User talk:Khirurg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I know this is messy and everything, but please respond Sir. I know you will have to react to clean up your pageKamlesh4rmBhopal (talk) 10:02, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sir, My Sockpuppet allegations at Battle of Hydaspes page[edit]

I am not "a person whose actions are controlled by another." or "a brainless sock puppet who only knows what to say because his handlers feed him his lines" or "a false online identity, typically created by a person or group in order to promote their own opinions or views."

My name is Benedict Assange, I am a Half Syrian Christian half Italian guy (you can check out my page). I am not even a Hindu (You called him a Hindu nationalist I think as I read in your edit war).

I have openly admitted to have been in direct contact with Aseem Purushottam, (who editted the original pages), who was my hostel room-mate. We shared the same phone once of my buddy and the laptop available in our room. If you notice the edits on battle of hydaspes, I have not forwarded any of his "agendas" or anything of the "Biased" sort. I have given elaboration from the same sources on the same pre-existing sentences, sir.

I had warned him earlier to tone down his harsh replies and style of dealing with other users and now he is banned for unknown time. Thankfully our shared IP was spared. I learnt much on how to use Wikipedia from him and I have decided to use my speed reading skills for good use. I only add elaborations, do grammar tweakings and language fixing for now.

Therefore it is better not to associate myself with him. I have not lived in Mumbai for the past 3 weeks. I will return in a few days to my hostel as diwali vacations finish. Kamlesh4rmBhopal (talk) 17:06, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

SPA account returned[edit]

There is a recent activity by a new account that creates lots of ultranationlist pov-forks [[1]]. Most probably a returning editor (geo-location makes that clear too).Alexikoua (talk) 16:29, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't bother. Just blocked. Too bad they can't understand how disruptive they act to their own national interests.Alexikoua (talk) 16:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Do not again revert the edits for Battle of Hydaspes by this IP address. No sources have been given there, ridiculous over the top white supremacist claims have been made, hence genuine demands for direct sources have been made. Either give sources yourself or let the edits remain. Else action shall be taken against this vandalizing profile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.97.48.11 (talk) 15:58, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Hydaspes[edit]

You mentioned a concern, "not sure about Majumdar 1952 though. Can you elaborate? --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, question is, does it meet WP:RS? One it's a bit dated, and two it's published by Motilal Banarsidass, which to my knowledge has published some pretty crufty stuff about ancient India . Khirurg (talk) 22:00, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
R. C. Majumdar appears to check out as an academic historian, where as for being dated, I believe I see
  • Diodorus Siculus (90-30 BC). Bibliotheca Historica.
  • Quintus Curtius Rufus (60-70 AD). Historiae Alexandri Magni.
  • Plutarch (75 AD). The Life of Alexander the Great, Parallel Lives.
  • Arrian (early 2nd century AD).
...which are dated, but I know their usage on Wikipedia is prevalent. The Majumdar source does not reference any outlandish claims(Porus' capture), though he does give an intriguing perspective of Alexander on page 101. Also, Motilal Banarsidass publishing appears to check out, though I always try to find out who the author/editor is.
In contrast, Kaushik Roy's area of expertise appears to be modern warfare. Interesting.
Anyway, I was just curious. Thanks for answering my question. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
I defer to you. If you think Majumdar checks out, that's fine by me. Khirurg (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Please tolerate a certain degree of patronizing language tone in the page towards the Indian side for now. A new serial centered on Porus will soon be released in India, unleashing a massive wave of nationalistic Indians who may ravage the page if such tone as in the original edits is to be found. It's for the good of the page else we may end up locking it up and that won't be good for such a incoherent developing article. Lord Aseem (talk) 05:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello sir, I examined your Edit wars with Aseem on battle of hydaspes page. I saw that you had removed the personal duel between Alexander and Porus as there was no historian relaying it. Incidentally I found Majumdar himelf doing so, therefore should I restore it?Kamlesh4rmBhopal (talk) 09:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Also Sir, I have found lots of sources for covering up the cn tags and adding as vivid information as possible which I will add as soon as I return to my hostel. The page will be finished soon and the issues tag will be soon obsolete. Thank you. Kamlesh4rmBhopal (talk) 09:25, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Recent disruption[edit]

