User talk:Grandmaster: Difference between revisions

Why do you think, the portrait is PD? According to the Tair Salakhov article the portrait is painted in 1976, three years after the 1973 needed for sovietpd. Maybe the date is wrong (Shostakovich died in 1975)? Otherwise we have to delete the Shostakovich portrait and find something exponated before 1973. abakharev 23:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Bakharev,

As far as I know this image is a public domain and you can see it all over the internet (at least Russian and CIS websites) without any reference to a copyright holder. As for the date of the portrait, it was completed after Shostakovich died, in 1976, as the great composer was fatally ill when he posed for the portrait. So the date is correct. If you speak Russian, you can also check this article for more details on this subject:

http://www.kultura-portal.ru/tree/cultpaper/article.jsp?number=492&crubric_id=100445&rubric_id=200&pub_id=479779

If you think that this image cannot be used due to copyright issues, then we can replace it with some other Salahov’s work, e.g. portrait of Kara Karayev (completed before 1973). But I think Shostakovich’s portrait is one of the best Salahov’s portraits and well illustrates his style of painting, so I would prefer to keep it. Thank you. Grandmaster 06:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I like the portrait as well (actually do not rember any other Salakhov's painting). Maybe we should email Salakhov himself and ask for his permissions? abakharev 08:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That would be nice, but I don’t know Salakhov’s email, and I’m not sure if he actually uses email. If you think this image would cause a problem, we can use portrait of Kara Karayev (created in 1960), which is also exhibited in Tretyakov Gallery. Grandmaster 09:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is better to delete this image and replace it with the one made before 1973. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to contact the author to obtain his permission. I will upload something else later. Grandmaster 12:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Once an article is created in Wikipedia, you have to have administrative rights to delete it. Neither me nor you have such rights, thus, we have to go through voting on AfD page - that is reasonably cumbersome and lengthy. Thus, I would not recommend to delete an entry (unless it is somehow offensive, harmful, etc.), just make it a redirect to an article with the right name. See Help:Redirect. Usually redirect does not harm - they a take negligeble amount memory, but simplify search. Even the redirects with an orphographic errors might be helpfull, if you made such an error been our expert on Salakhov, then quite possible that an American schoolboy or whoever would look up the wikipedia would make the same mistake - so the more redirects the merrier.

Thus, the strategy would be decide the right name for the main article. Move the article there by pressing the move button on the top and entering the right name. It would create a redirect on the place of the right name. Check that all the other redirects points to the main article, so that there will be no double redirects, if necessary, edit the redirects. That's all.

Last few words, for the Russian-related articles we decided to avoid using patronimics in the titles of the main articles - they look foreign for the English-speakers, to long to type, introduce additional errors (what is right: Ivanovich, Ivanovitch or Iwanowitch?), etc. So we decided to use them only to distinguish among equally notable people - Aleksey Konstantinovich Tolstoy vs. Aleksey Nikolaevich Tolstoy, etc. It is in theory, but in reality many people are still using patronimics in the titles. I am not sure if it is relevant to the Azerbajani form of patronimics with ogly/kyzy. abakharev 13:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Redirect

• Thanks for the useful info. Patronymics are used in Azeri mostly in official documents, and not used at all in colloquial speech, so I agree with your policy on using patronymics. They only make search more complicated. I suggest applying the same policy to Azeri names, patronymics can be detailed in the text of the article, but not in its name. The name of the article about a person should consist only of the person’s name and surname. Grandmaster 14:22, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you have a reference for your change of number, I've reverted it for now as this is referenced from the LOC. - FrancisTyers 17:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. The official death toll for the events in Sumgait is 32, of them 26 Armenians, and 6 Azeris. This information can be found on Gorbachev Fund website: [1] Sorry, it’s in Russian. This figure is also given in the book “Black Garden” by Thomas de Waal (see chapter 2). That book is actually a good source of information about the history of conflict. It’s written in English, but only Russian version is available online. Grandmaster 19:43, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, yeah it seems like we've been discussing this for ages :) Well, my point is not that she is unbiased (this doesn't exist), I'm fairly sure she presents an argument which is favourable to Armenians. However, I was very careful to distinguish between sites that will publish any perspective, that is, they are non-partisan, and sites that only publish one perspective, that is, they are partisan.

