User talk:Orhanghazi

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

Contents

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Orhanghazi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! SatuSuro 02:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

August 2009[edit]

Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Evergreen Marine. Thank you. –túrianpatois 14:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Malay people.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Malay people.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Skier Dude (talk 08:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Congkak[edit]

Hi Orhanghazi. I moved the swan-congkak image to the top for the introduction, although I have to say that the picture quality is rather poor (I prefer to find a better image for the introduction). I also re-placed the dakon image and moved it to the history subsection, that way there is a better 'hint' about this amazing southeastasian version of the mancala game. Dakon, or Congkak, or perhaps Mokaotan, these are only names for a form of game that shares a very similar rule in southeast asia. :) --Rochelimit (talk) 18:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Orhanghazi. You have new messages at Rochelimit's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello. I found the following edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Congkak&diff=415297556&oldid=415295344 . Note that there is indeed a mancala game very similar to Congkak played in Sri Lanka. It is called Chonka. See also: http://mancala.wikia.com/wiki/Congkak and the book of Henry Parker (http://books.lakdiva.org/parker/) 84.175.173.15 (talk) 07:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Userpage[edit]

Hi

I have copied your biographic table for my user page. Hope you don't mind.Quixodon (talk) 12:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain on "Indon" remark[edit]

On your edit explanation on article Sepak Takraw you wrote: Reverting possible vandalism by an Indon. Please refrain on Indon remark, it can be categorized as ethnic slur. Even so the vandal is Indonesian that can be traced to Pekanbaru Riau, please reverting the vandalism neutraly without unnecesary agression by expressing slurs towards other nationalities. cheers. Gunkarta (talk) 00:38, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Why dont we re-create an article about the word "Indon" first before categorizing the word as "ethnic slur". This is just a suggestion..:)(Orhanghazi (talk) 02:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC))

Thank you[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Bersih 3.0 rally, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.57.178 (talk) 09:20, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK nom[edit]

Hi, I proposed DYK nomination for recently article you have created, Template:Did you know nominations/Malayisation. Please regularly check and answer any problem that maybe raise there. Thanks. *Annas* (talk) 09:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Malayisation[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Malayisation at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Lihaas (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Ethnic Malays, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dayak (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) 14:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Malayisation[edit]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

warning[edit]

You are close to being in WP:3RR territory - you can be blocked for your reverts at Ethnic Malays SatuSuro 12:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing 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.

History of the Malay language (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Banda, Maluku, Frontispiece, Ambon, Batavia, Corpus and Orthographic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kingdom of Singapura, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Perlak and Ayuthaya (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) 11:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Melaka sultanate, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kampar and Siak (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) 12:01, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sang Sapurba, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Crown, Signet and Siak (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) 11:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Etymology / Usage[edit]

Etymology is different to usage. From wikipedia: Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. By an extension, the term "etymology (of a word)" means the origin of a particular word. --Dravidianhero (talk) 06:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Malay Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Orhanghazi, I hope you will come back to Malay Wikipedia and helps us to contribs some new articles at there.----Aplikasi (Talk) 01:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Salam saudara, maaf saya tidak boleh buat dlm masa terdekat ni, masih ada beberapa rancangan saya untuk en.wiki. Sekarang pun saya sedang mengusahakan artikel "Kedah Sultanate" dan kemungkinan ada 2 lagi rencana "Sultanate" di Malaysia yg akan saya buat. Saya memang ada perancangan untuk kembali ke ms.wiki, kalau tiada aral melintang, mungkin selepas semuanya selesai di sini. Saya lihat ms.wiki pun tidaklah ketandusan penyunting2 baru, bahkan semakin hampir mengejar id.wiki mengikut jumlah rencana..tahniah. Satu soalan...anda sudah bersara??-Ø:G (talk) 08:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Saya cuma berharap agar anda kembali semula ke ms.wiki. Bolehlah bantu mencipta pelbagai jenis rencana di mswiki. Kami semua di ms.wiki amat mengalu-alukan kepulangan anda. Ya, saya sudah bersara di en.wiki dalam mencipta rencana kerana tidak tahan dengan polisinya yang agak berat sebelah. Saya agak pelik mengapa rencana Bagan parish mesti di lencongkan padahal ianya juga terdapat di Kelantan selain Johor. Tetapi walau bagaimanapun saya masih aktif di ms.wiki. Saya akan berusaha sedaya-upaya memajukan ms.wiki kerana peraturannya tidak begitu ketat berbanding en.wiki.----Aplikasi (Talk) 12:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Lagi satu, kerana kebanyakan para pengguna di en.wiki seperti tidak menghargai sumbangan pengguna lain. Mengapa saya perlu mendapat amaran sebelum ini walhal rencana tersebut juga terdapat di ms.wiki.----Aplikasi (Talk) 13:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Malayisation, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vietnamese, Assimilation and Funan (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) 11:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Undang-Undang Melaka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abstract (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) 09:09, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Undang-Undang Laut Melaka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deck (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) 09:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Reliable sources[edit]