Congrats by dealing with yet another case (Ilirpedia). However, there is no doubt that all this kind of SPAs (unlogged/logged accounts etc) are recruited off-wiki by one editor who's obsessed to promote his personal POV.Alexikoua (talk) 11:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Illyrians[edit]

Hi, I stated what was on one source not multiple and just presented what was said on it. Can you please tell me how I did those violations?--Kelmendi123

Hi there, I looked over the paper and it doesn't mention the Illyrians anywhere. They did some testing on remains found at an archeological site in Croatia, but that doesn't mean they belong to an Illyrian. Therefore it is WP:OR to say that those remains belong to an Illyrian. Khirurg (talk) 00:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Turkey#RfC--lead[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Turkey#RfC--lead. Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 11:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

White Genocide[edit]

Can you self-revert on Armenian Genocide, I don't want to violate some undisclosed editing restriction. Did you look at the article before you reverted? Seraphim System (talk) 01:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Khirurg. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Source[edit]

Might I suggest using this for your discussion on Anatolia. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Excellent source, thank you very much. If I were dealing with good faith editors, it would help. Unfortunately the issue is not sourcing, it's trolling and personal issues (at least as far as one of the editors involved). Khirurg (talk) 01:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Ancient Pontus[edit]

I'm asking you this because I expect you to know more about this [[2]] than me, but I had thought that Pontic Greek history was indeed ancient and wiki also dates it back to 800 BC with a whole section on this. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding.

Also, on the map stuff, could you give me a bit to get back to that? Tagging Resnjari so he sees this too but Resnjari please don't reply here. I've already made all the changes except for the three towns in Vurg (ignoring Moscopole rn, it's a headache). But my time is limited due to having a life, and my time on wiki may soon be spent more on cleaning up some ongoing problems on 2017-18 Iranian protests, a pressing issue as it is current. Thanks for your understanding, --Calthinus (talk) 15:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Well regarding the Pontians, Greeks indeed did settle around 800 BC, but they were mainly Ionian Greeks, same as all the other Ionian Greeks. A distinct Pontian identity didn't emerge until the Seljuk conquests, when they became cut off from the remaining Greeks. So yes, there were Greeks living in Pontus since antiquity, but they were not "Pontian" in the sense of a distinct identity. Khirurg (talk) 06:38, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Ok fair enough, thanks for clarifying.--Calthinus (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

OR & SYNTH map[edit]

I've placed some additional objections about the map based on Calthinus's research in his talkpage.Alexikoua (talk) 08:09, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Don't remove sourced material because it does not fit your POV[edit]

This kind of summary is not an argument. If you continue with such behaviour, it will not end well for you. After repeated attacks on me, directly or indirectly (writing little failed investigations and giving them to your fellow editor to post them), I might decide to do what I probably should have done long ago. This is a warning Khirurg, if you can not edit articles of the Balkans topic in a civil way, make a favor to yourself and find an interest in other topics or take a break from Wikipedia. Otherwise you risk too much. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:30, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Large scale canvassing activity[edit]

Take in mind that the only Albanian editors that didn't vote in the AfD are those without enabled wiki-mail. I assume they are unable to be reached off-wiki.Alexikoua (talk) 12:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Greek speaking[edit]