Nowhere does it say "these are neutral sources". It says they are non-partisan sources - there is a subtle difference. We are presenting her piece as something published on a non-partisan website, there is even a link to her article, which you can fill out if you wish.

The final decision is not up to me, its up to you guys, I think I made a reasonable, verifiable distinction in the external links section which seemed to resolve the dispute at hand. Please let me know if you have any better ideas, aside from just labelling her as "Armenian POV" which is not constructive, as she has been published by the USIP, thats like saying the COE report is "Azeri POV" just because it favours the Azerbaijani position. Please feel free to leave a note on the article talk page or on my talk page. - FrancisTyers 17:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Francis, let's leave it for now. There are more important issues in that entry about Karabakh than this one link. Take care. Grandmaster 17:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, we worked together on Tahir Salahov article. Maybe you want to have a look on my Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alex Bakharev? abakharev 08:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to express my thanks to all the good people who spent their valuable time time and effort working on my (failed) RfA voting. Especially for those who actually voted to support me :). Lets move on and make together our Wikipedia an even greater place abakharev 10:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. I hope next time you'll succeed. Grandmaster 10:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Hussein Khan Nakhichevanski, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 06:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That’s cool. Grandmaster 07:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. Since either name links to the Saint Petersburg article, I think either one is fine. However, I think the city is best known as Saint Petersburg in the west. Go ahead and change it back if you prefer, but I would suggest putting Saint Petersburg in parenthesis after the first mention of Petrograd, such as: "Petrograd (modern day Saint Petersburg)" Hiberniantears 17:42, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I will amend it to read "Petrograd (modern day Saint Petersburg)". It would be more accurate from historical point of view. Also, do you think it is worth mentioning twice that he was the first and only Muslim to serve as General-Adjutant? Maybe, one mention will be enough. Regards, Grandmaster 18:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my newest notes in the talk page. Thanks! --RaffiKojian 23:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see talk page for Nakhichevan for my response. Grandmaster 07:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you added a new rayon to Nakhichevan - Kengerli. A couple of questions:

1. Do you have any further information on this, in particular a map? I can find no English language sources on it.
2. The only source I did find was in Azeri, and gave the name as KƏNGƏRLİ - this would transliterate to Kangarli, I do believe, but I'm no expert, I just know what I've learned while making my map.

I'd love to keep my map as up to date as possible, and this is the first I've heard of a new rayon. Thanks! --Golbez 07:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Golbez. It was a surprise for me as well, but I made inquires and found out that it has existed for about two years already. There is a link to the official cite of NAR at the bottom of the page, where this new rayon is mentioned along with other 6 and it is said that there are 7 rayons in the republic. At the same time the map is apparently out of date and shows only 6. I’ve made a search on the Internet myself and couldn’t find any map which showed the new rayon. As for the name, the letter “ə” is normally replaced in English spelling with either “a” or “e”, both are correct, so it’s up to you which one to use. It’s probably better to use the same spelling everywhere. Regards, Grandmaster 07:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the link to the map at the official website, but it does not show the new rayon. Grandmaster 07:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've asked the chap at Statoids if he knows anything, and made a stub article. --Golbez 08:15, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. If I find any new info, I’ll let you know. Take care. Regards, Grandmaster 08:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops. I just checked out the history of the page, and it looks like you are correct. Sorry about that. --Khoikhoi 06:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Grandmaster 06:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Grandmaster. I try to show the real 18 million number of iranian azeris in "azeris" page. But Tajik and some anti-azeris try to decrease it. Can you help there?...Sincerely

-Inanna-

Thanks, I’ll have a look. Regards, Grandmaster 07:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have studied the history of Caucasia and the Middle East since I was a child. There language is a Turkic language but has heavy influence from Arabic, Persian, and Caucasian languages. Also in the Republic of Azerbaijan there is Russian influence. My grandmather tells me about how her father (my great-grand father) remembers the the stories his parent told him about how so many Iranians left the area once the Russians annexed it.