See WP:Reliable sources. Wikis are as a general rule, not reliable. It's also a self-published source by the looks of it. If you want a wiki/SPS declared reliable, the best way is to ask on WP:RS/N. CMD (talk) 00:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't think all my sources are self-published, even if you think the source is 'unreliable', then just put a remark on it, why the heck you revert my entire edits? Ø:G (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
For the other reasons I mentioned in the summary. You were making large changes under the misleading edit summary of "rearrange", some of which you've supported with wikis, and some which has directly contradicted information previously there. Information that is unreliable should be removed, per the wikipedia WP:Verification policy. Per WP:BRD, if you think the information should be added, explain so in the talkpage, and achieve consensus there before adding. CMD (talk) 01:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
The problem here is you don't make it specific, which sentence is wrong or which part need improvements. Instead of giving any suggestions, you simply revert the work of others which properly cited, and thats pretty rude. I do made little additions but not that large, it also involves rearranging sentences previously there, thats why i put it "rearrange". In case you missed it or don't even brother to read, below are among infos that I have added
  • The name 'Malaysia' is a combination of the word Malay and the Latin/Greek suffix -sia/-σία.[1]
  • In modern terminology, "Malay" is the name of an ethnoreligious group of Austronesian people predominantly inhabiting the Malay peninsula and portions of adjacent islands of Southeast Asia, including the east coast of Sumatra, the coast of Borneo, and smaller islands that lie between these areas.[2]
  • The origins of the word Melayu ('Malay') itself are disputed. Among notable theories are, it is derived from the Sungai Melayu ('Melayu river') in Sumatra,[3] from the Melayu Kingdom, a classical kingdom that existed in the 7th century Sumatra.
  • In 19th century, the concept of "Malay race" was first propagated by European scholars, in referring to all natives of Maritime Southeast Asia or Austronesians as a whole. A number of derivations from this anachronistic concept was later introduced, among others were the terms "Malay Archipelago"[4] as well as "Malaysia" itself.
Now, do enlighten me, which part is "unreliable" and "need to be verified"?.Ø:G (talk) 03:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
I did, specifically mention the wiki source, which you at least seem to have removed. You've removed completely, without explanation, the widespread idea that Malaysia is Malaya + si. This needed an explanation, and should likely be explained as false if it is. You've also written that the origins of the name "Melayu" are disputed, and given for 2 of your proposed 3 possibilities theories which include the word "Melayu". You've also removed the note on Malayadvipa without explanation. Other terms related to the word Malay aren't relevant to the etymology of Malaysia. You're still conflating the skin-colour Malay race with ethnolinguistic Austronesians incorrectly.
If you're editing a wiki anyone can edit, expect to not always be in agreement with others. This is what finding wp:consensus is about, as well as wp:brd. In addition to rearranging sentences, and adding, you've also removed some, which you've failed to note. Remember that while you claim reverting your work is rude, you've simply overwritten the work of many others and edit warred that overwritten information in. CMD (talk) 13:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • You've removed completely, without explanation, the widespread idea that Malaysia is Malaya + si - Nope, i didn't remove this, its still there.LOL (seriously...are u really reading it before reverting?). Although i don't quite agree that this Malaya+si being "widespread", it is cited by at least one source, thus i left it there.
  • You've also written that the origins of the name "Melayu" are disputed, and given for 2 of your proposed 3 possibilities theories which include the word "Melayu"- are you denying there is a dispute here? seriously? the Malay Annals points it to Sungai Melayu, while several scholars suggesting Melayu Kingdom , all these are quite well-known facts, even taught in schools, how much citations you need to get you convinced? tell me. The theory points to Tamil origin is the weakest one here, the cited works are of scholars not even specialised in Malay studies. But surprisingly it get your so called "consensus" to be there.
  • You've also removed the note on Malayadvipa without explanation - this word aren't relevant to the etymology of Malaysia. It was written thousands of years ago and no any clear evidence suggesting that those Europeans who coined the word "Malaysia", made their derivations from it. The citations merely mention that Malayadvipa was used for Malay peninsular, and no reference was made to relate it with the etymology of Malaysia.
  • Other terms related to the word Malay aren't relevant to the etymology of Malaysia - well, in what way that these word aren't relevant, enlighten me please. You are making a general statement here. After all, all of these came from the same root word, "Malay"
