User talk:Gabr-el/Archive5

Osroene
Since you edited this page, may want to review this revert by somewhat new account which came back just for reverting. I am only trying to improve this article, so perhaps, we can work on it together. I will be glad to discuss on the talk page - see my response here. The king of Armenia who was converted to Christianity ruled in 286-330 A.D., while Abgar IX of Osroene converted by 201 A.D. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 15:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * For sure khon. See if you can recruite fellow ChaldeanAssyrians to join Wiki. Pshena. Chaldean (talk) 18:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunatly, the page has become the latest battleground between Azeris and Armenians. Both really don't care about the subject, but are just pushing there adjenda. I don't know what to do. Perhaps we can get a third party to take care of it. Chaldean (talk) 05:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * lol, lets get a mod involved. Chaldean (talk) 06:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

jesus talk - year of birth
Hi. Regarding your post, I think you may be interested in Calendar era and Anno Domini. Dionysius Exiguus started the counting from the year of Incarnation (=Nativity). adriatikus |  talk  15:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry. adriatikus  |  talk  15:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Lost Forever vs. Permanently won - Byzantine-Seljuk Wars
While "lost" and "won" are two sides of the same coin, there is an important difference between "forever" and "permanently". "Forever" means: "without ever ending", "eternally". If something is forever the case, it will still be thus 3 billion years in the future. "Permanent" just means: "for a long, indefinite period without regard to unforeseeable conditions", "long-lasting or nonfading". No one thinks the permanent headquarters of the UN will still be there 3 billion years from now. They are not there forever. I had tried to make that clear in my edit summary ("forever" sounds too absolute). --Lambiam 01:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think the meaning of words is not important enough to explain such nuances and to choose the word that is appropriate for the occasion, then we shall forever have a difference of opinion. --Lambiam 01:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Lost forever, perhaps (although there is a lot of future in which a lot can happen). But lost forever to the Islamic Turks, as you would have it? Will the Turks remain forever, will they remain forever there, in Anatolia, and will they forever be Islamic? I think not. --Lambiam 01:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Come on dude. Your position is untenable. As far as we can see, its lost forever to the Islamic Turks. Yes times can change but thats speculating upon speculatoin that there will somehow be a chance for this to occur. You'll notice that the Greek Christian community in Turkey has been nearly eliminated, and the Constantinople church struggles to find suitable candidates that are Turkish citizens are Orthodox Bishops of high enough standing. Tourskin (talk) 06:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As I see it, my position is simply about the meaning and use of the word forever in English. Here are some examples of appropriate use of that word on Wikipedia articles:
 * Fantastic Voyage (Kurzweil): The basic premise of the book is that if middle aged people can live long enough, until approximately 120, they will be able to live forever ...
 * Immortality: In this physical theory, one could hypothetically live forever ...
 * Judaism: Traditional Judaism maintains that a Jew, whether by birth or conversion, is a Jew forever.
 * Ultimate fate of the universe: However, if the universe has a large amount of dark energy (as suggested by recent findings), then the expansion of the universe can continue forever – even if Ω > 1.
 * And here are some examples of use of the word "permanently":
 * Dartmouth College Greek organizations: The College derecognized Beta Theta Pi permanently on December 6, 1996.
 * European Champion Clubs' Cup: This trophy was awarded permanently to Real Madrid in March 1967.
 * Mobile home: While these houses are usually placed in one location, often a rented lot, and left there permanently, they do retain the ability to be moved, ...
 * TWOC: Since the taking need not involve an intention to permanently deprive the owner of the car, it is easier to prove than theft (...).
 * For each of these examples, replacing permanently by forever results in a sentence that sounds strange to me, for whatever reason, just like forever sounded strange to me in the sentence I changed in Byzantine-Seljuk Wars. I have tried to explain that I replaced a sentence that sounded strange to me by one that did not have that problem. I have also tried to anayze why it sounded strange, but that is a secondary issue. I don't understand the fuss you make over this, and least of all the hostile tone. --Lambiam 10:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Apoliges for the harsh tone. Its still subjective in my opinion what is permanent and what is forever. Yes people who reach 120 could live forever in this book, but then again some twist in the plot of the book could change that. Tourskin (talk) 18:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * My point is this: Permanent and Forever are the same in this context, because we don't know whats gonna happen in the future, so there is no difference. Immortals like Zeus and Hera in Greek mythology could have lived forever, but of course if you ever watched the TV series Hercules you'll know that even they have their weaknessess and deaths. Tourskin (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I missed that TV series – too busy editing Wikipedia :). Yes they are (almost) synonyms, but they nevertheless have different dictionary definitions and can in general not be used interchangeably, as (I think) the above examples show. Determining which is appropriate in which context indeed requires, ultimately some form of subjective judgement. --Lambiam 21:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)
The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

