Jump to content

User talk:Turco85: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs)
354,693 edits
→‎Turks in Europe: new section
Line 329: Line 329:
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0227 -->
<!-- EdwardsBot 0227 -->

== Turks in Europe ==

[[User:AbdolRezaCCIH]] keeps on destroying my valid edits in the [[Turks in Europe]] article, will ypu please help?

Revision as of 07:26, 13 February 2012

Home Talk My Contributions Awards Contact me

Leave your messages or comments freely here:

Archive
Archives

Please create a new section instead of editing the archive page Turco85 (talk) 19:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Archives:

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Turkish diaspora

Hello, Turco85. You have new messages at Talk:Turkish diaspora.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Turco85! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

The Signpost: 7 November2011

Mediation Cabal: Request for participation

Dear Turco85: Hello. This is just to let you know that you've been mentioned in the following request at the Mediation Cabal, which is a Wikipedia dispute resolution initiative that resolves disputes by informal mediation.

The request can be found at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/08 November 2011/Iraqi Turkmens.

Just so you know, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate. If you wish to do so, and we'll see what we can do about getting this sorted out. At MedCab we aim to help all involved parties reach a solution and hope you will join in this effort.

If you have any questions relating to this or any other issue needing mediation, you can ask on the case talk page, the MedCab talk page, or you can ask the mediator, ItsZippy, at their talk page. MedcabBot (talk) 22:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Turco85. You have new messages at ItsZippy's talk page.
Message added 18:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal: Case update

Dear Turco85: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/08 November 2011/Iraqi Turkmens

is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, ItsZippy, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 13:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Talkback

Hello, Turco85. You have new messages at ItsZippy's talk page.
Message added 14:08, 24 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 14:08, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

Talkback

Hello, Turco85. You have new messages at ItsZippy's talk page.
Message added 16:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 16:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

December 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Iraqi Turkmens. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:25, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Z10

  • I just went back and looked and you edit warred more since I placed my message on the page. I've blocked you for 96 hours. Please consider in the future making use of WP:3O rather than ramming your point of view through by edit warring. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Magog the Ogre, to be honest I never actually saw these messages, nor do I remember reverting 3 times, when I was editing the article. You must have messaged me afterwards or I have just forgotten those events. Anyway, have a good day. Turco85 (Talk) 15:58, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Iraqi Turkmens

Please seek a consensus on your proposed changes to the article on Iraqi Turkmens, using the talk page. Your proposed changes are controversial.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather both sets of information be placed in the article until we seek a final agreement on this issue. I do not see why only User:Tavio's sources should be used when clearly there are sources which also claim that the community speak Turkish. At least this way we are less likely to keep reverting eachothers edits. Turco85 (Talk) 14:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have done three reverts to the article on Iraqi Turkmens in 24 hours. If you make another revert to this article, you are likely to be blocked again. (See Wikipedia:Three-revert rule#The three-revert rule.)

  • 02:54, 18 December 2011 Undid revision 466449137 by Taivo (talk) before removing sentences please show in the discussion page why you think that the paragraph is POV pushing. Your views do not= facts
  • 01:53, 18 December 2011 I will not allow for this article to go back into the poor condition it was made into by a bunch of sock puppets.
  • 14:49, 17 December 2011 Undid revision 466340221 by Toddy1 (talk) and I think it's unacceptable that you are removing these sources. At least my edit has BOTH sets of information... rather than a one-sided view.

