User talk:Tombseye

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

• Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
• To sign your posts (on talk pages, Votes for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
• You can experiment in the test area.
• You can get help at the Help Desk
• Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
• If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

• /Archive1

Re: Pashtuns

Hey, thanks. I'll do the Iranian peoples page some time, one of the things that needs to be fixed is the numbers at the Turkish people page. 1 million in Syria?? And look at the source for it. As for the Persian Jews, I suggest you leave a comment on the talk page over there. It's pretty much a battleground on that page - Iranian editors vs. Jewish editors: The final throwdown.

BTW, you should really archive your talk page. —Khoikhoi 08:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey

First of all, thanks for your great contributions to Iran-related articles, just one small thing..can you please see Help:Edit summary:

"When editing an article, there is a small field labeled "Summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

It is highly recommended that one fill in the edit summary field, as it makes it easier for you and your fellow contributors to understand what has changed, and is helpful when going through the history of the page."

Keep up the excellent work, -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 19:12, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Erased

Tombseye, I dont know if I'm wrong but somebody erased most of your chat page! Afghan Historian 03:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Lawrence of Arabia

I think you might know something on this. I've been reading on Lawrence of Arabia (TE Lawrence) online to improve the wiki article and alot of people seem to hold him accountable for the problems in the Middle East today, particularly the Levant (Israel/Palestine/Lebanon/Jordan/western Syria). I was under the impression that he tried to solve some of those problems in the end, just to get rejected. Would you find him at fault for what happened in the region or would you pin the blame on Allenby and the British politicians? Afghan Historian 03:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Armenians

Hi, you might want to see this. —Khoikhoi 23:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

1) Majority of Armenians are not from the region (if by region you mean Transcaucasus). There are between 10-14 million Armenians around the world, maximum 3-5 million (that includes inhabitants of ROA as well as those in Iran and Russia, a good number of them are descendants of Genocide survivors from Western Armenia) can trace their ancestry to the Caucasus. The majority are of Western Armenia. Point being Pontic Greeks are not exactly identical to mainland Greeks.

2) I have no objection towards removing Greeks. It's generally assumed that the two are related among both communities based on cultural similarities etc. In addition there's the Graeco-Armenian hypothesis and Classical sources claiming Armenian origins in South-Eastern Europe.

3) It's not about Azerbaijan.

4) You can mention the studies (which are still inconclusive like all similar studies, hell there are genetic studies linking Armenians to Hungarians, Ashkhenazi Jews, Italians, Portuguese and Kurds!!!!) in the ROA page since the test subjects were from there. But in no way does that apply to Armenians in general even if it was sound and valid.

I look forward to your response; nevertheles, here are compromise suggestions:

a) Leave Hamshens only b) Keep Other Caucasus people (which is still problematic), I means Kalmyks live in the Caucasus as well as Greeks. --Eupator 03:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I have no time for a proper response now but i'll get back to you tomorrow. I still very strongly disagree with such a controversial inclusion based on a language replacement theory and some studies reminiscent of drug testing studies conducted by pharmaceutical companies.--Eupator 03:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh, yeah. Have you seen the history of the Turkish people page today? You-know-who decided to pay us a visit. —Khoikhoi 04:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Vote on Iranian People

Tombseye, Thanks for letting me know about this vote. I will paticipated in it. Mehrdad 02:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I have to let you know that I think what you did there to target users like that is not appreciated. -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 10:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Input on the nationalist test

Thanks for your input, could you please see the talk page :) - FrancisTyers 08:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Iranian peoples

No, I disagree. We should really keep the page. So far there's no consensus on the voting, is there any sort of compromise you could think of? —Khoikhoi 02:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I know, it's ridiculous. I think the article is fine as it is right now. I suspect that some of the users voting are using sockpuppets, I'm going to list some of them at WP:RFCU. —Khoikhoi 04:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. - try asking User:Kilhan to vote. —Khoikhoi 04:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you please prevent them from doing so... other compromises (Azeris are contributing to Iranian culture and history) are what I have not problems with. Or state in the article that some Iranians claim that Azeris belong to Iranian group, claiming such and such source abdulnr 14:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I think many of the pages related to Iran and Iranian history have strong bias, they don’t comply with the rules and contradict the facts that are general knowledge, which compromises the encyclopedic value of the articles. It is evident even in such articles as Safavid dynasty or Ismail I. I think we need to attract the attention of the community to what’s going on in Iranian people and other articles. Here’s the source they provided to prove that Azeris are Iranian people, it is called Language of Azeri People and Pan-Turkism. I’m not going to comment on it, see for yourself. Someone needs to explain to them that you cannot decide on belonging of certain people to certain ethnic group by voting, things like that should be based on academic researches. Grandmaster 16:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom? No, that's only used as a last resort. (I'm in one, by the way) Hopefully this will be resolved once the voting's over. If not, I'm sure we could come to some sort of compromise. —Khoikhoi 15:52, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Kizilbash