byzantine empire
just wanna ask you some more questions if you can answer of can answer me by checking them in your refference books.

1-) beside, franks, salvs, armenians, christian arabs people of which which ethnicity were there in byzantine army in 7th century A.D ? where there any copts ( as there was a dispute on a fundamentalist christian belive between cpots and regim of heracular) and who formed the bulk of byzantine army ? greeks or armenians ?

2-) why they say byzantine empire was weaken by long byzantine-persian wars, although it was finally byzantine who came out victorious from this long war when heraculas conquered back what they lost a decade ago ? i mean an empire fought back whn it is in it form to fight.

and as it is writen in the article of byzantine empire that byzantine had the strongest economy in the world, is it true ?

3-) what about the armors of byzantine soldiers and commanders, i mean did they only used a coat of mail armor or was scale armor was in use in those days ? i wanna know this because the armor that muslim soldiers used was of the byzantine army 's that they got in spoils of battle.

thanks in advance for reading this all and try to answer them if u know it if not then take ur time and check them in ur books ok.. Bye Mohammad Adil (talk) 11:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Asalamualikum, thanks bro for the info you provided, the numbers are near my estination, close very close indeed. i am to re-write the muslim conquest of Egypt and syria because the pre-existing article is just terrible to read and quite confusing too, inshallah ur info will really gonna help me to make it neutral then before. and a good news for you, the dispute of ajnadyn and fahl are soon going to be solve as i have some estimations of the number for respective troops i will discuss them in the discussion section. meanwhile what is being done with battle of yarmouk's article is quite confusing... i mean 20,000 byzantine troops and 7500 muslims troops for the battle, was it a funny game ? aren't 7500 too less to control Roman syria and palistine with the population around 1.5 million ???? so i am gonna disscuss it too and will remove this funny figure ! what you say ? Mohammad Adil (talk) 09:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Islamic contributions to Medieval Europe
Take a look at it. Sometimes Islamic scholars wrongly credit Islam for some of the achievements mentioned, when they were done so by Assyrians, and other non-muslim Middle Easterners. Chaldean (talk) 05:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well no more than Assyrians and any other scholar stole from other cultures. And Islamic scholars very rarely wrongly credit Islam - infact they did that much less than Christian scholars creditting Christianity. Nabuchadnessar (talk) 23:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Well Happy Lent to you too!
God Bless you Tourskin in the this season of Lent! I hope all is well. LoveMonkey (talk) 12:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC) Yes brothers all of us Christians are in Christ. God Bless you in the time of loss. LoveMonkey (talk) 11:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello
You good sir are my hero. The world needs more of you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.65.118 (talk) 22:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Paulos Faraj Rahho
I am not here to cover up anything. There was no Islamic World at the time of the Emperor Constantine. It is true Christians do face persecution in the Islamic World, but before muslims, the Zoroastrian Persians were the ones persecuting Christians. It is presumed that he was talking about Christians in the Near East. I will respect your opinion and won't edit anything until I hear your rebuttle User:Ishvara7 (User talk:Ishvara7 21:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Good response, I forgot that there were also Catholics in Near East. User:Ishvara7 (User talk:Ishvara7 23:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Praze Allah
Hi. There's no question that the vandalism by User:Praze Allah was extremely offensive. That's why I left a "level 3" vandalism warning for a first offense.