what is the quote for greek speaking? You keep restoring it and I don't see it in the source. Seraphim System (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Please see WP:CLOP. And WP:TEND while you're at it. Khirurg (talk) 23:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
It's not close paraphrasing - the source does not say and you can't assume that Hellenized means Greek-speaking. I am giving you an opportunity to provide a quote to justify the content before changing it back. Randomly citing policies without justification are personal attacks. I suggest you simply justify the content or stop reverting this.Seraphim System (talk) 23:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
If you can't understand that Hellenized and Greek-speaking are the same thing, I can't help you. There is no need to stick to the exact wording used a by a source. In fact, that's what WP:CLOP is all about. You would do well to familiarize yourself with it. Khirurg (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
They are not, Hellenization was literary - they wrote in Greek, if the source does not say what they spoke, you can't assume it. You can't use WP:CLOP as a justification to fundamentally misrepresent [[WP:RS}].Seraphim System (talk) 23:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Stop making stuff up. I am not interested in your creative re-definition of "Hellenization". Now stop badgering me. Khirurg (talk) 23:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
  • "The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922, Donald Quataert, page 16;
"But inexorably, in the long run, Byzantine Christian, predominantly Greek-speaking, Anatolia was profoundly translformed and over time became Turkish speaking and Muslim"
  • "The Formation of Turkey: The Seljukid Sultanate of Rum: Eleventh to Fourteenth, Claude Cahen, page ix;
  • "There is a special problem regarding place names as a result of the gradual transformation of Greek-speaking Byzantine Anatolia into Turkish-speaking Seljukid Rum."
This is just two of many I found with little effort.--Kansas Bear (talk) 06:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Once again, it is not in the source that is cited. Please actually add the correct source for these things, it is necessary for editors to know which sources you are using to have a discussion. The extent of Hellenization throughout Anatolia is also disputed by numerous sources - [3] [4] "the majority in Armenia itself proved consistently resistent to cultural and linguistic imperialism" [5] "when the treachery of the Armenians was in some part responsible for the annihilation of the Byzantine army by the Seljuk Turks" - writing the article so it sounds like the Armenians were all part of one monolithic Greek-speaking Anatolian population is a major distortion of well-attested to historical facts.Seraphim System (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
However, Armenia was never a part of Anatolia. If by Armenia you mean “Eastern Anatolia” then you’re being misled by Turkish state-sponsored propaganda. Following the Armenian Genocide and establishment of the Republic of Turkey, the Armenian Highlands (or Western Armenia) were renamed "Eastern Anatolia" (literally The Eastern East) by the Turkish government. We’re not going to fall for that here. Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:36, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Etienne, this is your personal opinion - but we use WP:RS when writing articles, and according to WP:RS, Manzikert is in Anatolia. If you believe that all the academic sources on this topic are "Turkish state-sponsered propaganda" then I think you should reconsider editing in this area. I know that the government of Armenia does not recognize the border, but that is not what we are discussing right now.Seraphim System (talk) 08:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I did not call academic sources "Turkish state-sponsered propaganda". I merely stated that Armenia (both Western and Eastern) isn't in Anatolia. It's a basic geographical fact. Manzikert isn't considered Anatolia either. If there are sources that say so, they're dead wrong. For every source that does, I'm sure there's 10 that say Manzikert was a gateway to Anatolia, not Anatolia itself. Two very different things. And no, it's not my personal opinion, but the opinion of several scholars. There's an entire section on Wikipedia devoted to that subject: Eastern_Anatolia_Region#Substitution_with_Armenia. The Turkish government created a makeshift term to conceal the fact that a nation called Armenia existed on its territory. It was (and still is) a continuous effort to finish off the job the Turkish government started in 1915. Étienne Dolet (talk) 17:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Anyway, my apologies to Khiruig, I did not intend to have a prolonged discussion here. Undoubtedly, this will be raised on the article's talk page later. Seraphim System (talk) 09:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Seraphim System, I believe, you're mixing up modern-day "Anatolia" (i.e. "Asian Turkey"), with the historic geographic region known as "Anatolia" (i.e. "Asia Minor"). There's no debate that historic Anatolia and historic Armenia were two separate geographic regions. Therefore I don't really get what you mean. Could you further elaborate?
If you want to use the "modern extent" of Anatolia (i.e. Asian Turkey, aka 97% of Turkish soil) in history-related matters to refer to areas such as Van, Erzurum, etc., its only appropriate if you mention it like "(...) invaded Eastern Anatolia (Western Armenia)". Manzikert is nowadays in Anatolia i.e. Asian Turkey; historically, it was considered part of Armenia, regardless of the fact that it was dominated for millenia by greater powers. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:44, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

