Talk:Alqosh

'Notre-Dame des Semences'
Note that handbooks of manuscript literature habitually refer to the monastery of Rabban Hormizd at Alqosh as "Notre-Dame des Semences." This is probably because most Chaldean Syriac literature was catalogued by Addai Scher, who published his material in French. For scholars to find this page, therefore, it must have some material in this name.

BGN native name: Alqōsh; variants: Algōsh; Al Qush --Cam 05:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Spelling The Name of The Village
It is ridicules having two different spellings for our village. We need to settle on a single form of spelling for Alqush. This article contains many variations that need to be fixed. Therefore, we need to make a vote on a standard spelling that can be a standard.

I say we go with Alqush.

Karam Bollis 23:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC) Karam Bollis


 * I've always seen Alqosh and never Alqush. — Gareth Hughes 00:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * And google agree's with this in a 10 to 1 ratio. Chaldean 00:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright, thank you for the replies. Also, thank you Chaldean for the Google search numbers, that's pretty smart. I'll change it accordingly soon, unless someone will change it before me. Karam Bollis 06:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Despite the article's title being Alqosh, Alqush appears several times in the text. Mcljlm (talk) 22:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

People of Alqosh are Chaldean
Here is a link in Arabic stating the people of Alqosh are Chaldeans. Just thought I would post it and share it with the few others that think otherwise.

http://www.alqosh.net/000.htm

Translated using Google -

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alqosh.net%2F000.htm&langpair=ar%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

Another source I found (in English), search the page for the word 'Chaldean' and you will see -

http://www.betnahrain.net/AssyriaLand/1alqosh.htm#ae

Also it's 45 Km from Mousl not 30 like the article stats as of right now. Karam Bollis 06:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please see your talk page, nobody is argueing that Alqosh is a Chaldean-rite town. But its people heavely identify themselves as Assyrians. Chaldean 15:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm from Alqosh and I don't identify myself as Assyrian. Also, asked all my friends and sorry no one of them identify themselves as Assyrian. Also, you seem to be the only one who is identifying it as an Assyrian town. Looking at the page's edit history, so many people have changed it to say Chaldean but it was always you who changed it back to say Assyrian. The source you provided on my talk page is useless. Please stop being stubborn, accept the facts. I'm from Alqosh, you're not. Karam Bollis 16:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Khoun, the fact that you asked "all your friends" does not imply that you have the consensus of all Alqoshnayeh, and neither does the fact that you, yourself, are from Alqosh. I suggest that you (or anybody, for that matter) find data from a recent government-run census (if such thing exists) on the village of Alqosh, with respects to how the Alqoshnayeh identify themselves. Otherwise, it should be clearly stated that the inhabitants are from the Chaldean Catholic Church, and not ethnically Chaldean, since Chaldean is a religious term rather than an ethnic term, as stated by the late patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church, Mar Raphael Bidawid I. --Šarukinu 22:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm also from alqosh and we alqoshnaye all identify ourselves as Chaldeans, in terms of religion but also ethnically. Just because a patriarch stated something doesn't mean he speaks for all of us. So please respect our origins as we respect yours. 62.58.16.61 12:08 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I respect your opinion. But the same could go for yourself: the fact that you identify yourself as Chaldean, doesn't mean you speak for all 60,000 Alqoshnaye. The difference with the late patriarch is that he was certainly an authority, one who was educated about our origins - I didn't say that he spoke for all Alqoshnaye. We need a census, a survey of all Alqoshnaye, with a large enough sample size, in terms of how they identify themselves. Without that, nobody can claim that ALL Alqoshnaye define themselves as Assyrian or Chaldean. --Šarukinu 16:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Until you Šarukinu or Chaldean provide the census then it should stay Chaldean, according to the sources I provided. Beside the sources I provided, look at the page history, everyone is been trying to write Chaldean but it was always Chaldean who edited it. Seriously, grow up. Karam Bollis 16:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I figured that you would have access to such information, seeing as you're from Alqosh. Perhaps you can contact some family or friends still living in Alqosh and find out? --Šarukinu 22:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

