User talk:Kansas Bear/Archive Ending 2014

Khwarazmian dynasty
Sock perhaps? I presume you have it on your watch list. Dougweller (talk) 20:14, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * If it is, then I'm not sure who it would be. Aside from the unilateral article move, the removal of Persianate could be justified, since the sources do not support it. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Judging from the previous attempts to remove Persianate and the level of English used, there is a slight chance it might be User:BozokluAdam. Although, I do not know why BozokluAdam would use a sockpuppet, since he/she is not currently blocked. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe not then. Although doesn't seem new. Please keep an eye on the editor/article. Babur problem resolved? Dougweller (talk) 12:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

anti
Well many American politicians have anti national sentiments. Anti Iranian, Anti North Korean, Anti Cuban, Anti Mexican... -Esc2003 (talk) 10:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * That's nice. Do you have source(s) for that? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:45, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Dandanaqan
Well if the king of the Kakuyid dynasty aided the Seljuqs wouldn't it count that that his kingdom helped the Seljuqs? --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:52, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I have copy & pasted this to the article's talk page. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:47, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yavuz Sultan Selim Bridge
Hello Bear, Why would you remove a correction when I specifically mentioned the reason for my edit, "No mention of trees being cut + Italian company Astaldi, has denied the claims." Did you even check the reference? Yozer1 (talk) 16:52, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


 * My edit had nothing to do with trees or Astaldi, instead it restored referenced information removed by you, again, under a false edit summary. Whereas, at Slavery in the Ottoman Empire, you removed referenced information twice, with the last removal an attempt to make the issue personal, "Undid revision 574896810 by Kansas Bear (talk) Thanks for your bias Kansas Bear". And then, oddly did not feel obliged to explain yourself on the talk page!
 * I have noticed you are about to be indefinitely topic banned due to your bias, it is quite clear you should be checking your own edits and not the edits of others. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 12:40, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 19:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=585923681 your edit] to Ali ibn Sahl Rabban al-Tabari may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:35, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Sahl Rabban al-Tabari'  c. 838 – c. 870 CE; also given as 810–855 was a Persian<ref name="

Do you know about this publisher
Global Vision -- on this page - if you don't, it's useful to know. Dougweller (talk) 22:03, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes. I believe I have changed/replaced any I may have used. Thanks, Doug. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 17:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Henry VII
Yes, you are right, but unfortunately the edit you made wasn't. See the diff. You actually restored one of his nonsensical inclusions and broke links by restoring misspellings. I'd already reverted the edit you commented on on the talk page. I'm sure this was a mistake, but you just made matters a bit more confused. Paul B (talk) 16:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Mistakes happen. :) Paul B (talk) 16:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment

 * 1) See Talk:Saib Tabrizi, last section and cited sources.
 * 2) Talk:Nizami Ganjavi, section "Azerbaijani name of Nizami Ganjavi". Zyma (talk) 16:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You are not interested on those articles? Please reply here or on my talkpage. Thanks. --Zyma (talk) 17:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The Nizami Ganjavi issue was decided by DR, was it not? As for Saib Tabrizi, the sources state he was a Persian poet. Correct? --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I noticed you have edited Kadir Mısıroğlu in Turkish Wikipedia.
According to this source, written by Fatma Muge Gocek, ed. edited by I. Gershoni, Y. Hakan Erdem, Ursula Woköck, Histories of the Modern Middle East: New Directions, page 208, Kadir Mısıroğlu is an amateur historian and much imprisoned Islamist lawyer. Also, user:Yozer1 is attempting to create an English version of Kadir Mısıroğlu, although I do not see any source calling him a historian. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:04, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, he is "not" a historian, he is just interested in history :)--Rapsar (talk) 18:47, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * In your opinion, would the Gocek source be reliable enough to place "amateur" in front of "historian" when/if Yozer1 adds Kadir Mısıroğlu to English Wikipedia? --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:50, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * He just writes articles about history. Is that makes him a (amateur) historian? I don't think so. Murat Bardakçı and tr:Mustafa Armağan writes about history, but they do not call themlselves a "historian". I did a little research about Fatma Müge Göçek and I think her work would be a reliable source; but I'm not sure that there is a term called "amateur historian".--Rapsar (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok. Well Yozer1 is in the process of creating a stub article about Kair Mısıroğlu calling him a historian. Was just curious as to how to source it. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * He is notable enough as "writer, journalist and poet" :) Have a nice day :)--Rapsar (talk) 19:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes
No problem ever. Dougweller (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tarikh Yamini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Persian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Afd
Hi Kansas Bear. I don't think this article is notable. Can you nominate it for deletion? Have a nice day.--Rapsar (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Sock
Hi, with regard to this bizarre exchange I am in agreement about the suspicions, and I also think there's something funny about the interaction with the Studies user, who seems rather familiar with pinging and article deletions in spite of only a few hundred edits. Maproom and I had a conversation about this very subject a few days ago. The primary actor created an article that was an entire plagiarism job, copy/pasted from a PDF, so it's a little odd that they're somehow experts in article deletion and quality control. Many of the edits created by the primary actor have been reverted as troublesome. If you step through the diffs here you'll see a few mistakes, including adding an orphan tag where absolutely not warranted, and botching wikilinks. I apologize for the cagey language, I just don't want to throw around accusations blindly. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of battles involving the Ghurid dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khwarezmian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:30, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Badr al-Jamali
Put Link for Badr al-Jamali in the article Hassan-i Sabbah 68.100.160.250 (talk) 18:56, 3 February 2014 (UTC) 68.100.160.250 (talk) 18:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Hassan-i Sabbah
I left comment about ethnicity issue on talking page, apparently there was misunderstanding about quotes from books so there's no disruptive editing. And don't get me wrong, I'm neither anti/pro Arab/Persian, just noting that ethnicity claims don't make any sense.--109.165.172.48 (talk) 20:43, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * We are not here to "make sense"(ie. interpret what sources say. We report what reliable sources state, not what they do not state. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * That's precisely what I wrote on talking page. Because no sources say either Arab or Persian, most comments including yours were interpretations. --109.165.172.48 (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Wrong. I presented two sources stating his father was of Arab origins, including links. Are you saying the two sources do not state this? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Dude you got me wrong. I searched for Daftary's book in my library, found first about Ismailites and opened it, and saw quote without "Arab". So I assumed you're doing something nasty by inserting such word in Daftary's quote on talking page. Of course, you assumed the same when I excluded same word from article, because book which you consulted actually include it. So neither one of us were nasty or something. If you check my longer comment once again, you'll see that five among six identical quotes from same author (Daftary) and from different works doesn't contain word "Arab". I'm not telling this to play childish arguments "five beats one" or "five beats your two", just to explain mutual misunderstanding. Others may ask you why among six similar quotes you took just one with "Arab" word, or claim edition from 2007 was usruped by some "Persophobic pan-Arab", and so on. Neither of sources which you presented say "Hassan-i Sabbah was Arab", they speak about his father origins and say he "claimed Yamani origins" and he was "probably Arab". Of course, such informations sould be included in biography details, but I'm against inserting "....was an Arab" in opening line because it isn't supported by reliable sources. It's interesting for me that you didn't find claims about "Persian", but they also exist - for example Laurence Lockhart claimed "Though claiming Himyaritic ancestry, Hasan was both by birth and upbringing a Persian." and Charles E. Nowell  calls him "Hassan Sabbah the Persian". Now what should we do, to be "pro-Persian" and say such sources speak more specific about Hassan himself, or be "anti-Persian" and say these are outdated works? My advice is to avoid both ethnic and overcat wars, to say he was "a Nizārī missionary" in first line and explain details in his biography. As I said on talking page, three major informations are missing: : that little information is available on his early life, that primary works about his life have been lost, and that many informations about him comes from legends.--109.165.172.48 (talk) 01:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As I have said many times, if someone could produce a source for Persian ethnicity then we should list both or in this case mention, "Charles E. Nowell and Laurance Lockhart state he was Persian, while Daftary states Hassan's father was of Arab origin."
 * Intriguing, I always wondered what a JSTOR search would find. Wish I still had access to JSTOR. Simply report what the source(s) state. I'm not sure the age of Nowell's or Lockhart's articles would be an issue. I would not exclude either of them. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * First one is: Laurence Lockhart, Ḥasan-i-Ṣabbāh and the Assassins, Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London, Vol. 5, No. 4 (1930), pp. 675-696. Second one is: Charles E. Nowell, The Old Man of the Mountain, Medieval Academy of America, Speculum, Vol. 22, No. 4 (Oct., 1947), pp. 497-519. Academic oldies for sure, but Daftary still refers to first one. Another quote: "Hasan as-Sabbah was an Isma'ili propagandist or da'i of Persian origin." can be found in more modern work by Cyril Glassé, The New Encyclopedia of Islam, Rowman Altamira, 2003, page 64. In any case, I wouldn't arrange sentence as "some say Persian, other say Arab" because there's no such scolarly dispute. All of them agrees that he's born/raised as Persian, and that his father is probably of Arab origin because he claimed Yamanite line. In Lewis book The Assassins (page 38), it says his father: "was said to be of Yemeni origins - more fancifully, a descendant of the ancient Himyaritic kings of Southern Arabia.". Perhaps this way should be better to arange: Born and raised as Persian [link to "Persia/Iran" not "Persian people", sources above], he was son of Kufan man of possible Arab origins because his father claimed to be of Yamanite line [Daftary, Willey, Lewis].. Personally, for me it's intriguing that Daftary in sentence (from mentioned six sources) somewhere states his father was "Kufan" or "migrated from Kufa". I found this very confusing because on this Iranica's article about Qom it says Kufans migrated to Qom from 8th to mid 9th century, while Hassan-i Sabbah was born in mid 11th century.--109.165.134.57 (talk) 03:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:48, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour!
Nice to be greeted by you. Am not really back because too busy outside of Wikipedia, just popping in once in a while.

