacakti neoconlar... NY Times da bu dogrultuda yayimlanan onlarca makale ve haberder bihaber olmazsiniz. Herneyse konu bu degil.

dog)Buyukanit olayinda, Hukumet'in birkac "kraldan daha kralci" bakanini saymazsak, kendisi de dahil kimse "Sabetayist degildir" demedi. Evet herkes sabetayist oldugu gerekcesiyle engellenmeye calisilmasina karsi cikti, kopurdu, doldu tasti. Ancak iddiayi bertaraf etmek icin Fatih Cekirge'nin sundugu Filistin Cephesi argumanindan baska bir sey yok ortada. Oysa secere malum. Kimse o konuda agzini acmiyor. Isim gelenegi de bizzat Ilgaz Zorlu'nun degindigi bir konu. Mesela, Fethullah Gulen icin bu tur iddilar ortaya atildiginda avukati cikip aninda tekzip etmis ve Gulen'in seceresini aciklamistir. Buyukanit laiklik ve teror konusunda asiri hassas diyerek topu taca atmak, avukatin "F.G. vatansever ve egitim duskunu bir din adamidir" demesi gibidir, zira konu laik veya pkk karsiti olup olmamasi degil burada, sabetayist olup olmadigi...

Konu hakkinda biraz arastirma yapmis olsaniz, ordu ve disleri'nde sabetayist oldugu iddia edilen hayli komutan ve elci oldugunu bilirsiniz. Turkiye-Israil iliskilerinin de (Filistin yanlisi musluman ve sosyalistler ezici cogunlukta olmasina ragmen) temelde ordu ve disisleri uzerinden sekillendigi zaten malumunuzdur.

Bu konu benim icin o kadar da onemli degildi esasinda, ancak sizin o satira obsesif yaklasmaniza da sasirdim acikcasi. Sabetayist iseniz, dindasinizin dinini inkar etmek yerine Ilgaz Zorlu gibi durustce gercekleri kabul edip, kendi inancinizi Buyukanit gibi medya figurleri uzerinden kamuoyu onunde daha sempatiklestirmeyi deneyebilir, inanc ozgurlugu semsiye altina gorebilirsiniz. Ya da hic ugrasmadan "OK, he is Sabbetean. But, so what?" diyebilirsiniz. Turkiye, laik bir ulke nihayetinde...

Sabetayist degilseniz, "Buyukanit, (buraya "bircok gazeteciye gore" ifadesini eklemeyi dusunuyorum, dilerseniz link de verebilirim) sert 31 Agustos konusmasinda bile sabetayist iddialarini tekzip etmedi" satirindan nicin o kadar rahatsiz oluyorsunuz?..

Yarin bir gun kendisi cikip sabetayist oldugunu soylese ne olacak, gorevi geri mi alinacak sanki?

(Bendeki anti-obsesyonizmin kendisi de obsesyona donusmez umarim.)

Saygilar...

?? Hayir sebayatist degilim, hiç bir zaman da olmadim, butun sulalem Istanbul Turkudur (muslumanlastirilmis rum vs falan da degil).. Ayrica 11 Eylulun Amerika yaptigini dusunecek kadar da paranoyak degilim, ben o olaylar olmadan dort hafta once ve olaylardan uc hafta sonra New York'taydim.. Siz herhalde o cumlenin ingilizce'de ifade etmis oldugu seyin farkinda degilsiniz ve de buranin bir gazete veya blog olmadigini anlamadiniz.. Burasi bir ansiklopedi, bu da demektir ki bazi seylerin yazilmasi için arkasinda bilimsel kanitlar olmasi gerekir.. Buyukanit'in Yahudi veya herhangi birsey olmasi birsey ifade etmez, eger Turk'um diyorsa o da Turk'tur, gerisi beni ilgilendirmez, ayrica Turkiye laiktir, isteyen insan istedigi dine sahip olabilir.. Fethullah Gulen'le Buyukanit'i karsilastirmaniz bile dusundurucu, Gulen gibi orospu cocuklariyla ayni kategoriye girdigini dusunmuyorum ama tabi o sizin dusunceniz.. Dedigim gibi, yanit vermemis olmasi hic bir sey ifade etmez, siz ilk once onun sebatik olduguna dair Osmanli arsivlerinden, bilimsel kanitlar getirin, o zaman istediginiz seyi ekleyebilirsiniz, burasi bir ansiklopedi lutfen unutmayin, birkaç Islamci sitede lagaluga yapildi diye buraya eklenecek degildir... Sebatik olsaydim, inanin bana derdim, sizden izin alacak degilim...

eger yine beni komplo teorileri ile mesgul edecekseniz, lutfen benimle bir daha irtibat kurmayiniz, eger bilimsel bir konudan bahsedecekseniz istediginiz gibi not birakabilirsiniz... Baristarim 22:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Kusuru bakmayin, sanirim onceki mesajim fazla sert idi. Nitekim sizin de gittikce nahos bir uslup takindiginizi goruyorum. Dilerseniz biraz ara verelim. Uzerinde anlasacagimiz onlarca ulusal mesele (Amerika'da yasayan Turkler olarak birlikte savunacagimiz onca arguman) varken, Buyukanit'in sabetayist olup olmamasina takili kalmayi dogru bulmuyorum, ozellikle de henuz gerekli nezaket kivamini yakalayamamisken... Daha genis bir zamanda, daha sakin bir atmosferde ve daha olgun bir tavirla tekrar yazismak dilegiyle...