--Toddy1 (talk) 10:34, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as though you and Taivo were starting to cooperate, and I thought the new block was rather harsh. I unblocked Taivo after he agreed to my terms. Are you willing to abide by them as well? That would mean leaving the Iraqi Turkmens article alone for the 96 hours you would have been blocked, and thereafter following WP:1RR & WP:BOLD on that article when dealing with Taivo or Toddy1. — kwami (talk) 05:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I would agree to that. Would I still be allowed to discuss the issue on the discussion page though?Turco85 (Talk) 14:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point was to "cool off". I'm willing to walk away until Thursday or Friday and not even discuss it. There are admins now who will be watching like hawks for any sign of "heat" and Magog has shown he'll block on the slightest thing. It's probably best that we just wait and not give any reason whatsoever for them to pounce again. I suggest that we don't even look at this until Friday (just to give an extra day of calm). And remember the principles that we're constrained under (WP:BRD and WP:1RR): It's best not to edit in the article at all until we've discussed and agreed on the Talk Page first. --Taivo (talk) 14:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that seems fine by me. I'll stay away from the article till friday. Hopefully things will be better by then. Thanks for your message. Turco85 (Talk) 15:56, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good. You're unblocked.
One of the things that left a sour taste in my mouth was that you accuse those who disagree with you of being sockpuppets. It would seem that you are so sure that you have WP:Truth that you think anyone who disagrees with you must be part of some sort of conspiracy. That is not a healthy attitude for an editor, and will only get you blocked again. See WP:goodfaith. I've had heated disagreements with Taivo, but he is a good editor, he knows what he is doing, and he's not out to sabotage anything or disparage anyone. Nationalism, ethnic pride, and language are a volatile mix, and what people believe about their language—whether it's Irish, Croatian, Kurdish, Urdu, Malay, or Chinese—often has little to do with reality. The national language of India, so-called Hindi, for example, is actually Urdu, but tell that to most "Hindi" speakers and they'll freak out. Likewise, Urdu is one of several Hindi languages, but tell that to most Urdu speakers and they'll freak out. When people's identities are at stake, they want reality to conform to them, not vice versa, but we can't allow such subjective claims to decide an article. The Zhuang, for example, traditionally claim their language is a dialect of Chinese, but it isn't even in the same language family as Chinese. I know nothing about Iraqi Turkmen, but if they claim their language is Turkish, it doesn't mean that it actually is Turkish.
As for your other question, talk pages are excluded from blocks unless you've gotten really nasty (personal attacks, threats of violence, etc.) or are filling them up with masses of irrelevancies, in which case you'll be told that specifically. But a cooling off period is often a good idea. I know I need one sometimes. — kwami (talk) 00:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't edit talk pages on my block. --Taivo (talk) 03:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oversight, or intentional? — kwami (talk)
kwami, if you look back at the history of the Iraqi Turkmens article you would see that a user by the name of User:Ledenierhomme has created various accounts in order to push their political views, they have gone by the following names:
Other sock puppets have included:
User:Izzedine, so excuse me for being a little conscious about User:Taivo. I realised that Taivo was a genuine user once they started to discuss the issue with me, however, it was mainly due to the fact that Taivo was reverting the article to the version which the sock puppet created which made me a little suspicious; nonetheless, I did not actually report Taivo as a possible s.p. User:Ledenierhomme (whoever they may really be) has been creating accounts and disrupting the article for over a year now. I recently took the article to mediation (see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/08 November 2011/Iraqi Turkmens) however, the mediation ended because the other user was again a sock puppet of the same person. Thus, what I'm trying to say is that I'm not this person that you are trying to picture-out, one which to quote you, is "so sure that you have WP:Truth that you think anyone who disagrees with you must be part of some sort of conspiracy". It would be great if you look at the history of the article and try to understand my view as well, a bit of WP:goodfaith right? Also I would like to state that though my user name come across as nationalistic, I have changed a lot in the last 3 years thanks to Wikipedia, my views are not what they used to be... I'm not interested in politics, just demographics.Turco85 (Talk) 14:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a relief to learn there really were sockpuppets. I also understand how frustrating it is to deal with such people: I've had my share. At this point, I suggest you make the changes you want as a test edit (you can post a {{Under construction}} tag at the top, so no-one jumps on you), revert yourself, link to the diff from the talk page, and ask Taivo if he has any objections to them. (Or, if there aren't too many, you can always just use the talk page as usual.) Any points he does not object to you can then make permanent without worrying about being accused of edit warring, and with the sockpuppets blocked, you should hopefully be able to work out any remaining differences without the frustration of the past. Taivo might do the same with the things he wants changed. I know I made some changes after you, but I was mostly trying to clean up the article, as it had grown incoherent. I don't expect you to run any changes by me: if you can agree with each other, then we're probably good to go. — kwami (talk) 20:02, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would be grateful if you would read the comments that an editor has placed on the talk page of this article, and respond to them at Talk:Iraqi_Turkmens#Today's_tags.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Iraqi Turkmens (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links to British, Assyrian, Northern Iraq and Erbil

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Hi. When you recently edited Turks in Azerbaijan, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Khachmaz and Sabirabad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find more information and sources about Turks (and Meskhetian Turks) living in Azerbaijan for the Turks in Azerbaijan article?

Can you find more information and sources about Turks (and Meskhetian Turks) living in Azerbaijan for the Turks in Azerbaijan article?

The reason is that some sections are not specific to Turkish (and Meskhetian Turkish) communities in Azerbaijan, but are about the general situation of Meskhetian Turks.

And there is little information about Turkish citizens living in Azerbaijan (apart from their numbers) and very little about Turks from Turkey who permanently settled in Azerbaijan and have become Azerbaijani citizens.

And also important to note that in Azerbaijan, no distinction is being made in population statistics and censuses between Meskhetian Turks and Turks from Turkey who have become Azerbaijani citizens – which is another problem, not to mention the gradual assimilation of Turks into Azerbaijani language and culture and their classification as only Azerbaijanis as well.

The Turkish community in Azerbaijan is a bit more diverse but specific information and sources about them are hard to find.

Thank you.

Noraton 14:30, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do my best.Turco85 (Talk) 14:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Twafotfs

You should open an wp:spi on twatfofs and resolve the issue. Toddst1 (talk) 03:16, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'll do that. Unfortunately I'm beginning to think that this issue will never be resolve. This user is clearly delusional, they keep saying that they don't see x or y in the cited sources even though it is clearly written in black and white. they then manipulate the sources, it’s clearly the same user for about a year now and I am tired of it... Turco85 (Talk) 03:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nicely done. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 16:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Turks in Europe

User:AbdolRezaCCIH keeps on destroying my valid edits in the Turks in Europe article, will ypu please help?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Turco85&oldid=476606027"