I did some writing in the article Kizilbash. Could you please have a look at it?! Some feedback would be really helpful. Thx Tajik 23:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

There is an slight impasse btw us and Tajik, specifically about intro - Kizilbash is "predominantly Turkic origin (with others for good measure) " vs " people of diverse ethnic backgrounds (no mention of Turkic majority)" abdulnr 20:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I am not disputing the fact that the Turcoman Kizilbash were the largest and most infleuntal group. I am just against your version that this should be mentioned in the intro. The intro should only mention that the Kizilbash were a "militant religious group of different ethnic backgrounds". The special role of the Turcomans as well as all the Non-Turkic tribes who made up the movement are mentioned in detail in the article. Tajik 21:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Seems like a minor point we can agree on. Tombseye, please pass your independent judgement when you have time . Rgs abdulnr 21:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

On the different note - if you go to other say of History of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan there is amazingly little discussion, as if there are no controvershy. It seems History of Caucasus causes people more problems than of Central Asia. I wonder why abdulnr 15:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we resolved Kizilbash issue. Pls, pay a visit anyway and check for yrsf abdulnr 01:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

You-know-who

This is why, in case you haven't noticed already, the Turkish people, Ardahan, and Zaza People pages are currently semi-protected. :p —Khoikhoi 18:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

As for Iranian peoples, I think there's still room for compromise. They're a lot more reasonable than you they are. I prefer "Iranian" over "Iranic", because it is much more common. I'll put forth some more suggestions on the talk page eventually, but don't worry about it. BTW, have you seen this? —Khoikhoi 18:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Well the compromise might be a creation of Turko-Iranian Peoples article that should discuss interrelationship of these two peoples over centuries. Current one is very sparse. abdulnr 19:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

We already have the Iranian Turks article, which is a term that I've quite frankly never really heard of. Yeah, I saw the map, have no idea why Dagestanis are included. Weird. As for Inanna, yeah, you should see some of the stuff going on at Talk:Armenian Genocide. But if she ever tries to talk to you, just remember one of Wikipedia's policies, don't feed the troll. Cheers, —Khoikhoi 00:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. - don't forget to add your email to your preferences. —Khoikhoi 00:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Turks is really a non-article, quite disorganized. Need to do smth about it.Btw, where are you in UK? London? See also Turko-Iranian abdulnr 21:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I am doing something on the History of Turkmenistan. please help editing when you have time abdulnr 22:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen the Ancient Azari language article by any chance? —Khoikhoi 23:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hehehehe, you did the right thing. :) —Khoikhoi 23:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Turkmens and History of Turkmenistan

Thanks for the interest! Could we do the following= Turkmen article currently refers to two separate people in Turkmenistan and Iraq. Turkmenistan Turkmen probably need a separate page and a collage photo like Azeris, Iranians etc, I can suggest you three four photos. Actually there is quite a lot to do, not many Turkmens around to help us abdulnr 01:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Great work

The well deserved Tireless Contributor Barnstar For your excellent contributions to Iranian-related articles :) Kashk

Hi

Can you enable your e-mail address please? --ManiF 06:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I will contact you by the end of the weekend. --ManiF 07:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Check this out:

Look what I came across while searching on Google:

"Vote for Iranian Turks on Wikipeida"

Apparently now we're "separatists". :D Now I'm quite convinced that these people have no idea what the definition of "Iranian peoples" actually is. They seem to have come up with something by themselves. —Khoikhoi 18:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