Malay (Melayu)->Malay peninsula or Malaya (Tanah Melayu) (15th century-20th century)->Federation of Malaya (Persekutuan Tanah Melayu)(1948-1963)->Malaysia (1963-present)
Malay (Melayu)->Malay Race (19th century)->Malay archipelago(19th century)->"Malaysia" (19th century)
  • You're still conflating the skin-colour Malay race with ethnolinguistic Austronesians incorrectly. - the term Austronesian is quite new, previously in the 19th century and early 20th century, Malay race was used instead. It is clearly mentioned in my edit that this is an anachronistic concept, no longer relevant today. Ill remove the "austronesian" thing.Ø:G (talk) 19:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Ah, found it. I suppose that was part of your rearrangements. My apologies, but in that case you've put in two prima face opposing theories and presented each individually with no link. Surely there's some connection if they're both true?
Both "Sungai Melayu" and "Melayu Kingdom" include the word "Melayu". They are not explanations for the origin of the word Melayu. The Tamil theory is actually an explanation for the word Melayu, and the only one there, although I suppose the removed Malayadvipa could be another origin (or perhaps also based off the Tamil).
Tagging "archipelago" or "race" as an additional word to "Malay", or adding "Federation of" does not make Malay a root word, as these aren't new words. They're two words put together. You said in your above point about Malayadvipa that the sources didn't explicitly link it to the etymology of the word Malaysia. Do your sources for these do so?
Austronesian isn't exactly a replacement for the idea of a Malay race. The Malay race was part of a racial division of people, based mostly off skin colour. Ethnolinguistic classifications, like Austronesian, work off far more evidence, and provide a more detailed examination of origin. These classifications are actually useful for history, unlike the racial ones.
I didn't mention it, but the articles you placed as main articles don't fit that usage. Neither is an article focused on a more detailed discussion of the etymology of Malaysia. CMD (talk) 20:08, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Opposing theories exist in many articles, i don't see why we need to push forward one theory and discard the others. After all, they are just theories. Considering this theory "Malaya+Si", in my POV, it is illogical to assume that the 19th century term "Malaysia" was derived from the term "Malaya", as "Malaya" only established as the name of a country in the early 20th century, via Frank Swettenham's British Malaya (1906).
  • "Melayu" in Malay means "to flow", which explains the naming of Melayu river. It is common for people in Malay world to be known by the name of the river on which they settled. i.e. Sungai Brunei-Brunei Sultanate-Orang Brunei, Sungai Pahang-Pahang Sultanate-Orang Pahang, Sungai Perak-Perak Sultanate-Orang Perak. The section is for the etymology of Malaysia, i think its enough to include the origin of the word 'Melayu' itself, not to go deeper into etymological root.
  • Both terms, Malaysia and Malay archipelago were derived from the european understanding of the concept of Malay race which in turn derived from the word Malay. I think thats pretty simple to understand. The inclusion of federation of Malaya was merely to explain the historical evolution of terms for Malay peninsular until it formed Malaysia.
  • Malay race wasn't exactly a encompass the entire Austronesians, but it was the only term best representing the Austronesians in the past.
  • As i mentioned earlier, etymological root of Melayu can be best explained in details not here, but in other articles that deserve it more, which i think the ethnic Malays article. The same thing was done to article Russia where Rus' people was placed as main article. The same goes to Malay peninsular, Malaysian federation was undoubtedly originates from the federation of Malay states in the peninsular, before its expansion. The evolution of terms for Malay peninsular from the past, does relate with the naming of Malaysia.Ø:G (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
You can present opposing points of view, but not with such disconnect and absolutely no acknowledgement of that opposition. What is the quote from your source where it describes "sia". Does it enlighten?
The point is you've portrayed Melayu river and the Melayu kingdom as opposing theories to the Tamil root when they are completely different topics. Two, that of the river and the kingdom, are not about the origin of the name Melayu, instead they are about how the name Melayu was first used in the area (and quite frankly the Kingdom could've been named after the river, or vice versa). The Tamil theory is about the origin of the word Melayu. Different topics.
"Malay race" isn't a derived word, it's exactly the same word functioning as an adjective. It's in reference to the word, not an evolution of it. Malaysia on the other hand, is a completely new word. It's derivation from Malay is not necessarily related to other uses of the word Malay.
