Talk:Issyk inscription

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Writing systems Low‑importance

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Central Asia: Kazakhstan Low‑importance

	Asia portal Issyk inscription is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Kazakhstan (assessed as Low-importance).

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vandalism under the banner of racist ideology

Recently added content is under the ideology of Pan-Turkism, for more information see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Turkism and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ See Sun_Language_Theory, their theories are baseless Afs.rnoru9 (talk) 14:54, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Afs.rnoru9: I didn't know about the connection to the Sun Language Theory. Thank you for pointing this out.

What I would suggest is that if it's reinstated, rather then entering into an edit war, revert and reference this conversation with a link in your edit summary.

Although I'm aware of the sun language theory I don't know enough about the subject to be involved.

You may need to find someone with more expertise in the subject to assist you with further edits.

Thank you for at least doing the right thing and bringing it to the talk page.

I will put a note on your talk page referencing this. Knitsey (talk) 15:51, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

🙏 Afs.rnoru9 (talk) 13:56, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gilaki translation is from janos harmattas finding

You even ignore janos harmattas finding then you say to me that im making original research that is not true i just translated what janos harmatta finded to Gilaki language Morteza115 (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reading a 2400-year-old inscription as Gilaki makes about as much sense as reading it as Russian, French or English. None of these languages existed in the 4th century BC, and their ancestors at the time were radically different (closest to Proto-Balto-Slavic, Old Latin and Proto-Germanic). Same for Gilaki. Back then, its ancestor must have been an Old West Iranian dialect similar to Median, Parthian and Old Persian, but not to any modern Iranian language. For the same reason, reading it as modern Turkic makes no sense: Turkic was also very different 2400 years ago; you'd basically have to use Proto-Turkic reconstructions, not modern Turkic like Hasanov essentially does. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And "translating" Harmatta's transliteration to a completely different language is literally original research. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 07:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]