However, I think that warning a user about Wikipedia's policy against vandalism is a better course of action than insulting his or her language skills and calling him or her a bigot. Comment on content, not on the contributor. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 04:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

East-Hem Maps
Thanks Tourskin, I appreciate your note. What I don't understand is, why remove the map that shows more detail and valuable information? Too many times I've read articles, looked at their maps, and left with no real idea of what the subject's world was like. It's very helpful to see info like the physical geography of a nation's lands, whom the nation interacted with (like neighbors, enemies and allies, trade partners, etc.)

I respect your opinions, so how can we compromise with editors so that the articles keep a version of the East-Hem maps (or a zoomed-in version)? It's a shame if we remove relevant and valuable information from articles, leaving readers with less understanding of the subject. Respectfully, Thomas Lessman (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Campaignbox Byzantine-Ottoman War
A tag has been placed on Template:Campaignbox Byzantine-Ottoman War requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire lead paragraph

 * I'd get involved if I had much to offer. Looking at what is there now, I'd change some of the wording and facts, but otherwise it's an appropriate length for an intro to such a fascinating and lengthy subject. As for the map, I can do whatever would need to be done to it, but certain editors dislike the maps enough that I think they would object no matter what I do to them, especially if I am the one suggesting it. If you made the suggestion, they would be more open to the idea.


 * Sorry, I've been busy researching possible issues in the 8th century borders of Tibet and India, amongst other things. I'll see if I can add anything constructive, otherwise I'll watch and see what I can do. Respectfully, Thomas Lessman (talk) 03:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Arab conquest

 * I reverted your change from "Arab Conquest" to "Foreign invasions", for numerous reasons. The first being that the plague devastated the eatsern realms which were more heavily populated than the western ones. Secondly the scholars that were infered in this context talk about Arab invasions, no? Foreign invasions is ambiguous. Yes Byzantium suffered invasions, but it was the Arab one in the 7th century that had a help from plague. Tourskin (talk) 04:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Check out Chapter 5 of Armies of Pestilence: The Impact of Disease on History online. The invasions of the Slavs in the Balkans, the Lombards in Byzantine Italy, and the Berbers in Byzantine Africa have all been said to have been helped by the Plague. Granted the degree to which the Plague helped each of these invaders is widely debated which is why I said "some scholars".

--Mcorazao (talk) 05:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Good point. Even so, many scholars would unanimously agree that the magnitude of the threat of Barbarians across the Danube, or Lombards who can only expand so far before reaching a sea was nothing compared to that of a centralized, zealous Arab state with hundreds of thousands of potential recruits and ample resources. Even the Frankish Empire of Charlemagne was not of the same calibre as the Caliphate. Time and time again, Byzantium proved to be the only Christian power capable of defeating the Arabs in southern Italy, Illyria and Asia Minor, were else the only strong state in the Dark Ages, the Holy Roman Empire was not adequate, one could say. If you want kep it to foreign invasions, you have a fair point to do so, but the Arab invasions constituted the majority of Byzantium's foreign wars. Tourskin (talk) 06:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, I agree that the Arabs wars represented the primary theaters during that time following the Plague. I was just making the point that the Empire did suffer attacks from multiple sources at a time when the Plague may have been a factor. Frankly, the Plague really wasn't just limited to the original one in the mid 6th century. It was really a wave of epidemics that spanned something something like 3 centuries during which time a lot happened. The other thing to bear in mind is that you have to be careful how talk about the Arabs at the outset of Islam. First, the Arab armies to some extent gained recruits because of their successes (religious zeal often correlates with perceived success). Many of the "Arabs" of that era were people in annexed territories who simply joined the cause. Had the Byzantines been more successful in holding them back the whole militant movement may have lost steam early. The other thing is that as the Arabs captured new lands they gained strength from it, not necessarily in terms of military manpower but in terms of economic strength (supply chains for the military, new bases of operation; and bear in mind they were gaining lands from the most powerful economic power in the world). So today we perceive them as a force to be reckoned with, and they were, but the truth is that they got on a roll and the momentum itself was a big factor in their success as it often was at the outset of many Empires.