Malaya is a relevant word to Malaysia, but the various apendages in formal names, the "states" from "Malay states", the "Federation of" from "Federation of Malaya", are irrelevant to the etymology of Malaysia. They're political designations. CMD (talk) 01:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • So i suppose we have to connect them then. Here is my source concerning "-sia". "‘’The name was devised in the early 19th century by British geographers for the Malayan Archipelago as a whole, with -sia added to Malay to form a classical-style name that happened to suggests the archipelago’s location in southeastern Asia." .
  • Sungai Melayu and Melayu kingdom are the possible origins where the word Melayu was derived, while "Malai" and "Ur" may also the possible origin of the word "Melayu", but in linguistic side. Both are in fact talking about origins, unless I'm talking about "etymology" here, then it would be a different matter.
  • You still don't get it about this "Malay race". Why is it so hard for you to understand?. Its not about the words, but more on the concept of it which led to the derivations of various terminologies such as Malay archipelago and Malaysia itself. The concept of "Malay race" here is the understanding that all natives of Maritime Southeast Asia are of the same racial stock called "Malay". This was thought to have been first coined by Raffles when he remarked in the early 19th century; "i cannot but consider the Malayu nation as one people, speaking one language, though spread over so wide a space, preserving their character and customs, in all maritime states lying between Sulu Seas and the Southern Oceans." Since 1824, the term was popularised and commonly accepted. As a result, in 19th century, european scholars began naming the geographical area where this Malay stock live after their name; "Malay", thus we have the terms "Malay archipelago" and "Malaysia" here, in referring to modern "Maritime Southeast Asia".
  • Malay States and Federation of Malaya are political designations as the Malaya and Malaysia themselves. They serve the purpose to explain the evolution of terms used to refer to Malay peninsular. They are merely for additional info and of course not directly related the discussion on the etymology of Malaysia.Ø:G (talk) 06:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Okay, so it's in reference to the original name, rather than the change from Malaya to Malaysia. That's a possible difference.
The shift of a word between regions and applications is different from the creation of the word. Presumably the Tamil theory applies to the naming of the river and/or kingdom.
The term "Malay race" isn't important. What's important was the designation as the people as Malay (be it the wider race of the more limited ethnic group). The generalisation to the whole are wouldn't require them all to be Malay.
Maritime Souteast Asia is the combination of the archipelago and the Peninsular, both the 'Malay' areas of old. However again, the important point here is the word "Malay", not any of the other derivatives (unless perhaps "archipelago" or "peninsular" or "race" somehow evolved into the "sia" suffix, which I doubt).
The terms didn't refer to the peninsular, but to various political bodies on it. They should be covered in the history section, not included as a distraction in Etymology. CMD (talk) 15:59, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Riza Aziz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penthouse (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) 13:34, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Malay Annals, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kampar and Klang (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) 09:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terengganu Inscription Stone, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Orientalist and Abstract. 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) 09:41, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Rumi Spelling, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Grammarian, Velar fricative and William Marsden. 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) 15:29, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dong Yen Chau inscription, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Naga and Cham. 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) 17:38, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Malay tricolour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tricolour (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) 09:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sultan of Pahang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Muar (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) 08:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Malay world, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Malaya and William Marsden (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) 09:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of English words of Malay origin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cootie, Cutch and Tical (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) 11:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mahmud Shah III, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lingga (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) 09:38, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