You two can complain all you want, the fact of the matter is Wikipedia should only provide facts that people from the deaspora don't have a right to change. [these are the Real Alqoshnaye] - the ones that are actually living in Alqosh today, not you guys living in Sweden or Detroit or Australia. Do you see what flag they are holding? End of discussion. Chaldean 17:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * And where do you live? Don't you live in the States? Detroit? Don't you mean Michigan? You are probably an ignorant welfare living 30 years old who sits at his computer chatting and arguing over the internet instead of being productive to society. Get a life... We are Chaldean... Karam Bollis 17:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Now you have crossed the line and have lost total credibility. You inaccurate edits will continuously be reverted back. Please refrain from personal attacks in the future - see No personal attacks. Chaldean 20:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * We Alqoshnaye don't like to be offended by our origins, so you so called "Chaldean" (Assyrian is what you really are) you better get a life or eat your heart out cause I will be changing everything to Chaldean the way it's meant to be. I'm getting really sick and tired of this "We are all Assyrians" crap. YOU, you are not a whole population. Just because your friends feel the same way as you doesn't give you the right to dishonor us Chaldeans. So get ready for some reverts, I won't stop. 62.58.16.61 10:10 01 June 2007 (UTC)

Third Opinion Simple. If a reliable source per WP:RS can be found (not just "a link") to assert that these people are Chaldean rather than Assyrian, it should be changed. Something that should be made clear is the nature of the Chaldean people. Please clear this up. A Google search for "site:.edu" and/or "filetype:pdf" usually returns more reliable sources. --User:Krator (t c) 00:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Are they the Assyrians in the same way the Batavians are (supposed to be) the Dutch? In this case, it would be appropriate to call the group Assyrians as it is the more modern name.
 * 2) Or are they a subgroup commonly associated by reliable sources with the Assyrians, like the Frisians are commonly associated with the Dutch? In this case, both major group (Assyrians) and subgroup, if notable, should be named.
 * 3) Or do they differ in religion only (that Chaldean church I keep reading about), and are in fact of the same people as the Assyrians, like the Dutch Reformed and Dutch Catholic?


 * Krator, to clarify this issue, the people of the Assyrian Church of the East (also incorrectly known as the Nestorian church) and the people of the Chaldean Catholic Church identified themselves the same way up until about 500 years ago when a huge fraction of the followers of the former branched off in communion with Rome to form the latter. These are the same people, just more recently superficially divided along religious lines - nobody can argue with that. What the people of Alqosh identify themselves as, that's a totally different question. It's not a matter of historical fact (which many people seem to ignore in this case), but rather a matter of the current state of things. That's why I suggested that somebody find some official data from a survey or census taken in Alqosh. Nobody can speak for these people but themselves (which EXCLUDES those in the diaspora). Anybody can come along and say they're from Alqosh to assert their legitimacy on this issue, and nobody would be the wiser. As long as random people who claim to be from Alqosh attempt to make edits, the respective edits will be reverted back.  If you people, whoever you are, wish to change everything in this article to "Chaldean" in stead of "Assyrian", provide some reliable sources, and don't expect everybody to believe your testimony just because you claim to be from Alqosh. This is not how it's done. As for what these people truly are, the truth lies in their history.--Šarukinu 06:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I still don't get it. What I get from the above is "yes, it's a different group" - I knew that. Please simplify it for me in the form of a clear example, like one two and three above. --User:Krator (t c) 14:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is the number 3. I have given 3 sources of this on the Chaldean page - these are reliable and neutral sources. Its a religious splite, but some in the diaspora (like the anonimous from the Netherlands that is reverting) like to exploite it and claim it to be a totally different ethnicity; when in reality no nation in this world recognizes that as proven with census done throughout the world (see Assyrian diaspora). Chaldean 14:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I never said they're different groups, Krator. I said they're superficially divided along religious lines - still the same people. Sorry, I was trying to explain number 3 :) --Šarukinu 04:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