--Mcorazao (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Unity
Its always good to see Unity. Now I just wished the Church changd its name to the Assyrian Catholic Church. Chaldean (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea, exactly. Our previous Patriach was a true Assyrian nationalist as well, but the current one is not. Chaldean (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * True true. Please keep an eye on the discussion here Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Syriac)‎. Chaldean (talk) 16:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have complained about his ways of breaking wiki rules yet nobody does anything because his an admin. When you deal with an admin, your only hope is to counter him with another admin. Chaldean (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Tourskin, first, please try to keep a cool-head when having these heated discussions. We will only lose credibility if we use insults rather then facts. Now, I am back in the US for now. Just finishing off my Biology-related studies at WSU and We'll see where we go from there :) Chaldean (talk) 04:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea dab, and please try to stay ontopic in the talk page of the Assyrian persian province talk page. Just talk about the facts. We have 3 Persian kings conferming Athura's existance. Let us go from there. Chaldean (talk) 04:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

your revert
re : I am sorry, but there is no Persian province called "Assyria". Unless you can present evidence that there was, your move is not defensible. After all, you moved the article to the title "Assyria (Persian province)", which, you will agree, to the casual reader seems to imply there was a Persian province called "Assyria", no? --dab (𒁳) 16:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Let me introduce you to Dab. He is a strong supporter of deleting anything Assyrian on Wikipedia, be it ancient or modern, and replacing it with either Syriac, Aramean, Mesopotamian, you fill in the blank. Chaldean (talk) 16:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * BTW Dab, if you care about the correct information, yes there was an Assyrian province under Persia and they called it Athura [] [].  Chaldean (talk) 16:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Khon, just keep Aramean nationalist (and friends of them like dab) in check. Chaldean (talk) 02:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Look who's talking... POW-warrior nr1. The TriZ (talk) 13:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Salam Akhi
Hi Tourskin. I have no clue how you got the impression I was Assyrian lol, I am Iraqi Arab. I chose my name because I'm proud of my Mesopotamian decent and heritage (you understand not all Arabs are Saudi Beduins ;) ). Nonetheless, nice to meet you too bro, but I strongly disagree with you segregation and victimisation attitude. Back in Iraq, Sunni, Shia, Christian, and everyone else lived quite happily together, and out Christian neighbours were treated like everyone else. they weren't exactly persicuted and martyred lol :D.

Anyway, my exodus story was when I was we moved out shortly after the 1991 war, and lived in Libya for a couple of years. We returned to Iraq in 1994 and stayed until we came here in 1998. Things were pretty bad during the sanctions - just the normal people sufered while Saddam and his ruling elite lived like Kings - but to be honest, things are no where near as bad as they are now.

So anyway, what are you planning to do in the US? Have you moved with your family or alone?