The religion of Malays ethnic groups according to 2010 Indonesian Census[edit]

Hi~ You undid my edit regarding the religions of ethnic Malays, citing that was not mentioned in the reference paper. That is simply not true. Please look at page 21 in the paper "Changing Ethnic Composition: Indonesia, 2000-2010" by researchers from Indonesian Statistics and University of Indonesia (http://iussp.org/sites/default/files/event_call_for_papers/IUSSP%20Ethnicity%20Indonesia%20Poster%20Section%20G%202708%202013%20revised.pdf) that clearly provides tabulated data of religions of each ethnic groups in Indonesia, including Indonesian Malays. In which in Indonesia, 98.77% of Malay are muslims, 0.97% are christians (protestanism and catholicism), 0.26% are Buddhists, 0.01% are Hindus.

While it is true that per definition of Malaysian constitution that Malay is 100% Islam, that is not the case in Indonesia and other places as evident from Indonesian census.

Hand15 (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I admit missing that. But it is still less than 1% and not even worth mentioning, just like the number of non-followers of Judaism among Jews . Similar to Minangkabau, Malays having religion other than Islam is extremely uncommon thing. Islam itself is the integral part of Malay culture, and this is recognised not only in Malaysia, but in Brunei, Singapore and Thailand.Ø:G (talk) 01:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Pahang123.svg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pahang123.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hari Merdeka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National holiday (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) 10:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Malays of Mon-Khmer descent.[edit]

Salam Bro, it is highly possible that many Malays especially those from the northern Peninsular were originally of Mon-Khmer stock but being Malayalised after several generations kan? in addition of their Austronesian stock that is. Some interesting discussion here and here, nak letak dalam wiki but too bad i can't seem to find any good articles to cite. What do you think? (Egard89 (talk) 06:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC))

Waalaikumussalam bro, Linehan and Farish Noor discussed a lot about Pre-Malaccan history of Pahang, and noted it being of Mon-Khmer origin, in their books 'History of Pahang' and 'From Inderapura to Darul Makmur'. In my opinion, Malayisation of Mon-Khmer was not partial as what experienced by Minangkabau/Javanese/Bugis immigrants etc. It is rather a complete assimilation, whereby combined elements of Mon-Khmer+Austronesian with Muslim-Malay, effectively creating an entirely new unique identity, e.g northerners & east coast people. Moreover, I cant recall any Malay claiming of Mon-Khmer descent in these days in contrast to Minang/Javanese/Bugis descent. Even myself, being a Pahangite Malay, quite probably of being this Mon-Khmer descent, never claim as such.Ø:G (talk) 07:37, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Nice, now those books are on my wishlist. I'm halfway on reading What Your Teacher Didn't Tell You by Farish as a matter of fact. Ah, so do you think it is reasonable to mention that the Malays are also partly descended by the early Mon-Khmer/Austroasiatic settlers on ethnic Malay article? This is also supported by The Yunnan theory (Mekong river migration) on the Origin section of the same article. :) --Egard89 (talk) 05:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Saw From Inderapura to Darul Makmur at the local bookfair, excited terjumpa buku tu sampai vendor tanyer "kamu ni orang pahang ker?" Haha.--Egard89 (talk) 16:12, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Haha, good for you bro. Anyway, ko orang mane? Yes I do think it is reasonable to mention as such. Mon-Khmer, various Austroasiatic peoples along with Austronesians are among the earliest settlers of mainland Southeast Asia.(Ø:G (talk) 17:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC))
Yo bro, sorry r lambat reply, kadang-kadang discussion kat talk page ni tak keluar notification. Haha. Aku Sabahan,with a Kedahan-Malay mom and an Indonesian-born Bugis dad. Oh, ade juga jumpa buku tu dekat library shah alam. Aku baru resign keje, bosan-bosan tu la tiba-tiba rajin edit wikipedia ni. :) --Egard89 (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
seronok je tengok adat perkahwinan melayu kepulauan riau kat youtube nih --Egard89 (talk) 03:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pahang Civil War, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Muar and Klang (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) 10:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

May 2016[edit]

Information icon Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing an article on Wikipedia, you will see a small field labeled "Edit summary" shown under the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

 

I noticed your recent edit to Sultan Mahmud Shah of Pahang does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! TJH2018talk 23:09, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Lembah Bujang[edit]

Salam bro, dapat info baru pasal tamadun lembah bujang yang lebih awal daripada zaman hindu-buddha itu sendiri, tapi tak tahu nak selit dekat mana dalam article etnik melayu. haha.--Egard89 (talk) 04:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Pendapat aku, bahagian history/Indian influence tu patut dah bleh tukar jadi "early kingdoms", tapi kene re-write balik skit(Ø:G (talk) 22:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification for October 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pahang Kingdom, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pepper, Sukhotai and Ayuthaya (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) 11:14, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inderapura, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deva (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) 11:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Orhanghazi. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the Wikipedia Selangor Meetup 1[edit]

Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup Banner.jpg

The 3rd Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup had now arrived on Selangor! Pack your bags and your laptop, and meet some fellow Malaysia Wikipedians in the meetup!