That’s how they enlist supporters and that’s why there were so many anons and newly created accounts, who took part in voting. Grandmaster 18:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The signature of the guy who posted that points to a blog owned by someone who calls himself "Persian Magi" ([1]). Maybe someone should ask User:Persian Magi if he knows anything about this, and point him to WP:SOCK#Advertising and soliciting single-purpose accounts? Lukas ^(T.|@) 19:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Good find. Coincidentally, he's the same one who set the deadline for the voting. —Khoikhoi 01:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah that was a good find. Sheesh. I had no idea this was that important of an issue. At any rate, I really think this is just absurd to argue with anons (who may be sockpuppets) with little history or credibility anyway. Tombseye 03:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

No man

I still think we should continue to discuss things. The anon has made a new section on the talk page that requests for people to define what "Iranian peoples" is with references, and I suggest you check it out. Meanwhile I'll archive the talk page, it's getting pretty big. Don't give up! —Khoikhoi 03:02, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks! I'll make a picture when I have the time, I'm really busy right now. As for the Hist of Turkmenistan article, I suggest you add a lot of links like you did to Iranian peoples. Then I can eventually convert them into references. (I'll do the same for the Iranian ppls page, but I'll wait until the conflict is over) Hey, have you seen this? I think we should tell our friend 203.48.45.194 to log in... —Khoikhoi 03:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, yeah, the problem is, I have some guy ranting on my talk page about how "Georgians are talented" and "Georgians should be part of EU", etc, etc. I hope the compromise at Georgia (country) works, however. BTW, a sock puppet is defined as an account holder. An IP address is not an account. —Khoikhoi 04:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. You've done a great job, congrats! —Khoikhoi 04:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

BTW...

I noticed you mentioned the Judeo-Tats. Are the Mountain Jews the same people? Also see the Tats article. —Khoikhoi 04:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, do the Turkomen of Iraq speak Turkmen or Turkish? —Khoikhoi 16:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Just noticed there's already a Iraqi Turkoman page as well. —Khoikhoi 16:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, so I guess the languages section of the Demographics of Iraq article should be changed. It still points to the Turkmen language article. —Khoikhoi 16:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol. —Khoikhoi 16:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Theoretically they speak vernacular close to Azeri, but it is heavily influenced by Turkish across the border. Iraqi Turkoman is not an literary language, so they use Turkish of Turkey for the purpose. We need a bit more on the Iraqi Turkomans in that article as well. Definetely their language is not as close to Turkmen as Azeri and Turkish. abdulnr 23:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Central Asia

You are absolutely welcome, I wouldn't consider anyone to be butting in unless they came to my user page cursing at me. If you have anyone else who might share this interest (I've already contacted Abdulnr) then please feel free to invite them over to my discussion page which will be the temporary home of this plan. Aelfthrytha 04:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Question

Hey, could you please cite a source that shows that "Central Asian Turks who remain a large segment of the population that has been moving to Turkey for centuries"? Also see the talk page, thanks. —Khoikhoi 17:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, sorry for bugging you so much, but could you check out the discussion here? —Khoikhoi 23:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh, it's not possible, it's final. :( Oh well, I'm glad that's all over with. —Khoikhoi 00:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Iranian peoples

Hello. You might be interested in this article of the "Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911". It has some useful, historically-documented information about the meaning of the word "Iran" and about the ancient inhabitants of this country and how they were discribed by Greeks. Tajik 13:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Turk-

Yeah man, I highly suggest you stay away from Turk-related articles. Consider it a topical ban. ;) BTW, Zmmz sent me an email:

you are welcome to use this in iranian ppls article discussion page under tombseye s comments,

Genetic studies have already placed Azeris firmly into the Iranian group. This was published in 2000 by a 25 man research team led by Richardson. the statement below confuses Georgians and Armenians with Azeris. Georgians are kartvelian and of a different gene pool, although this is an oversimplificaiton. The Ossetians of Georgia (I am part-ossete) speak northern Iranian Avestan - they and the Armenians share the same genes as Azeris (found in the same study). The Kurds are also the same as Azeris genetically. Kuyurds, azeris, Ossetians and Armenians are of the U5 gene pool - the same as Europeans. The U5 is found in south, east and southwest, but less so due to earlier Elamite and Aramaic asimilations - in the woutheast with the Barhui.

Now it is true that parts of Arran were settled with kartvelians and parts of our own Azerbaijan as well - however the genetic studies have firmly confirmed Azeris as Iranians. This study seems to annoy pan-Turkists who now claim that Turkish tribes have been indigenous to Azerbaijan and Khuzistan for 10,000 years. Again these claims do not stand up to scientific scrutiny.