Anyway, great talking to a fellow Iraqi Wikipedian. Nabuchadnessar (talk) 23:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey bro, it's cool, I don't blame you for it. Lol but I'm just Iraqi Arab with Iraqi decent. Anyway, yeah it great to meet another Iraqi. And the thing in Iraq is that now everyone is being persicuted, of whatever race religion etc... to the same degree.
 * Anyway, what are you planning to do in the US bro? Have you moved alone or with your family?
 * Anyways, Take care. Nabuchadnessar (talk) 23:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've come to the UK just with the primary education from Iraq, learned English and finished my GCSE's and A-levels. I was depressed and bored afterwards, so I took a gap year to relax and have fun, and so far it's been very cool. I didn't do as well as you in my A-levels, from your achievements page (by the way, well done bro, you did real good. In my whole college only like one or two got straight A's), so I didn't have as much uni offers. I got a medicine offer and a Pharmacy offer, two rejections and still waiting for the last choice. Luckily tho, my medicine offer is my first choice university, so I'll hopefully start this september. My dad works as a doctor here, and my mom's a university researcher/professor at a university that luckily I'm not going to :D. My sisters are still in school/sixthform. It's so true that like all Iraqis try to be Doctors/Engineers. If we all go back, there'll be no one to do any of the other jobs lmao. Nabuchadnessar (talk) 00:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hahaha, yeah, Iraq's got much bigger problems. Btw, you heard about Basrah being totally taken over by the militias bro? I was rejected for all my medicine unis when I first applied, except the one my mom worked in lol. That also encouraged my choice of a gap year. Thanks very much for your compliments bro, I'm also very happy for you to get into a cool uni in the US. I haven't thought far ahead to be honest azzizi, but now I'm just trying to save up for a car (planning to buy a cheap one, and mod it up with the rest of the money), and a hot GF will do - I can't see anything wrong with girls who aren't Iraqi, but my parents seem to see all of them as either sluts or evil LMAO. But I'm going to move away, so their nagging wont bug me anymore :) . Nabuchadnessar (talk) 01:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hahaha, I just haven't seen that much, but I'll take your word on it lol. :D Nabuchadnessar (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy new year to you too bro. But we Iraqi Arabs don't call it Assyrian New Year, but 'Door Il Senna', or 'Awdet Tamuz' lol if you understand those bro. We generally celebrate that in Spring Solstice (like 23 March). When do you guys celebrate the Assyrian New year bro? Anyway, I wish you and all your family and friends the very best for the new year, and don't forget to have fun bro. My Nana made us 'Zarda Ou Haleeb' - very old Iraqi sweet dish, but it don't taste as nice as Gummy bears :D. All the best man, TC. Nabuchadnessar (talk) 18:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey bro, thanks for your reply, and don't worry about it, there's bigger annoyances than Assyrian stuff, which I actually find interesting. :) And Zarda Ou Haleeb is oats or some other grains that are made into two different pudding style-dishes eaten on Dorret Senna, with Dolma. I'm also gonna change my username, I think Nabuchadnessar is actually too nationalistic, and I am so much more as a person than my geneology/decent/ethnic identity. I'm gonna change it into something a little more... me. lol. Take care bro. Pink Princess (talk) 14:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol thanks bro, but believe me, Easter Eggs are so much better (especially the Galaxy ones :D ). 'Assyrian and Proud' is still a cool name bro, it ain't too nationalistic. As for me, I like my current name lol. Pink Princess (talk) 16:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Why not, my mommy said I woz the prettiest pwincess. :D LMAO. Its just a joke name bro, and no-one can mock as it mocks itself. Just enjoying being different. ;) Pink Princess (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Byzantine lead....again
Hey Tourskin! Sorry I didn't reply to your message sooner. I'm not very active on Wikipedia these days, and it looks like I've missed the action. Congratulations on your good work with the lead. From what I could see, it looks like you've found a solution that everyone could agree to.... that's quite an achievement on wikipedia! Byzantine Empire is a very contentious article. There have been disputes over the lead ever since I can remember (late 2005). It's not something I've ever really understood - I tend to enjoy maps and articles relating to specific periods of Byzantine history, which tend to be a bit less controversial. Anyway, thanks for notifying me about these changes. Bigdaddy1204 (talk) 03:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