As a Chaldean from Alqosh I only consider the Chaldean term to be a church term, in fact never have I ever heard the elders in Alqosh call themselves Chaldeans, it's always Alqoshnaye, the only Chaldean labels you get are in church. The one thing I cannot deny however is the Assyrian heritage of the village, the people of Alqosh in general are not even from Alqosh, 90% of them come from other regional areas near by (In fact, many of them come from Hakkari which is the home of the Assyrian Church of the East up until the 19th century), mind you there are many people from Alqosh who confess its Assyrian heritage, whether that's enough or not it's good enough evidence for me that the Alqoshi people are Assyrians, and those who are not from Alqosh originally (90% of its population) come from northern areas for most part and are in fact, no different than those who follow the Assyrian Church of the East today, here's the source for the families of Alqosh in Arabic: http://www.alqosh.net/alqosh_families.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Birko19 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

ALL PEOPLE OF ALQOSH ARE ALL CHALDEAN CATHOLIC (RESOURCE: I AM FROM ALQOSH). THERE ARE NO ASSYRIANS IN ALQOSH, AND ALL ATHORNAYIE WHO CALL THEMSELVES NOW "ASSYRIAN" SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR WHAT THEY ARE DOING TODAY TO THE CHALDEAN. CHALDEAN PEOPLE OF ALQOSH SAVED ALL THESE WHO CLAIM TO BE ASSYRIANS FROM THE GENOCIDE AND NOW THEY ARE BITING THE HAND THAT ONCE HELPED THEM! PLEASE WIKIPEDIA STOP PROMOTING THESE FALSE FORGED INFORMATION ABOUT THE VILLAGES AND TOWNS OF THE CHALDEAN. BASICALLY YOU ARE HOLD RESPONSIBLE FOR PROMOTING MORE HOSTILITY AND HATRED BETWEEN THESE TWO NATIONS BY ALLOWING SOME ILLITERATE PEOPLE TO OWN THOSE PAGES AND PUBLISH WHATEVER THEY WANT.

I am from Alqosh and my village is Chaldean NOT Assyrian. Stop changing the Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alqoshnaya (talk • contribs) 23:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Alqosh is and always has been a Chaldean village, just as is Telkayf and all other major villages in the north of Iraq. This article MUST be changed to reflect the truth and not what some confused Chaldeans (who call themselves Assyrians) are saying. This is not a debatable subject. Nobody needs to prove that Alqosh is a Chaldean town, it simply is. If anything, you must prove that it is an Assyrian town. Chaldean dynasty destroyed the Assyrians and therefore Chaldean is the more modern name. There are more Chaldeans in Iraq than Assyrian, even by the Assyrian news organization's inflated numbers of Assyrians. We are being slaughtered by Muslim Jihadists and now you guys are trying to kill us on the internet? This is sick and demented.Lawrencegoriel (talk) 22:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

3RR
Hello guys I just wanted to tell you that there is some thing in Wikipedia called Three-revert rule.Thanks--Aziz1005 02:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Protection
New and unregistered users will be temporarily unable to edit this article. I hope this stops the back-and-forth editing. Established users will not be prevented from editing. — Gareth Hughes 14:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Kurdish nationalist Ahmedo Semsurî tampering with page - please flag
After several attempts to state the true legislative status of Alqosh, the user is being relentless in his attempts to attach Alqosh to the Kurdistan Region and make it legitimate in some kind of revanchist effort re: Kurdish territory. Even the sources he has presented all point to Alqosh being assigned as a sub-district of Tel Kaif from Sheikhan in 1970. This is its true status today regardless of the fact that it was signed off by the Ba'athi regime. The Kurdistan Region was also signed into existence via the Autonomy Accord between Kurdish leaders and the same regime in 1970, but it doesn't mean that its legislative status as an autonomous region should be revoked because Ba'athists oversaw its new designation.

