User talk:ܥܝܪܐܩ

Need your help

Dear Mr. Iraq

As you have seen, lately some of those so called Assyrians are trying to change the history of Tel Skuf to make it an Assyrian village. I have faithfully tried to keep that page out of this nonsense but they seem to be back. The username "Chaldean" seems to be a die hard Assyrian who keeps changing the page. I have reverted it back to your last change. I hope you'll help me keep an eye on this page.

Thanks, MT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tisqupnaia2010 (talk • contribs) 08:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will help you with it. unfortunately there are some fanatic Assyrian nationalists on here. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assyrian Nationalism

Dear 'Mr Iraq',

I will be devoting several paragraphs of my forthcoming book to the subject of Assyrian nationalism, and the negative effect (in my view) of the tactics used by some of the more extreme nationalists on the international image of the Church of the East, so it's a subject which I will be educating myself on over the next few months. You are very welcome to use my paragraph, hot off the presses, on the origins of Assyrian nationalism, but as it has not yet been published I suggest you cite as its source an article by the late J. M. Fiey, 'Assyrians or Arameans?', which was published in The Syrian East (Madenkha Suryaya), volume 10 (1965). I don't have the page references to hand, but I'm sure there's a link to this article somewhere on Wikiproject Assyria, or it shouldn't take you long to google it. I've basically boiled down Fiey's 13-page article into a single paragraph, so it's a perfectly legitimate citation.

If I may, I'd like to run some of my stuff on Assyrian nationalism past you as I write it up. I know it's a sensitive subject, and although I wouldn't be bothered in the slightest if my book offended Assyrian extremists (indeed, quite the reverse), I would be very unhappy if I said anything that upset moderate Assyrians and Chaldeans.

Keep up the good work. The truth will prevail, eventually ... Djwilms (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou and of course you are very welcome to run it by me, it sounds interesting. The excerpt is a good summary in itself. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 17:44, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I share your impression that Assyrianists have conspired to get the upper hand over a number of articles, but in my experience, this isn't about the Chaldaean group at all. Those Assyrianists I have seen were perfectly happy to admit the existence of a separate Chaldean group. What they were after, and what really had them foaming at the mouth, was the suggestion that their group was also called "Syrian" or "Aramaean" by some of their own people. I.e. this is entirely about Assyrianism pitted against Aramaeanism. The result, as always in these cases, is of course an entire category of Wikipedia articles misused as WP:BATTLEFIELD and degraded in quality, plus the impression taken away by non-involved editors that the entire ethnic group (at least the angry young men with internet access) is composed of puerile vitriolic morons. In other words, nationalist editors on either side of the divide are only doing damage to themselves and the image of their cherished in-group. --dab (𒁳) 11:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I would quite agree that more damage is done than good. You seem to have a deep understanding of the problems that have been caused by the proselytizing Assyrianists on Wikipedia. I think much of the problem is rooted in the power that having the article titled after them has given them. It would be very interesting to have your thoughts on this at the recent discussions on Talk:Assyrian people if you have time. Thankyou for the message. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 03:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could be some good news

Shlama Iraq, There could be something good here. See if you agree with what have been suggested.--Tisqupnaia2010 (talk) 22:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shlama khon, I support the proposal. What did you think of my suggestion Tisq? ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 04:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: BarzanPDK18

Re your message: Doesn't surprise me. One thing you can do to keep things centralized about this guy is to just add to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BarzanPDK18 instead of creating a new sub-page for each new account. Adding to the existing case is the proper method of reporting additional sockpuppets. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 01:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i've been making extra work for the SPI team unintentionally. What's the easiest way to do that Gogo? ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 02:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the WP:SPI#Submitting an SPI case page, in the form on the left, change the SOCKMASTER to BarzanPDK18, and then click the button on the bottom. You'll get a normal looking edit screen with a note on the top that you are adding a subsequent request to a case. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppetry

You know that other users can state their opinion regarding someone who answers for someone else here. Answering other people's questions could be s slip in identity!!!