This meetup was initiated by Chongkian and the invitation was written and sent by NgYShung. For more information, see the meetup page. If there is any enquires, feel free to discuss at the talk page or at the Facebook event page. (Delivered: 07:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC))

Orphaned non-free image File:Pahang123.svg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pahang123.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Kingdom of Singapura[edit]

Please provide the exact quote so we can know the correct context on which it is written. Many things have been written in the article that are highly dubious, for example, claiming that Wang refuted the Portuguese account which is impossible (see the discussion page), there is a need for a more accurate description of history of the supposed kingdom. It is known as early as Raffles' time that a significant settlement existed in Singapore, and Wang's account certainly supported it, therefore we would need to know what it is that historians questioned. Other people need to go over the article as it seems to be entirely written in a POV manner, trying to suggest that these figures are historical when many historians thought them mythical invented to justify the legitimacy of the Malacca Sultanate. A request for review of the article has been submitted - Wikipedia:Peer review/Kingdom of Singapura/archive1. Hzh (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

1) Wang (first hand account) mentioned local chief, and so Malay Annals (second hand account). Tom Pires (centuries of hand account, from traders in 16th century Malacca) said Siamese (foreign) chief ruled Singapore.
2) Its your own POV that Malay Annals is mythical. Unesco recognized it as romanticized history, and so Britannica.
3) You can always refute the existence of the kingdom with your source. There are scholars that mentioned it did exist.
You are not answering the question I asked, and I'm not sure if you understand my exact point. I'm asking what your edit "which an earlier generation of historians had queried the existence of" refers to exactly and on what context is it said? Does it has anything to do with the historicity of the kingdom? If not, then why is it there? No one has questioned the existence of a significant settlement, the question is whether the line of kings as described in the Malay Annals existed. I had in fact given a link that say "no one has claimed the Malay Annals is a reliable guide to dates and events". Another one here describes Sri Tri Buana as "mythical" and that the 5 kings may be invented - [1]. Encyclopedia Britannica says the Malay Annals is a "historical source about Malacca", did not say anything about Singapura [2]. The UNESCO does not says it is "romanticized history" - [3], it's Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (by Dato’ Haji A.Aziz Deraman) in their nomination - [4]. Again UNESCO talks about the Sultanate (i.e. Malacca), not Singapura. I'm not actually refuting anything, I'm merely asking it to be written in a way that does not push a point of view. No one is claiming that Malay Annals is entirely false, just that what's written about Singapure is questionable. You are also misunderstanding what's being written. Wang said a local chief, that does not mean there was a king (absolutely no king is mentioned actually, but it said that the chief found a crown), and a local chief can be anything. Portuguese sources suggest that Singapura/Temasek was a vassal state of the Thais, that means that there was also a local chief, but he paid their allegiance to the Thais (some said that the local chief of Singapore was linked to Patani by marriage). The Portuguese sources indicate that local chief may be a Sang Aji (equivalent to a prince) or a Tamagi (possibly the same as a Temenggung). In any case what Wang wrote has little relevance to the event the Portuguese wrote about, because the events are separated by around 60 years. Hzh (talk) 09:04, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
You should also try to reply to the discussion in the article talk page - Talk:Kingdom of Singapura. There are many issues that need addressing, as a lot of the article needs rewriting. Hzh (talk) 10:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
You are not answering the question I asked, and I'm not sure if you understand my exact point. I'm asking what your edit "which an earlier generation of historians had queried the existence of" refers to exactly and on what context is it said? Does it has anything to do with the historicity of the kingdom? If not, then why is it there? No one has questioned the existence of a significant settlement, the question is whether the line of kings as described in the Malay Annals existed. I had in fact given a link that say "no one has claimed the Malay Annals is a reliable guide to dates and events". Another one here describes Sri Tri Buana as "mythical" and that the 5 kings may be invented
1) The words are not from me. That exactly what Abshire (2011) wrote in page 19-20, History of Singapore. Read the last paragraph of the article. You should ask him, not me. The fact is Raffles himself referred the rulers of the kingdom as 'Malayan kings'. So the existence of the settlement as a kingdom is well noted by historian. You are welcomed to include any sources that deny the existence of these 'Malayan kings', don't forget to mention the name.
Encyclopedia Britannica says the Malay Annals is a "historical source about Malacca", did not say anything about Singapura
2) Britannica also says that the Malay Annals is a romanticised account, not a mere myth. The major theme of Malay Annals is the origin, evolution and demise of Malacca Sultanate. The story about Old Singapura included in the origin part. There are a very long chapter on Old Singapura there.
The UNESCO does not says it is "romanticized history" - [5], it's Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (by Dato’ Haji A.Aziz Deraman) in their nomination - [6].
3) The 'romanticised history' is mentioned in the published version Memory of the World: The treasures that record our history from 1700 BC to the present day (2012), page 219. You can buy one and check.
I'm not actually refuting anything, I'm merely asking it to be written in a way that does not push a point of view.
4) But you denied the historicity of the Malay Annals from day one. The article is well sourced, not merely created from my POV.
You are also misunderstanding what's being written. Wang said a local chief, that does not mean there was a king (absolutely no king is mentioned actually, but it said that the chief found a crown), and a local chief can be anything.
5) Yes, it can be anything, a ruler, or a king. There are many interpretations, you are welcomed to put other interpretations if you wish.