This is picking and choosing from a Kurdish nationalist perspective and one which we should all reject on this town's Wiki - a town with no resident Kurds whatsoever. You cannot accept some things because they benefit Kurds and others because they don't. That is not how a Wiki page is run. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheodorLewin (talk • contribs) 13:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? Why should it not been mentioned that Kurdistan has controlled the town since 1970? Again, it seems like you removed it because it doesn't fit your POV. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 13:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I will have to report you to admins if you continue to edit on the ground of OR and removing well-sourced information. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 13:45, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * the KDP has controlled the town since 2014, not 1970. Even the MEE source you yourself cited reads "Although Alqosh is, on maps anyway, part of Baghdad-controlled Iraq, the KRG's security forces have effectively controlled the town since 2014." You can't even read your own sources. If you continue, I will have to report you for peddling Kurdish nationalist POV on a page that has no connection to it. TheodorLewin (talk) 13:58, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Alqosh was annexed from the sub-district of Shaikhan and became a subdistrict of Talkef in 1970 (Republican decree no. 55) It has an area of 508 sq/km and a population or 22,256 according to the 1977 census. It increased to 27,233 in the 1987 census. Again, it seems that reality doesn't fit your POV. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 14:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

And according to the 1947 Iraqi census, 5% of the village was Kurdish. Another lie that there is not a single Kurd there (Not because it matters but you mentioned it). --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 14:12, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Chaldean/Assyrian POV edits
We need to all come together and fix the introduction of this article because this is causing too much disruption and vandalism. Pro-Chaldean POV edits claim the town is Chaldean, then more reliable edits state it is Assyrian and this keeps getting reverted, deleted or changed. Especially Bealtainemí who is extremely adamant to remove the sources/info stating the town is Assyrian (which it quite clearly is), your pro-Chaldean POV edits are not very helpful. Chaldeans are followers of a church, it definitely isn't an ethnicity - they speak Neo-Aramaic, live in the Assyrian homeland and some of them identify as Assyrian, and as the sources state, Alqosh is quite definitely Assyrian. You're very adamant to not specify the town's Assyrian nature. We need to collaborate and solve this. 3Oh Hexelon (talk) 16:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Because of an edit conflict I was unable to restore all the positive editions by the editor with a new name, while preserving the few sourced edits that the same editor deleted. My edit summary was "restored other sources, while keeping those that were removed because an editor with a new name called them "disruptive" "unsourced", "irrelevant" and "violating neutrality code" Please justify these qualifications."  Bealtainemí (talk) 17:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * To remain neutral and fair we should indicate the town's people are ethnic Assyrians who follow the Chaldean Catholic Church. That way we include all the info. 3Oh Hexelon (talk) 17:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia; not a space for politicised conjecture. There is academic consensus that Chaldean Catholics are ethnic Assyrians; which was visible on the “Chaldean Catholics” page before vandalism by the same user making disruptive edits on the Alqosh page: Bealtainemí. This user’s edits are highly politicised and ahistorical claims, disregarding historical fact and academic consensus for appeals to authority and inductive reasoning. Trying to prove that Alqosh is not Assyrian because it is also home to Chaldean Catholic Church adherents is fallacious. It is both ethnically Assyrian and a centre of Chaldean Catholicism. This behaviour goes against the neutrality rule and violate integrity. Can the mods please lock or prevent this user from making disruptive edits. Thank you Ninnyçizzy (talk) 17:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have now fixed the intro, all that's left to do is remove all the unneeded sources, there's 17 sources for the word Assyrian, we only need two reliable sources and that should be enough. 3Oh Hexelon (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree, if I may, with your statement that I am "very adamant to not specify the town's Assyrian nature", unless you add the adverb "undoubtedly": "undoubtedly Assyrian nature". As I told you, I wanted to restore the many sources that had been added in support of its Assyrian nature (without "undoubtedly"), most of which you have since removed. I also disagree with the statement that "There is academic consensus that Chaldean Catholics are ethnic Assyrians." "Consensus" is too strong a word. Knowledge of the alleged consensus obviously hadn't reached those who drew up the Iraqi Constitution, nor in 2019 had it reached the Holy Synod of the Chaldean Catholic Church, who endorsed the statement in the Constitution. Instead of "consensus", one should speak of what is "the general view" or some such phrase.
 * As indicated above, I take exception to the description as "disruptive" "unsourced", "irrelevant" and "violating neutrality code" of references to views other than the one that is now presented as the only one that exists.
 * When speaking of (modern-day) "Assyrians", there should be no hiding the fact that the term is ambiguous. As well as often indicating an ethnicity, it indicates exclusively adherence to what is called "the Assyrian Church". Take for instance this passage from a 2019 book:
 * Assyrians' new retreat to the northern regions and pragmatic alliances with the Kurds in the 1970s, coupled with their attempts to control the appellation discourses by applying the term 'Assyrian' as an umbrella title for all the Christians of Iraq to augment the size of the Assyrian constituency and give credence to the campaign for an independent Assyrian state intensified the rift between the Assyrians and the rest of Iraq's Christian communities during the twentieth century and served to sideline the Assyrians rather than fortify their position. In effect, the 1920s–70s was an era during which the Assyrians witnessed gradual political and social marginalization in Iraq while the Chaldeans looked collectively ahead towards progress. Bealtainemí (talk) 20:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Consensus is the correct word. Other than Yasmeen Hanoosh, who argues an apolitical and ahistorical stance on the Chaldean identity based on an unverifiable and questionable psychological view of “ethnicity” - you will not find a reputable or recent academic who denies Chaldean Catholics are ethnic Assyrians who broke from the Church of the East.
 * “Knowledge of the consensus” - how is this relevant to what constitutes historical facts. This is an encyclopaedia.
 * “Those who drew the Iraqi Constitution” - this is an appeal to authority fallacy and is an incredibly dangerous precedent for determining “truth”. In any case, “Chaldean” on the constitution was a result of pressure from Chaldean Catholic ethnic separatists such as bishop Sarhad Jammo and patriarch Emmanuel Delly; not reflective upon historical and verifiable truth. It does not constitute as evidence to support your claim.
 * There are many Chaldean Catholic Assyrians who have not adopted this recent “ethnic” identity and these edits subsume them, imposing a highly politicised (see: Sarhad Jammo, Emmanuel Delly, Louis Sako) and ahistorical view.
 * These edits are actually quite unethical in political and historical context of Assyrians/Suraye and show obvious malice. Ninnyçizzy (talk) 23:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)