What you say is basically right. Azeri language is Turkic and was lingua franca in the Caucasus back in the day, of course it has influences, as most of other languages. We have a lot in common in terms of history, traditions, etc, and Persian language was very popular with Azeri intelligentsia before Russia took the region over. Indeed, many Muslim people fled the region, as Russia started resettling Armenians from Persia and Turkey, and most of those who left were ethnic Azeris. Many people in Azerbaijan have relatives in Iran. As for Azeris being ethnic Iranians, I don’t share this view, and I responded to your post on the talk page of Azerbaijani people, please have a look. Regards, Grandmaster 07:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was born in South Azerbaijan in the city Hastper when we my family got exciled from Iran, because we wanted democratic Itan, we fled to Azerbaijcan SSR. In Iran we people always said North Azeri are greedy and selfish and more negative things. But when we arrived in Baku, we were welcomed with open arms, we had so much support there. I had never seen such friendly people, it was very unexpected. Today I dont see myselfs as a Irani anymore but as a Azeri and nothing else. 99% of my family is still in Iran and alot of North Azeris also have relatives and family in South Azerbaijan. Azeris might be ethnic Iranians (although recent research has proven that the DNA and genes are of Caucasian people and not Iran or Turkey) but look at me man, I was born and raised in Iran and I see myself as Azeri. I dont know any Azeri in Azerbaijan who sees himself as a ethnic Iranian. Baku87

I cut my addition from the Nakhichevan and added it instead to the Nagorno-Karabakh article. I apologize for any inconvenience (Google News made mention of both locations, so I included them both). -- Clevelander 14:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I hope you’ll keep contributing to these articles. Regards, Grandmaster 14:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/pdf/Y-paper.pdf

You will notice that the researchers did not use any subjects from Turkey or Turkmenistan. They are using the data in the literature for Kyrgyz, Karakalpak, Kazak, Dungan and Uzbek. Though when they plot their data superimposed with the data from the literature. Azerbaijanis and Armenians cluster closer to Turks of Turkey compared to Iranian populations.

Same people are doing the same argument in "Turkish people" article. I would think quite a few of them are "Aryan race" supporters and the rest are the usual suspects.

Saglicakla kal. AverageTurkishJoe 06:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the useful info. Currently I’m very busy with the articles Nakhichevan and Nagorno-Karabakh, and I cannot get engaged in another lengthy discussion because of time limitation. If you check those articles you’ll see what’s going on there. I will try to contribute as much as possible to the above mentioned article as well, but unfortunately my activities there are limited for the moment. Thank you very much for your support, for the moment we are simply being outnumbered here, Hoşca kal. Grandmaster 07:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Привет. А ты был в Польше судя по флажку. A в каком городе? Я сейчас в Кракове сижу. Brandmeister 19:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Привет. Я был в Варшаве в 1991 году. Grandmaster 19:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Wikipedia and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you.

If you feel I can help you or Wikipedia as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very much, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! I’m glad that you won. I wish good luck to you. Grandmaster 10:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read your contribution in the Safavids article. First of all, thanks for your effords to improve the article. However, your claim that Safavids were "Azeris" is deffinitly not true. The origin of the Safavids, Sheikh Safi al-Din Es'haq Arbabeli who traced his origin back to Firuz-Shah Zarrin-Kullah-e Kordi, was a Kurd and Persian-speaking. It is well attested in many documents that Safi al-Din was not a Turk. He wrote poems in the old language of Azerbaijan, the Iranian language known as "Adherbaijani". He was married to the daughetr of Sheikh Zahed al-Din Sanjani, a mystic from Gilan with origins in Khorasan. Of course, the Safavids intermarried with many other peoples - Armenians, Turks, Greeks, and later with Moghuls and Indian nobles - but the "origin of a dynasty" is defined by the male linage. And in case of the Safavids, they were of Persian-Kurdish origin.

As for the language, of course you are correct. The Safavids were Turkified Persians (the same way the Turkish Ghaznavids and Aibakids were Persianized and spoke Persian).

Claiming that Safaivids were of "Azeri origin" is wrong. They were Turkic-speaking Persians. Safavids are a symbol for Persian nationalism and the revival of Persian language, culture and nationalism after centuries of Turkish rule in Iran. Even their successors, the Turkoman Qajars were Persian-speaking.