Portuguese sources suggest that Singapura/Temasek was a vassal state of the Thais, that means that there was also a local chief, but he paid their allegiance to the Thais (some said that the local chief of Singapore was linked to Patani by marriage). The Portuguese sources indicate that local chief may be a Sang Aji (equivalent to a prince) or a Tamagi (possibly the same as a Temenggung). In any case what Wang wrote has little relevance to the event the Portuguese wrote about, because the events are separated by around 60 years.
6) You are welcomed to include what Portuguese sources had indicated, if you consider that as reliable.
Again, you are not answering the question. I'm asking what is the context in which it is said. That is, I'm asking you to give me the full quote (or paragraph) so I can understand what is being said. It seems that you might be using what's written to imply something that isn't there. (Like I said, no scholars has questioned the existence of a settlement there since Raffles' time, you appear to want to suggest that he is writing about the historicity of the kingdom). You are also not replying to what I said, which is that all of them mentioned the Malay Annals in relation to Malacca, what the scholars are questioning is whether the account about Singapura has any basis in truth. You will also find that the UNESCO is merely repeating what Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka said. It is not their words. I think you have a problem with understanding what people say, I did not deny the historicity of the Malay Annals, I'm saying many scholars questioned its historicity. You have actually made up the entire thing about Wang refuting the Portuguese source (I checked that source, it did not say that). A local government, if it existed, cannot refute the Portuguese account in any case. You appear not to understanding the various kinds of government, or even the terms used, such as local chief, kings, or vassal, and come up with odd assertion. Having a local chief does not mean that it is independent, a penghulu is a local chief, he is certainly not a king. It is therefore a big stretch to suggest that Wang has said anything that indicates that there was a king there, or that they weren't controlled by the Thais just before Parameswara arrived (they were actually attacked by the Thais according to Wang). That statement is plainly wrong. Hzh (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Again, I would strongly encourage you to discuss this in the talk page for Kingdom of Singapura. Where there is doubt about the historicity, then the article should be written differently. You should see that issue involved when a scholar would say that a king is "mythical", but the article is written as if he is unquestioningly real. Hzh (talk) 16:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Anyway, I think the issue is best discussed in the Talk:Kingdom of Singapura. I will try to make some changes to the article another time so that it is more balanced as far as academic opinion is concerned. If you object to any changes, you can always let me know in the talk page. Hzh (talk) 16:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Again, you are not answering the question. I'm asking what is the context in which it is said. That is, I'm asking you to give me the full quote (or paragraph) so I can understand what is being said. It seems that you might be using what's written to imply something that isn't there.
1) The full quote is there in the article's last paragraph, I didn't made it up. It looks like you yourself who failed to read.
You are also not replying to what I said, which is that all of them mentioned the Malay Annals in relation to Malacca, what the scholars are questioning is whether the account about Singapura has any basis in truth.
2) You can include who are the scholars questioning the basis of Malay Annals account. Mind you that there are also scholars that regard the account in the text has the basis.
You will also find that the UNESCO is merely repeating what Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka said. It is not their words.
3) Doesn't matter, both Unesco and DBP mentioned it anyway, including Britannica. They are all more authoritative sources than you.
I think you have a problem with understanding what people say, I did not deny the historicity of the Malay Annals, I'm saying many scholars questioned its historicity.
4) Not surprised that some scholars questioned its historicity. But again, the Annals is a romanticised history.
You have actually made up the entire thing about Wang refuting the Portuguese source (I checked that source, it did not say that). A local government, if it existed, cannot refute the Portuguese account in any case. You appear not to understanding the various kinds of government, or even the terms used, such as local chief, kings, or vassal, and come up with odd assertion. Having a local chief does not mean that it is independent, a penghulu is a local chief, he is certainly not a king. It is therefore a big stretch to suggest that Wang has said anything that indicates that there was a king there, or that they weren't controlled by the Thais just before Parameswara arrived (they were actually attacked by the Thais according to Wang). That statement is plainly wrong.
As i mentioned before, there are many interpretations. Does not necessarily they are wrong. You have no right to judge, you yourself is not a scholar. (Ø:G (talk) 10:59, 3 February 2017 (UTC))
Just a note to say that you are not free to make your own interpretation in Wikipedia as it would constitute original research per WP:OR - "Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation." You gave no secondary source or tertiary source for such an interpretation, therefore it is wrong according to Wikipedia guideline. Hzh (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
You still haven't answer the point, which is the context on which that sentence is made. If it hasn't anything to do with the historicity of kings of the Malay Annals, then you are attempting to make something sound like it isn't. I'm interested in a fuller quote for the context. In fact nothing in the last paragraph support what you doing, as it only refer the settlement, not the historicity of the kings. Hzh (talk) 12:17, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
There is a further problem that, if I read what you suggested correctly that the entire paragraph (or maybe the entire section) is reproduced from the book, then you are violating WP:COPYVIO, and that is a serious offence in Wikipedia. (I read it, and assumed you would not have violated copyright by direct copying which can get you blocked.) You are therefore required to rewrite it, or use a smaller portion of the quote, and make clear that it is a quotation from the book. Hzh (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
If, as you are indicating, that the paragraph or section are copied, then this whole discussion is even odder, since it quite clearly states that "historians are generally in doubt over the existence of the kingdom". Therefore if this is the scholarly opinions, then how you wrote the entire article is really strange. Hzh (talk) 13:04, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to the Wikipedia Selangor Meetup 2[edit]

Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup Banner.jpg

The 4th Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup will be held for the second time on Selangor, and you are invited!

→ To collaborate between Wikipedia Malaysia User Group and Sunway Group, a large corporation in Malaysia.
→ To create Wikipedia (and other Wikimedia projects)'s articles and edit/improve articles on the spot.

This meetup was initiated by Chongkian and the invitation was written and sent by NgYShung. For more information and updates, see the meetup page. If there is any enquires, feel free to discuss at the talk page. If you wish to opt-out of any future Malaysia meetup invitation, please add your name here. (Delivered: 11:46, 22 February 2017 (UTC))

An Invitation from WikiProject Malaysia[edit]

I would like to note that you are still not officially a WP:MY members since your name is not in the list Face-smile.svg NgYShung huh? 07:52, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

how come, my name is already here (Ø:G (talk) 18:01, 5 March 2017 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pahang Kingdom, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Malay, Bera and Klang (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) 10:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to the Wikipedia Johor Meetup 2[edit]

Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup Banner.jpg

The 5th Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup will be held for the second time in Johor. Since it is at holiday, check it out if you have time!

This meetup was initiated by Chongkian and the invitation was written and sent by NgYShung. For more information and updates, see the meetup page. If there is any enquirers, feel free to discuss at the talk page. If you wish to opt-out of any future Malaysia meetup invitation, please add your name here. (Delivered: 03:54, 17 March 2017 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing 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.

Orang Kaya Indera Pahlawan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bera
Orang Kaya Indera Segara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Rembau

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hukum Kanun Pahang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pawn (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) 09:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to the Wikipedia Kuala Lumpur Meetup 2[edit]

Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup Banner.jpg

The 5th Wikipedia Malaysia Meetup will be held for the second time on Kuala Lumpur!


→ To talk about the past Wikimedia Conference 2017 in Germany, Creative Commons, Malay Wikipedia and the upcoming Wikipedia East, Southeast Asia & Pacific Conference 2018 in Indonesia.
→ Forming a Wikipedia Malaysia User Group, coordinating East Malaysia-related affairs and training newcomer Wikipedia editors.
→ And a lot more!

This meetup was initiated by Chongkian and the invitation was written and sent by QianCheng. For more information and updates, see the meetup page. If there is any enquires, feel free to discuss at the talk page. If you wish to opt-out of any future Malaysia meetup invitation, please remove your name here. (Delivered: 06:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC))

  1. ^ Room, Adrian (2004). Placenames of the World: Origins and Meanings of the Names for Over 5000 Natural Features, Countries, Capitals, Territories, Cities and Historic Sites. McFarland & Company. p. 221. ISBN 978-078-6418-14-5. 
  2. ^ The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (2013). "Malay". Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. 
  3. ^ Milner, Anthony (2010), The Malays (The Peoples of South-East Asia and the Pacific), Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 18–19, ISBN 978-1-4443-3903-1 
  4. ^ "States of Malaysia". Statoids (Administrative Divisions of Countries). Retrieved 23 June 2010. 
  5. ^ Mohamed Anwar Omar Din (2012). "Legitimacy of the Malays as the Sons of the Soil". Canadian Center of Science and Education. pp. 80–81. ISSN 1911-2025. 
  6. ^ Reid, Anthony (2010). Imperial alchemy : nationalism and political identity in Southeast Asia. Cambridge University Press. p. 95. ISBN 978-052-1872-37-9.