 * So if Chaldeans aren't a religious group, what are they? Because it's certainly not an ethnicity as research shows, and all sources point to Alqosh being Assyrian, and not Arab or Kurdish or Turkmen or Yazidi. I said we should include that it is *both* Assyrian populated and adheres to the Chaldean church, I don't see the controversy. I'm being as fair as possible. We need to be more cooperative rather than divisive. 3Oh Hexelon (talk) 21:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, so this seems like it could turn into a long discussion. I believe a debate regarding the naming issue has already taken place on Wikipedia a long time ago, see: Naming conventions (Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac). Regardless - there are many articles related to Syriac Christians, it'll be problematic if every article has a long explanation regarding the naming issue. Unless a new consensus arises through further debate on the naming issue by using Village pump (proposals), "Assyrians" remains the catch-all term, with exception for the cases listed on the naming conventions page. Having a wikilink somewhere, within the text or in "see also", to the "Chaldean Catholics" page as well as mentioning that the majority of the inhabitants of the village are Chaldean Catholics is also appropriate per WP:NPOV. AntonSamuel (talk) 21:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , for curiosity I have checked on the present status of 3Oh Hexelon and found that he has been blocked for a week for edit warring. If you agree, we can, for our part, freeze this article until he comes back. Bealtainemí (talk) 12:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm not looking to marginalize any user specifically - however, I'm keeping an eye out for disruptive edits or edit warring in general. I would advise you to remember to remember to adhere to WP:CIVIL and WP:GOODFAITH and focus more on the edits that are problematic more than the users themselves. If there is a pattern of disruptive behavior, follow the instructions that you find here: WP:DISRUPT regarding how to deal with it. You may request page protection if you consider it necessary, however - I don't think that the admins will consider it warranted so far. Regarding rivaling identity narratives, discussions can go on for quite a long time regarding which identity is more correct historically and so on. It is prudent to remember that it is often a sensitive issue and when possible and while taking readability into account, it's prudent to be inclusive with regard to WP:NPOV. That being said, as I stated in my previous post, "Assyrians" remain the catch-all term for Syriacs/Assyrians/Chaldeans/Arameans. AntonSamuel (talk) 13:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I am confident that, with your kind oversight, 3Oh Hexelon will guide this article to a happy solution. Bealtainemí (talk) 15:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be little point in discussing declarations that ideas other than one's own are disruptive, irrelevant, not reflective upon historical and verifiable truth, etc., and that terms like "Assyrian" as univocal.

