User talk:Tumen-il

Tumen-il, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Tumen-il! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Turkoman (ethnonym), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:04, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tangra Mountains, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bulgar. 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) 06:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DPL bot thanks. Tumen-il (talk) 07:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Beshogur (talk) 12:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Beshogur about Uyghurs, I was talking about their culture, language and genetics (of course there are some mixes). They are definitely descendants of Karakhanids. They have haplogroup J2 (which is also VERY common in Karakhanid). Modern Uyghurs of Xinjiang (Eastern Karakhanid/Chagatai) also very closely related to Uzbeks (Western Karakhanid/Chagatai). But Yugurs are descendants of Ancient Uyghurs linguistically, culture, religion and genetics (yes they also have mixes. It seems they mixed with Tibetans and Chinese than Mongols). It is clear that the Yugurs are the original heirs of the Uyghur Khaganate. They also known as "Neo-Uyghurs" already. Tumen-il (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know about haplogroups and other stuff. However this can not be explained with language and genetics. What makes you think Uyghur Khaganate population did not have J2 haplogroup? I don't know. Do we have researchs about Qocho, etc?, probably not. Haven't seen one. Yet your argument is a WP:OR. You're keep changing the topic to Yugurs. Yes it is true that Yugur language is a descendant of Old Uyghur, but this does not mean that Yugurs are "true descendants" of Old Uyghurs. Uyghurs despite being inherited mostly from Kara-Khanids, have other groups like Tocharians, Old Uyghurs as well in their ethnogenese. If you were right all the time, there shouldn't be whole history of the Uyghur Khaganate on the page Uyghurs. Still "Uyghur" is a collective name for the peoples in Tarim Basin, I agree, but you simply changing Uyghurs -> Yugurs is simply POV pushing. If scholars call them Uyghurs, we should redirect to Uyghurs, not Yugurs. Maybe get a consensus about that. Beshogur (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Beshogur but we are talking about Old Uyghurs right? Yugur does also means Uyghur. And they live in Gansu, not Tarim Basin. Uyghur (Hui) means "Muslim" in chinese today (it means foreign in old times and used for Jews, Christians, Muslims in Yuan Dynasty). It's not a collective name for the people of Tarim basin. The Qocho Uyghurs lived in Dzungaria (Turfan, Beshbalik etc...), not Tarim Basin. Dzungaria (Northern/Eastern Xinjiang) was homeland to the Qocho Uyghurs and Tarim basin (Southern/Western Xinjiang) was homeland to the Eastern Karakhanids. Old Uyghurs basically migrated to Gansu, then Qocho. Descendants of Eastern Karakhanid people actually known as "Eastern Turki" (which means Eastern Karluk) but later adopted the name "Uyghur" in Xinjiang in 20th century. Also Old Uyghur haplogroup most likely Q (and O, D with mixes). Haplogroup Q was common in Xiongnu, Ashina, Ashide, Yenisei/Old Kyrgyz. It seems Old Uyghur people were descendants of Oghur (not Shaz) people. Later adopted Shaz language by Göktürks. Because Old Uyghurs claimed the epic of Oghuz Khagan, which is Hunnic (Oghur) epic. And the name "Uyghur" comes from "Oghur". And my arguments are not "WP:OR". I always linking Yugur page. Tumen-il (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on titles template

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Beshogur (talk) 20:19, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. For disruptive editing at Samarkand, and recently at Ashina tribe. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @LouisAragon,

I'm just deleting mistakes. It doesn't matter whether there is a source or not, wrong is wrong. There is a reason Samarkand is in Uzbekistan. Is it for nothing that Samarkand is located within the borders of Uzbekistan? Who cares about the Persian equivalent of Samarkand when Samarkand isn't even neighboring Iran? Samarkand was founded by Sogdians and was historically ruled by many nations: Sogdians, Achaemenids, Greeks, Turks, Mongols, Russians and even Arabs. In addition, the Turkic domination in Samarkand did not end with the Mongol invasions. The city continued to be ruled by the Turks. Also, before the Mongol invasions, the Iranians did not rule the city, only the Turks. Even now, the city belongs to the Turkic people, the Uzbeks.

In the description of the page, the city directly tells about the ancient Persians. But who cares about the Persians when Samarkand has such a great history? Moreover, today, when Samarkand is not Iranian. Tumen-il (talk) 19:43, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm just deleting mistakes. It doesn't matter whether there is a source or not, wrong is wrong"

According to user Tumen-Il? As unfortunate as it might seem, Wikipedia is written using reliable sources, not personal opinions. (WP:NOT).

You might wanna read WP:NOTHERE. If you keep this going, you'll be reported to ANI. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know but if you read my answer fully, you will understand that it's objective, not my personal opinions. Tumen-il (talk) 19:57, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:58, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Turkic migration. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]