"In 1071, five years after Hastings, the Byzantine army, the oldest and best trained military force in Europe, was destroyed in battle with the Seljuq Turks at Manzikert in Armenia." -- The Cambridge Medieval History (vol. 6). Cambridge University Press, 1986. p. 791
  • "They are not, Hellenization was literary - they wrote in Greek"
You sure?
"Scholars have rarely defined carefully and explicitly what they mean by Hellenisation, but in most cases it describes the process through which non-Greek communities adopted Greek material culture, language and literature, styles and iconography, cults and myths, cultural practices like athletics, and even Greek identity." -- Vlassopoulos, Kostas. (2013). Greeks and Barbarians. Cambridge University Press. p. 9
  • "(...) but we use WP:RS when writing articles, and according to WP:RS, Manzikert is in Anatolia."
Your own sources don't state a thing about Armenia being part of Anatolia, yet you invoke WP:POINT on others?..
- LouisAragon (talk) 19:44, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    • I will write one last response, but my intention posting to Khirurgs talk page was to ask him which source he was relying on, not as a substitute for a talk page discussion involving multiple editors. It's not appropriate, please post additional comments about this on the article talk page, so other editors watching the article will see the discussion.
    • Manzikert (or Muş) is in Anatolia today. Our articles are generally not written based on historical terms Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Geographical_items.
    • What Etienne said: Manzikert isn't considered Anatolia either. If there are sources that say so, they're dead wrong. - this is also a personal opinion, and more importantly it sounds like trying to WP:RGW. This There's an entire section on Wikipedia devoted to that subject: Eastern_Anatolia_Region#Substitution_with_Armenia. - this is a problem because when I look at that article I see Meowy is one of the top contributiors, along with one of the users who was banned at a Meowy sock at the Turkey RfC Etienne posted in July(?) (Tiptoethrutheminefield) and a third blocked sock who has not been linked Steverci who seems to have added the section here [6]
    • Unfortunately, this means I will have to source check everything as insertion by blocked socks is generally not reliable. Etienne has not posted any sources to back up his statements, which is an important part of collaborative editing, so I will have to try to find these sources myself.Seraphim System (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Manzikert (or Muş) is in Anatolia today. - no it's not. It's in "Eastern Anatolia" which is a term concocted by the Turkish government to conceal the fact that Armenia once existed on Turkish territory.
And about the socks, regardless of what you think of those users, they added material that was reliably sourced. Just because they were socks doesn't mean that all their contributions should be removed outright. See: WP:BANREVERT Étienne Dolet (talk) 07:30, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • In this case whether or not it was once the Kingdom of Armenia is tangential to what I want to improve in this article - the line about "Greek-speaking" populations should be probably be removed or significantly reworked. The issue of continuity between the Seljuks and the Turkey is much debated - I don't think the article should continue to present the "extreme version" or the "Turkish right" POV as the mainstream academic consensus [7] [8] - it's dubious to accuse editors who are trying to improve this of making POV edits. I will probably propose a rewrite at talk but it's not going to be anytime soon, so I think we can table this for now. Seraphim System (talk) 03:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
I would advise against that. Instead I suggest a more productive use of your time. Khirurg (talk) 17:53, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Gjirokastër[edit]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]

Peacedove.svg

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! (Bes-ART (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2018 (UTC))

Anti-Orthodoxy RM[edit]

You recently participated in an AfD discussion for the Anti-Orthodoxy article here. A request to move (retitle) that article is currently under discussion here if you'd care to participate. —  AjaxSmack  05:56, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion on requested move[edit]

Hi, you recently participated in an AfD discussion for the Anti-Orthodoxy article here. A renewed request to move (retitle) that article is currently under discussion here if you'd care to participate. Sorabino (talk) 01:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. I saw that discussion, but I don't feel especially strong about it either way. If anything I feel the proposed title is somewhat clunky. Khirurg (talk) 04:31, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it is clunky, but some solution for proper representation of the full scope of that article had to be proposed since entire sections have been rewritten and even deleted recently, with excuse that article is about "persecution" only. Sorabino (talk) 04:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Large scale cleanup needed[edit]

I assume that recent ip disruption is a result of nationalist consumption rhetoric provoked by this [[9]]. What's sad is that this childish paranoia is considered by some low profile wiki-editors as RS. Off course the articles of the specific journalists and so-called professors in this video need to be vanished from all citations of this encyclopedia. They can be a always part of the Uncyclopedia.Alexikoua (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

A little lion for you![edit]

Youngkitten.JPG

For being a brave lion.