Esenlikler :)

Ok, no problems.. It is way too late here, I have been running around (virtual running, around the net:)), so sorry if I came out a bit angry.. What can I say? :)) Well hope to corroborate in the future, we definitely need some help around here.. :) You know, there are so many people that pass by here that when I saw that you only had an IP address, I assumed that you were just trying to mess around.. There are many people like that.. When you assume, u make an ... ! I would advice u to get a user name and a user page so that people will know that you are serious.. Take care! Baristarim 00:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

you criticism of my edits

What edits are you talking about? I've got a funny feeling about this... Yandman 16:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Revert

Excuse me for the mistake. I'm starting to use a new anti-vandal tool, and made that mistake. I thought it was a vandalism for the first look. I'll be much more cautious. Sorry again. Cheers, NCurse _work 17:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

On languages

Is English really compulsory? If it is, then I'm also guilty of violating the rules at User talk:GrWikiMan :-( --Tzekai 18:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Request

Selam Barış! Can you please keep an eye on the Arkoi (Nergiscik adası), Fournoi Korseon, Gyali, and Pharmakonisi articles for me? I'm sure you've heard of the Grey Zones, right? —Khoikhoi 20:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, just follow the instructions at Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. It interested me–what you said–about Iran and Turkey. Other interesting discussions I've seen at Wikipedia can be found here and here, the latter of which relates a lot to the link you gave me. BTW, I heard the PKK declared ceasefire?

On another note, would you mind translating the following for me (just the bit about Tüfekçi)? It's from this website:

Thanks! —Khoikhoi 01:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Huh? I just didn't have anything to say in response, that's all. Yes it's interesting...what else would it be? BTW, Armenians don't just want money, they want the Genocide recognized because they believe it happened. I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you on this one. —Khoikhoi 05:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

No, that's not at all what I wanted to say :)) I was referring to the europeans when i said show me the money! - i wanted to say that, europeans, will admit turkey as long as it is in their interest.. I definitely know that Armenians want it recognized because they believed it happened - i think there was a misunderstanding :)). As for the other thing, maybe it is the late hours playing with my mind, but I just had the slight impression that u were pulling my leg, that's all :)) Baristarim 05:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I guess there was! No, I wasn't pulling your leg. Hoşçakal! —Khoikhoi 07:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Turkey restructure

Hi, I have to say i'm not a big fan of the restructuring of the page. It doesn't seem logical to have the Geography first. If you look at other Feature Article pages such as Canada, India or Australia you'll see that History, Politics, Foreign relations/Military, Geography, Economics, Demographics, Culture etc seems to be the best sequence. Let me know what you think, thanks --A.Garnet 23:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah i'd like to get Turkey to FA status, I think the basics of whats needed is there. Will need more referencing, better prose, more concise explanations, balancing out (e.g. shortening Economics, expanding culture etc), fewer but high quality pictures. It needs work, but like i say i think the foundation is there. Hopefully we can sort it out, thanks --A.Garnet 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I dont know if Origin or Etymology is better, can be either i guess. As for the sub-articles, i dont think their quality has an effect on the Turkey article for FA status. Unfortunately i'm going to be a bit busier than usual in coming weeks, but i'll still try and lend a hand where i can. Thanks, --A.Garnet 21:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Stop messing up the articles Timurids and- especially - Babur. Your recent edit in Babur was totally unnecessairy, because that information is already given in the article:

... He was born on February 14, 1483 in the town of Andijan, in the Fergana Valley which is in modern Uzbekistan. He was the eldest son of Omar Sheikh Mīrzā, ruler of the Fergana Valley - who he described as "short and stout, round-bearded and fleshy faced", and his wife Qutlugh Nigar Khanum. Although Babur hailed from the Barlas tribe which was of Mongol origin, his tribe had embraced Turkic and Persian culture[2][3] (see Turco-Mongol, Turco-Persian), converted to Islam and resided in Turkestan and Khorasan. His mother tongue was the Chaghatai language (known to Babur as Tōrkī, "Turkish") and he was equally at home in Persian, the lingua franca of the Timurid elite[4]; he wrote his famous memoirs, the Baburnama, in the former language, that of his birthplace. ...

The article Babur was mostly written by User:Sikandarji who is an expert on Indian and Central Asian history and who holds lectures at Oxford

Your information about Timur is wrong - Britannica has made a mistake. Authoritative sources, such as the Encyclopaedia of Islam (see the article Timur; B.F. Manz, "Tīmūr Lang", in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Online Edition, 2006) call him "Mongol" and underline this with other authoritative sources. Even minor encyclopaedias, such as the The Columbia Encyclopedia (published by the Columbia University) call him "Mongol" ([15]).