hello
Have nothing against you either, it was meant for Chaldean and what he wrote. The TriZ (talk) 00:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Born and raised in Sweden, I consider myself Syriac, with Aramean origin. BUT, I do not say that your not Assyrian. And that is were the difference goes between me and for example EliasAlucard and Chaldean. The TriZ (talk) 14:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You like putting words in other people's mouth? Where I have brushed you as an Assyrian? Call yourself whatever you want, what do I care. Chaldean (talk) 21:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Where you have done it? Where have you not done it. Your fooling no one Chaldean, it is called to be a turncoat. The TriZ (talk) 20:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I also believe that we are the same people, though I don't rule out the option that we might have mixed ancestrors, I mean who knows if the Arameans and the Assyrians and all other people living in the area have blended in into eachother, though you know which group I believe i'm belonging. But I don't believe in a country for our people. I know no one who would move back to Turabdin or the Middle East, not from Europe, maybe a few but the young generations will never go back. The language will live through the church. But I know that in Syria there are Syriac schools, not schools in the monasteries, but real schools, if course teaching the required studyplan given by the state, but also alot of courses in Syriac language etc. And I believe that is what is important to keep building on. As it is today, we will never get a autonomous country. The TriZ (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, I also heard of the priest who got killed. May he rest in peace. We need to help the people there so they can stay there, it sounds kind of selfish, but like you say, it is needed that the people in the Middle East to stay in the Middle East, else i'm afraid our language and culture will melt away. The TriZ (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey
Tourskin, Third Opinion requires that only two users to present their case and a third view will then be given. But it taken was taken from the list without getting a third opinion because you and a forth user chimed in their opinion, and thus it was removed from the list. Let us wait and have a third opinion by the community first. Chaldean (talk) 23:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I will be honest with you, it won't help us lol. I myself am considering changing my username as well to a more moderate one. Chaldean (talk) 00:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Good one :D Chaldean (talk) 00:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Great, but didn't Parthia came after Selucid? Chaldean (talk) 00:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * AAA, now it makes sense. But they were both Persian-based, right? Chaldean (talk) 01:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Isn't this a beautiful picture?
 * Its a real sulpture, not a drawing, and it is desribed as Assyrians. Another example of Assyrian existance beyond 608 BC. I found out of it in this great paper about the subject [] Chaldean (talk) 17:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and use that in your recent comment to folaten. Its ok to comment there, just dont comment in the THIRD OPINION section. Chaldean (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Khon, I removed misrable from you comment, because I thought it would provoke the user and give us more harm then good. I hope your not offended about it. Chaldean (talk) 04:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea I love Mesta alot. I come from Arbil, so we used to drink that many times. Chaldean (talk) 04:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW, do you have any idea how much I envy you for living in SD? My dream is to one day when I have the money in order to find a place there. Chaldean (talk) 04:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe, well its 6:38 AM right now where I'm at (I'll let you figure that out) so I'm gonna get some rest. Chaldean (talk) 04:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You have done alot already, and I thank you for it. Just keep an eye in the discussion, and chime in every now and then. I have re-written the article in that it is about Assyria alone, and not the Babylonia's section, and in that it covers only the Achaenenid period. Now Folantin has no reason why the article isn't ready to be moved to Achaemenid Assyria. Chaldean (talk) 05:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