The reference for the genetic study is below (note the large number of international researchers):

Tracing European founder lineages in the Near Eastern mtDNA pool. American Journal of Human Genetics, 67, pages1251-1276, 2000.

good luck

zmmz

I know the issue is pretty much over, but you might want to check it out. —Khoikhoi 16:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Which Azeris though - I presume in the south?. I actually have a theory developed while working on Turkmens. You see all Oghuz Turks have Meditteranean (largely) features, unlike Chagatai and Kipchak Turks - 2 other branches. It is known from Arabic sources (don;t remember where though, you can help me on this) that Oghuz Turks were already Caucasoid by the time they settled in Transoxania after coming from Altay. So it may be that they mixed with Iranian population there in 8th century - and then much later ( a large time gap!) in 11-12th migrated to Az. and Turkey, in which case genetics, which does not distinguish between native Iranian and transoxanian (eastern) Iranian elements is hard to interpret. If this is not the case then arises the question how such small group of people was able to impose their culture through the whole of the area. So in summary - it is a mass migration of already mixed Turko-Iranic Oghuz tribes to Middle East and Turkey.abdulnr 23:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah - i need to find a reference to original Oghuz Turks being already Mediterranean. I am not going to add this into Azeris page until that is confirmed abdulnr 20:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

- he he I am coming from different prospective. If they are placated good for them... Plus Northern Az. where I am from is probably less iranian than native Caucasian anyway. abdulnr 00:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Yeah I kinda realised that shortly after wards..but I always thought Iranians and Indians to be of the same root of Indo-Aryans branch of Indo-European, it seems that infact Indo-Aryan and Iranian are different branch under Indo-Iranian, of Indo-European? Lol could it possibly get any more confusing? :) -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 22:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah good job. I think after a general clean up, especially in the references, we can nominate it for good or featured article status, that'd definately make it all worth while -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 22:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you

Please revert this vandal [2] he was blocked for 3RR but I can't revert it anymore. Thanks, -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 16:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks man. Yeah he is blocked from editing for breaking WP:3RR. Lol it is the second time in the last few days I have been called a "monarchist" for keeping an eye out on monarch's articles -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 16:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Pashtuns

Its hilarious how new users are voting in favour of something like that. There has to be a policy against this! -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 21:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome to remove the picture. Khoikhoi said he is busy, I am sure he will do a collage when he has time. Pashtun vs Pathan is another meaningless discussion similar in spirit to our Azeri inclusion in Iranian Peoples... sometimes arguments are not enought abdulnr 23:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Pashtun is the correct name. The Pathan is used by people in other parts od South Asia.

Siddiqui 22:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Turks

Hi, when you have the time, could you reply to this? —Khoikhoi 00:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's exactly who I was thinking of as well. Jeez, that Turkmenbashi is really weird. I believe he recently renamed all the days to things like "my mother", and "the flag". He's another one of those dictators who think everyone should read his book every night. So we have two so far: Magtymguly Pyragy and Saparmurat Niyazov. The problem is, I even checked several books and I can't find anyone besides these two. Perhaps you could find some other Turkmen heros. (Although Turkmenbashi is hardly a hero).

Interesting people, the Turkmen. They're only a generatinon or two removed from being nomads. Plus they've allowed their cities to become predominantly populated by other peoples. I guess most of them prefer village life.

Anyways, you think I should propose to move the Oghuz Turks page to Oğuz Turks? I know the former spelling is much more common, but thanks to development of the UTF charsets as the browser standard, we can now see in the browser the exact word, so the original form of the word can be written.

Salam aleykum. ("peace by with you" in Turkmen) —Khoikhoi 02:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No, I'd rather learn Spanish personally. I'm going to Israel this summer for a month, so no need to use Turkish there. Yeah, but at least Lukashenko isn't obsessed with himself, or is he? My personal favorite is Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, the president of the Kalmyk Republic in Russia. His Chess City idea has to possibly be the dumbest idea I've ever heard of. Talk about leaders treating their countries as playgrounds. I could do a better job than him.