3Oh Hexelon, commiserations on being called a sock. I absolutely refuse to entertain the idea. Yes, the Chaldeans are a religious group. I presume that they would in general consider themselves Assyrians in one (ethnic) sense, but I also believe that they would even more clearly deny that they are Assyrians in another sense, a sense in which the word is used today just as it was when Ronald Sempill Stafford used it when in 1935 with no thought of ethnicity but clearly and explicitly he distinguished "the Assyrians" from "the Chaldean inhabitants" of Alqosh: for him, the Chaldean inhabitants were not Assyrians. (For some reason, that source has been excised.) What is needed in this article and elsewhere is for the distinction in meaning to be made explicitly clear. There is a traditional millennium-old saying (the Latin of which quite escapes me at the moment) that defining terms removes disputes about them. I trust AntonSamuel agrees with me. If you and he agree, we should apply that remedy to the present article. Bealtainemí (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


 * In the process of invoking hollow, western colonialist demarcations, you have discounted an Alqosh native and academic (Hirmis Aboona), who is sourced and supports the virtually unanimous view that Alqosh is an Assyrian town. Furthermore, the village being labelled as "Chaldean" is postulation. Please explain in what way Chaldean identifying Assyrians differ from all other Assyrians in language, culture, geographical origin and tradition. There is no distinct Chaldean dialect or language, only a mislabelled, geographically-determined collection of dialects from the Nineveh Plains; where they currently live in high concentration. The identity is not univocal and the posturing of Chaldean as an ethnic one is recent and heavily politicised. The identification with the Chaldean misnomer was not born in a neutral space. To impose and universalise this false difference is extremely harmful and imperialistic; given that many Assyrians belonging to the Chaldean Catholic Church resist signification through an ecclesiastical lens. No one is denying linguistic and cultural differences between Assyrians; they do not however, occur in ecclesiastical matrices. Ninnyçizzy (talk) 12:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:GF Bealtainemí (talk) 15:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back Do you think that, as I stated here, if an article uses the term "Assyrian" where it can be understood in more than one sense, it ought to indicate the sense or senses in which it uses it? If so, we can obtain undisputed clarity in this article (and in others). Bealtainemí (talk) 07:56, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Regretfully, I have found that 30h Hexelon has been blocked for even longer: I must therefore introduce the distinction, the disambliguation, myself. Bealtainemí (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Can we get help from a mod to sort this out? User Bealtainemí who is also editing “Chaldean Catholics” is insistent on removing well sourced info on this page to inject a POV that is reflected by their edits on the aforementioned page. Ninnyçizzy (talk) 03:10, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss
Please discuss, instead of just shouting: "Very obvious POV", "Disruptive edits", "Politicised conjecture", "Inductive reasoning". etc. For an apparent newcomer, you are extraordinarily familiar with expressions like "the mods". I told you I was seeking assistance for both of us on the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. So why don't you respond there on the topic? Bealtainemí (talk) 08:46, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I have responded to you with a paragraph to which you haven’t countered a single point. Still waiting. On top of that we already reached an agreement that there was more than enough sources and therefore consensus that the town is Assyrian. The naming conflicts between some people do not change this. That information is irrelevant to the town, and already included in the “Chaldean Catholics” page. Ninnyçizzy (talk) 13:39, 5 November 2020 (UTC)