Babur's upbringing was not Turkic but Persian. See F. Lehman (who is one of the leading experts on Mughal history, and an author of the Journal of the American Oriental Society) in his "Zaher ud-Din Babor" (Encyclopaedia Iranica, page 320ff): ... His origin, milieu, training, and culture were steeped in Persian culture and so Babor was largely responsible for the fostering of this culture by his descendants, the Mughals of India, and for the expansion of Persian cultural infleunce in the Indian subcontinent, with brilliant literary, artistic, and historiographical results ... [16] Tājik 02:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Only your claim that the "Encyclopaedia Iranica is only about Iranian history and has nothing to do with Babur" (which is total nonsense, because a) Babur and his tribe were part of Iranian culture and geography, and b) the Iranica is a master-piece for the entile field of Oriental studies! For example: it has the most detailed information about the Oghuz Turks than any other Encyclopaedia: [17]). And I am leaving out the fact that you are rejecting the work of Prof. F. Lehman. Who are you to say that Prof. F. Lehman is wrong?! If Iranica has nothing to do with Babur, then how come "Britannica" has anything to do with him?! Has Babur ever been in Britain?! (*irony*) And what about the Encyclopaedia of Islam?! Is that encyclopaedia wrong, too, because "Babur was a Turk and not a Muslim"?

Babur's memoirs (which also includes 20 poems in Persian, as well as small texts in poems) do not define his ethnicty. If that were the case, then his children would be Persian, because his daughter - Gulbdana Begum - wrote her famous Humayun-Nama in Persian (that much about your claim that the Mughals (a word which means "Mongol") were "Turkic")! Tājik 03:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello dear brother Baristarim, welcome to WikiProject Azeri, we are happy that you joined us. We\re looking forward to cooperating with you :)

One note: could you please select one country in the participantslist, we recommend current-nationality as it is concrete info. Baku87 14:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

hehe

Selam Baris aksam aksam guldurdun benide :)) dedigin gibi Selcuklular, Timurlar vs tarafindan yonetilmek epey koymus, hatta Khosrow II'nin sayfasinda isim pan-turkistlerle mucadele etmektir yaziyordu bi ara, Turko-Iranian sayfasindq gecen gun tam 7 kez revert yaptim tahmin edebilecigin icin banlandim, ben boyle yanlis gorunce kafama cok takarim ama psikolojim bozuldu gercekten seninde dedigin gibi burasi insan sagligi icin sakincali bir yer. :) Vaktim oldukca pan-Iranistlerle tartismaya giriyorum ama bu aralar fazla vaktim yok, n'olur sen pes etme, resmen tarihimizi yok etmek isteyen birkac çapulcuya yenik dusmemeliyiz. Ingilizce'me guvenemiyorum ben bir turlu sorunumda bu pan-Turkism sayfasind Ermeni beni yanlis anladi sagol sen aciklamissin ne demek istedigimi, Ingilizcem cok mu berbat benim ya? :) Sevgiler- Zaparojdik 22.30 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually I went to sleep, and now I'm ublocked.Khosrow II 22:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I interpreted 24 hours to me one day (therefore 3 reverts per day, if you look at my reverts, i did some on oct 2nd, then some on oct 3rd, and so on...).Khosrow II 23:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Etymology

Yeah, it should be rightly labelled "Etymology". I guess we should go around to "Australia" and "Canada" and change the section titles to reflect that. IMO, the Levant pic is quite poor (too drab/foggish and just a couple of buildings) in addition to being a copyright violation thats bound to get deleted sooner or later.--Kilhan 04:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Re

Hi. sorry for the misunderstanding, and i trust u that u will keep your word:). in fact it really seemed that u were disputing the existance of the article. i do not speak german either, but, as a post in Talk:Pontian Greek Genocide says, it got deleted there. so, having in mind that another user said will propose this one for deletion, u simply seemed to think this way too. as for its deletion in german wikipedia, for which u said not to say that it happened cause of the many Turks who live there/speak German, i consider it at least as valid (always having in mind the differences and importance of these cases, which i am trying to give some "stupid" balance:)...) as the US states' recognitions: u claimed that it is all due to the greek lobby, but u also say that the turkish lobby in germany is "innocent"... About the whole 'grey wolves'-'pan turkist'-'nationalist' talking that has been taken place recently, have in mind that for some users (me included) all these along with 'kemalist' are synonymous. And, cause i just noticed your comment in Tekleni's talk, i can't understand how it is possible for someone to be 'communist' and 'kemalist' at the same time... Sincere regards Hectorian 04:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

According to Persian tranliteration !

You've said, why writing "Ahvaz" using "w" is incorrect, you've said according to whom?

According to Persian transliteration, "و" must transliterate to "v" not "w" .

If you wanna more info, I'll be happy to deliver ...

Sasanjan 13:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)