As for Oghuz, I should probably ask Saposcat on that one. He's the Turkish literature guy here. Yeah, I've always supported using the native names of cities, like in National Geographic. Wikipedia has this "use English" rule however, so changing Turin to Torino won't be so easy, and it will probably take more years because people are so reluctant to switch. —Khoikhoi 05:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I was away and will be again for a week - but I am struggling to find a world renown personality in Turkmenistan worth mentioning - that is why for the picture I would like to add the generic turkmen girl in trad. attire. BUT: There are plenty of underreported heroes like banned writer Esenov or Shikmuradov, leader of opposition languishing in a real dungeon. I think these people deserve mention? Turkmenbashi is mad but not suicidal, he knows how to choose friends, and stays clear of making trouble, and he has a lot of natural gas. This is in short an answer, why he will never be in the axis of evil. abdulnr 22:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Azerbaijani people

Hi. Do you think the following phrase that was copied from Iranian peoples is appropriate in the article about Azerbaijani people? It’s not connected with the text, as the article is not about the group of language speakers.

Due to historical ties with various ancient Iranians[1] and cultural ties with Persians[2], some sources also include Azaris/Azeris as an Iranian people, although the modern Azerbaijani language is a Turkic language and the issue remains highly debated.[3]

Grandmaster 05:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they are just trying to make a point. If I remove it myself, they will immediately accuse me of various things. But the way it is now is also not appropriate. Maybe you can try to explain to the anonymous User:72.57.230.179 that it’s not the way it’s done here? But also be sure to check his block log to have understanding who you’re dealing with. Grandmaster 05:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that is their purpose. They just want to present Azeri people a certain way, apparently for political reasons. Thanks for your efforts to keep the article factually accurate. Grandmaster 06:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Azeri Wikiproject

Great, thanks for joining, we really need knowledgeable contributors like you. Cheers. Grandmaster 06:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

True, and now you are a formal member. I’m really glad. Feel free to edit our Wikiproject page, and add any information or announcement you deem necessary. Grandmaster 06:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Great. I’ll try to be helpful as well. Also some recent edits to the History of Azerbaijan are questionable, it would be nice on part of those editors to discuss such changes on the talk page prior to making them. I’ll post my message there soon. Grandmaster 06:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

yes most welcome to wikiproject azeri! Karabakh 12:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Georgia is Europe

Ok. In what ways is Georgia not European? Please, do not make the argument, that Georgia was under Greeks, Romans and etc. We never were part of Romans or Greeks and it helped us to keep our unique language that is spoken only in Georgia. Sorry, but your argument makes no sense. It shows your lack of knowledge about Georgian Culture. Georgia was European, when it was free from Russian, Turks, Romans and Greeks. In adiition, please do not post again the statement, which us absurd in all ways.Sosomk 11:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, I realize that I was not being nice calling your statements absurdity, but I just wanted to say that Georgia is Europe historically and culturally, despite its neighbours. I can kind of tell why you made that point about the Caucasus in general, because you know about the neighbour provinces from the North. If we despite their religion I can also provide an argument why Georgia is completely European country, because the way that Georgians lived before christianity is totally similar to other Europeans lives before Christianity. The argument about the minority religions in the Caucasus can also be attacked from another point of view. You know that Eatern Europe is kind of complicated in terms of the religion, because you know about Kosovo and Albania. So, even though that Georgia became Christian in 325 (second Christian Nation in the world) I believe that there is nothing wrong in having other minorities in Europe, such as Chechnya, Kosovo and Albania, because the world should be treating people good, despite their religious beliefs. I don't wish to argue with you any more and once more I apologize for using inappropriate terms about you. I just have to deal with lots of people who do not know about Georgia at all and you are definitely not one of them.
Yours Truly
Sosomk 22:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month

Hi! I noticed your name on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horror membership list and am writing to all members who have not voted for the Collaboration of the month. Today is the designated selection day to choose the collaboration, but we currently have a tie between the two articles receiving the most votes, John Carpenter and Dario Argento. I am hoping to remedy this by drumming up a few more votes. Note that by voting for any nominated article (not limited to these two) you are indicating your "commitment to support and aid in collaborating on that specific article if it is chosen," so please feel absolutely free to ignore this message if for any reason you don't wish or would not be able to participate.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks with regards to picture on Pakistan page

Thanks Tombseye for putting in that picture of Jinnah addressing the nation in place of the other one. It resolves the conflict (which was getting pretty ugly!) and is much more relevant to that particular section than another picture of solo Jinnah or one with him and Gandhi, which justs inflames passions on both sides. Thanks a lot! Afghan Historian 23:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)