AssadistDEFECTOR (talk) 23:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks on Ioannina[edit]

Thanks on Ioannina, still I am surprised how there are editors eager to go into whole edit-revert wars for no apparent reasons. Everyone can do better than this. --👧🏻 SilentResident 👧🏻 (talk ✉️ | contribs 📝) 00:49, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Always glad to help. It seemed that particular editor was just looking for an opportunity to revert a Greek editor even though he had no dog in the fight. Sad. Khirurg (talk) 04:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this is the impression I have too, although I didn't want to believe this. I have already warned him multiple times in the past to not act or judge based on the ethnic or religious origins of the editors in Wikipedia, but it appears he didn't listen, hence why he, like how a fellow described it: *he fell spectacularly on his face*. Really, it can't be helped. I will just ignore this. Take care. --👧🏻 SilentResident 👧🏻 (talk ✉️ | contribs 📝) 12:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Largest cities in Turkey[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Largest cities in Turkey has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 15:26, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

In historic times[edit]

Hi Khirurg, hope all is well.
I just noticed you tweaked a sentence on the Turkey article.[10] I did some thinking after reading the sentence once more. As you know, during the Achaemenid era, large parts of Anatolia (i.e. "historic" Anatolia) were settled by Iranian colonists. Principally western Anatolia, Cappadocia, and Pontus. There are numerous peer-reviewed sources that have dedicated entire chapters to this, such as the Cambridge History series, as well as the Encyclopedia Iranica.

According to the reliable sources, these colonists were an important component of the inhabitants of Anatolia/Asia minor in ancient times, starting with the Achaemenid era, as they were the ruling elites in aforementioned areas, and left an important cultural legacy on the "natives" of Anatolia as well. These Iranians and their descendants remained important in the Hellenistic and Roman era, when, amongst others, they became the founders and rulers of two kingdoms.

Having said that, Anatolia/Asia Minor/"Asian Turkey" didn't play the same important role in the overal historic configuration of the Persians, as it did in the historic configuration, of lets say, the Greeks or the Armenians. But they were one of the inhabitants in ancient times as well. And an important one too. As I don't want to insert something that could (??) be interpreted as undue weight, I decided to pay you a visit. Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 23:41, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi I think we've talked about this in the past. I still think this is a relatively minor point that had little impact on the history of Turkey. May be appropriate for Anatolia or History of Anatolia, but I think it's too specialized for Turkey per WP:SS. Khirurg (talk) 12:11, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, we once talked about the Kingdom of Pontus, but not about the Iranian colonists/population of antiquity in general, which on itself is a larger concept. Anyways, seems the sentence has been changed again in the meantime. Looks more appropriate now I think, as it implies there were other civilizations as well, without assigning undue weight to them. Take care, - LouisAragon (talk) 18:38, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
I saw you reverted some edits on the Christianity in Turkey page. What do you think about these recent edits, made on the same page?[11] - LouisAragon (talk) 22:55, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Science[edit]

I am not sure if you are still observing this article Science. There have been some significant lead edits in recent times that you might have opposed in past months/years. Lorstaking (talk) 03:46, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, "Karachi guy" is an obvious Eulalefty sock. I just haven't had time to file an SPI yet. Khirurg (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
He is, I had filed the SPI and he got blocked. Although some of his recent edits might have been accepted on the article. Consider checking those edits out when you get time. Lorstaking (talk) 17:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Boyer 1991[edit]

You recently added two citations of "Boyer 1991" to the article on mathematics. However, there isn't a full citation for this source in the references section, and the Harvard link isn't functioning. Could you provide a full citation of this source? Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Done and thanks. I will be adding some more citations in the coming days. Khirurg (talk) 19:51, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Great. Thanks for the quick response. I just noticed that Boyer's book was provided in the further reading section, so I removed it from there. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Greeks[edit]

Hello, thanks for cleaning up the Greeks article! I'm happy to let it get reassessed or pull it from the nomination. I don't think it will have any issue passing. Maybe it should even be nominated for FA? Also, regarding the plagiarised book, Routledge got back to me saying they are investigating it. --Michail (blah) 02:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. How about we send it for FA since it's already GA, and would probably pass GA easily like you said? Keep us posted on the routledge story, I'm curious to see what happens. Khirurg (talk) 02:54, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Minoan civilization, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Malia and Akrotiri (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)