Thanks

Hi. Thanks for your message. First off, Kurdish origin is just one of the versions, and not the most popular one. There is a great number of other sources that are available in the talk page archive, which prove otherwise. Some even doubt that Ismail was a direct descendant of Sheikh Safi. The claim that they were Turkic-speaking Persians is also disputable, it was rather the other way round, one can say that Shah Abbas was a Persian-speaking Turk. Regards, Grandmaster 13:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting. I though perhaps next time he reverts you'd be able to talk with that anon, as you are both Azeris. This isn't the first time I've heard this, I also encountered another Wikipedian way back who believed that they were "Turkic-speaking Iranians". It seems that Wikipedia is a magnet for people with minority beliefs who add their opinions to articles. Anyways, thanks again. --Khoikhoi 07:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now it looks like some Iranian POV-pusher has messed up the History of Azerbaijan article. Please help me out here, as I'm trying to stay off edit-warring. --Khoikhoi 07:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Khoikhoi. He’s not an Azeri, Azeri people don’t think that they are Iranian or anybody else. Looks like this is a result of some sort of official propaganda in Iran, they desperately try to deny existence of Azeris as an ethnicity. Thanks for your resistance to these POV pushers. Grandmaster 08:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently he is, but he's also an Iranian nationalist at the same time. Anyways, thanks for reverting on History of Azerbaijan. --Khoikhoi 18:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ibragimbekov.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 06:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I think no matter what Tajik is going to continue to revert, unless we come up with a compromise. What I suggest is to not state the origins in the intro, now that we have a section about it. However, we can mention all the stuff we can about Turkic origins at Safavids#Ethnic_and_linguistic_controversy. I suggest you make that section longer, and cite sources. What do you think? --Khoikhoi 07:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Khoikhoi. I don’t really think these people are willing to make any compromises in this issue. They continue to deny the facts established by many sources. But I think we should cite some sources the section you have mentioned, that would help to illustrate the conflicting views. I’m a little busy right now, but as soon as I find some time I’ll do that. Grandmaster 07:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think if we just remove the fact that they're Turkic in the opening paragraph (which is true but I don't think is good introductory material) and just add sources for the other section, then I think we'll be fine and Tajik won't revert anymore. --Khoikhoi 07:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But it does not now say they were Turkic, it just says they were Turkic-speaking as per Columbia encyclopedia. Grandmaster 08:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. We'll see what happens next. ;) --Khoikhoi 08:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Take care. Grandmaster 08:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm. Did you show this to Tajik? What did he have to say about it? I think this and the other source is enough to support your claim. We all know that they were initially Turkic-speaking, so I suppose we can add that for now. --Khoikhoi 18:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As one might expect, he keeps denying Safavids being Turkic or Turkic-speaking. He keeps reverting no matter what. Have a look at the discussion at the bottom of this section: [2] So I’m thinking what actions can we take to stop the revert war. There are absolutely no grounds to deny that they were Turkic-speaking, this is supported by a number of reliable sources, including Iranica. The latter even confirms that Safavids were Turks, but just claims that the clan was originally Iranian and later became Turkified, adopted Turkic language and became the ruling dynasty. That is fine with me as well, even though there are sources that claim they were originally Turkic. So we have every right to mention in the intro their Turkic background, and I may consider applying for some formal conflict resolution to stop the guy from reverting. Grandmaster 19:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would be a good idea. The guy's been reverting since early January, and I think we should add something to the Administrators' Noticeboard. It started with User:TimBits. Looks like he hasn't been editing in awhile. Oh well. --Khoikhoi 19:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If he continues the same course of action, something should definitely be done. Noticeboard could be good for a start. Let's give him another chance for now. Take care. Grandmaster 19:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salam kardas necesen? Senin e-mail ne dir kardas, bir suzum var sene??

Sağ ol. Bu səhifənin sağ tərəfində E-mail this user linkını basıb mənə yaza bilərsən. Grandmaster 14:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bro your e-mail doest work, it says you havent confirmed it yet. If you cant get it fixed mail me at farhad87@hotmail.com I'll mail you my question to you there. Leave a message here if you have sended the mail.