"Babylonian rule was unpopular, but did not last long. When the Babylonian King Nabonidus made war with Persia, he was defeated by an outnumbered Cyrus the Great at the Battle of Sardis in 546 BC. Cyrus's armies took Babylon and made it, along with Assyria, into provinces of the Persian Empire" - How is that battle specifically the begining of Persian rule in Assyria? Sardin is all the way by the Aegean Sea. Babylonians went all the way over there to fight? Or maybe I'm missing something? Chaldean (talk) 06:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah, will probably be half a world away Chaldean (talk) 05:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I will make sure to be in Detroit when you come to this side of America! Chaldean (talk) 05:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea sure, all thou I will admit, I'm not an expert on the issue. Chaldean (talk) 02:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if you know about this story, but its a great part of our history. They are known as the Thirteen Assyrian Fathers sometimes as Thirteen Syrian Fathers. They literally greated the Georgian nation a Christian nation that it is right now; [] [] Shio-Mgvime Monastery Alaverdi Monastery. When I'm done with the Achaemenid Assyria, I will start writing on the thirteen Assyrian fathers. Chaldean (talk) 02:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nobody is going to move the Persian Mesopotamia unless a mod does. Can you ask any admin you know to take a look at the requested move? Chaldean (talk) 04:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Tool provided. You are a user with good contributions, no participation in edit wars and no blocks. I think you deserve it and you can use it with caution. Read carefully Rollback feature. Cheers!--Yannismarou (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Alexander the Great
You obviously meant "Modern day ethnic Macedonians are a slavic group" in your comment... The Cat and the Owl (talk) 06:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ottoman-Hapsburg wars and Russian Link
Your link, possibly, is with the Treaty of Belgrade--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 08:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Help
I would like to help, but I'm not an admin. My suggestion would be just to wait the 7 days or whatever for the RM to finish. Once it has been listed for 7 days, an admin should come along and manually close it. Nil Einne (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Çaka Bey and Chaka of Smyrna
Tourskin, this is a friendly notice to inform you of an ongoing discussion about merging the articles Çaka Bey and Chaka of Smyrna, and the most appropriate name for the merged article. Your significant contributions in the area of Byzantine-Turkish relations suggested to me that you might be able to contribute constructively to the discussion. Regards, Aramgar (talk) 15:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you have any other secondary sources for Tzakas-Chaka-Çaka? In particular, where did you get the dates 1092 and 1095? Thanks for your input. Regards, Aramgar (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry. My mistake. I misinterpreted the word "article" in your post. Aramgar (talk) 18:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * There is not much in English and less in print at the moment. You can probably find the two basic works at a decent university library. The second one may be of particular interest to you in that it discusses the mechanisms of cultural and linguistic change in Anatolia, not all of which were military.
 * Claude Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey: a general survey of the material and spiritual culture and history c. 1071-1330, trans. J. Jones-Williams (New York: Taplinger, 1968).
 * Speros Vryonis, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century (University of California Press, 1971).
 * Please let me know if I can help you find sources. I have access to a very good library. Aramgar (talk) 20:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Crusader-Ayyubid War
I know, I'm not sure who made up that title, but I never worried because an article wasn't actually created. And I guess it is directly related to the invasion of Egypt. What should we call it, if anything? There is no article about the 1169 siege of Damietta; there is Siege of Damietta but there are a few other sieges that need articles, or at least mentions. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah I really have no idea what to do. It would be valuable to organize all that info somewhere, especially for the 12th century when Jerusalem was basically left on its own with only random support from Europe. Is Amalric's invasion of Egypt an entirely separate crusade? Or just a regular war between two states? What about the other battles? In the 13th century they didn't do very much on their own when there wasn't a specific crusade (but La Forbie comes to mind as an exception). Maybe bring it up on the Crusades task force page. Adam Bishop (talk) 05:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Voting
You've told me to vote somewhere and put 'Oppose' in, where do I vote and why should I put oppose?Doug Weller (talk) 15:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Byzantine-Arab Wars - "All roads lead to Rome"
Hey, I deleted that saying because I can't see why it's relevant. Taken literally it makes no sense as the section is about the conquest of Syria and not Rome, nor was the Syrian campaign aimed at capturing Rome. The meaning of the saying, that there's more than one way to accomplish something, also doesn't make any obvious sense to me, is there more than one way to capture Syria? (ofcourse there is...) Adding to that, it's not really an Arab saying as it exists in almost every language I know, and probably came out of Latin considering it's about Rome. Why do you want to keep it in? Wiki1609 (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok I didn't know they meant the new Rome, however the Arabs never captured Constantinople. Anyway thanks for clearing up the issue, maybe you could make a footnote or something to show it refers to Constantinople and not Rome as it may not be obvious to everyone. Wiki1609 (talk) 11:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Ajnadyn
Asalamualikum, hope you doing fine bro..

check the discussion section of Battle of Ajnadyn, as the strength of the armies was disputed therefore i have given there a new topic, i would add in it inshallah soon, as i was in a bit hurry. I would like to know your views there. Mohammad Adil (talk) 10:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)