May I wish you a "happy new year" on this date in March? Never saw any rule against it... Au revoir! --Frania W. (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * That's perfectly fine! It was nice to see you back anyway and I completely understand being busy outside of Wikipedia! Hope it is warm where you are, we just finished a "nice" stretch of subzero temperatures here in Kansas. Take care, Frania! --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I think that last winter decided to remain in N. America. There was hardly any where I live & spring is arriving a good month ahead.
 * Are you considering changing your name to... Polar Bear? Hope you're doing well. Cordialement!--Frania W. (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * LOL. No, nothing so drastic. Things are fine here. Just getting ready for the tornado season! "woo hoo". --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:42, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Did you
See my WP:AN proposal for a ban for an editor? Dougweller (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep. Voted and commented. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Ibn Khaldoun
Hello there. I seen some of your good contributions on the Ibn Khaldoun Talk page. You certainly seem to know what your talking about, and your talk page seems to show that you are a senior editor here on Wikipedia and are quite familiar with the Nationalist types plaguing every virtually every Middle-Eastern related article on here. I would really appreciate your thoughs and help in cleaning that article up from more POV-pushing. I have started a section on the Talk page called "Mohammed Enan" regarding a very unreliable and uninformative source, here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ibn_Khaldun#Mohammed_Enan Thanks for your time. SaSH172 (talk) 07:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Any idea
as to who that is, since you and he haven't any articles in common. I reverted him and warned him. Dougweller (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Besides that article? Not really. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

John I, Duke of Brabant
Sir, I saw your revert of my well-meant addition to John I, Duke of Brabant. If the form was incorrect, as you seem to imply, may I invite you to implement corrections in a more constructive way, since you seem to be better acquainted with this wikipedia than my poor self. In one way or another, a reference to the song is worth mentioning, so if my way to do so was not correct then please apply a better one. Thanks in advance, Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * It is up to you to provide reliable sources for your addition(s). --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:25, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * ??? Are you saying that nl.wikipedia.org (to which I referred) is not a reliable source??? Baffled, Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I guess you did not read the link given above. "Tertiary sources such as compendia, encyclopedias, textbooks, obituaries, and other summarizing sources may be used to give overviews or summaries, but should not be used in place of secondary sources for detailed discussion. Although Wikipedia articles are tertiary sources, Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact checking or accuracy. Because Wikipedia forbids original research, there is nothing reliable in it that isn't citable with something else. Thus Wikipedia articles (or Wikipedia mirrors) are not reliable sources for any purpose." --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks. I did check the link, but have obviously missed the relevant paragraph. Funny, though, that wikipedia doesn't consider itself as reliable. Perhaps, instead of referring to another WP article, I should have referred to that article's references? Above all, I could have wished for a more constructive intervention on your behalf, but thanks just the same. Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Apion
Footnote 40 here and pp 243-244 and note 116 here] are possibly better. Against Apion also has the same statement Rarevogel added, but it was added in 2006 by an IP. Dougweller (talk) 14:35, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Baibars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salihiyah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Kansas. Can you check the Kyrgyz people article? I dont understood the unrevert reason. Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you be more specific? Which unrevert in particular? --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:44, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It's about Kyrgyz peoples' genetics. User florian removed a sources. If you check the view history and talk page of artcile, you'll see. This is a revision of florian's removed. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kyrgyz_people&diff=603388395&oldid=603388016 Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 20:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * The link you left is not a link to Florian removing references. It is user:Su4kin adding sources which prima facie appear questionable. This linkHaplogroup R1a as the Proto Indo-Europeans and the Legendary Aryans as Witnessed by the DNA of Their Current Descendants is a 404 Error.
 * Here, Florian says the source does not state what was written into the article. You will have to bring your sources and facts, from these sources, to the talk page, not simply questioning him as to why he removed the information from the article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The source is not mine. And the link is fine. http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=17707#.U3psV_l_tv4 Maybe just you can't open the url. And what is that mean exactly: "Florian says the source does not state what was written into the article" huh? You think this is a reason? Please be cooperative and neutral. Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 21:09, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I did a quick search of the journal, I found Turkic only once located the last page listed in the references, "http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Turkic/default.aspx?section=yresults". I found nothing within the journal to support, "Proto-Turkic" as added by user:Su4kin. Which page of the journal does it mention "proto-Turkic"? --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:21, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ctrl+F is not helped you I guess. Of cource. That region -mentioned in the journal- were and still turkic peoples' living region. But you're insistently searching a "proto-turkic" word. Fine. But the new dna research decline to relationship between r1a and Indo-Europeans. So; I'am asking, this sentece is ture: "haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) is often believed to be a marker of the Proto-Indo-European language speakers"? Can you correct this? Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 21:37, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you not going to answer my question? On which page in the journal, "Haplogroup R1a as the Proto Indo-Europeans and the Legendary Aryans as Witnessed by the DNA of Their Current Descendants", does it mention "Proto-Turkic"? --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, same point. OK. There is not a "proto-turkic" word. Fine? Now your turn. Are you going to answer my question? this sentence correct? "haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) is often believed to be a marker of the Proto-Indo-European language speakers"? Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 21:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Therefore, user:Su4kin falsified the source simply to add "Proto Turkic". As for whether the sentence, "haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) is often believed to be a marker of the Proto-Indo-European language speakers", is "correct" or not, what do the sources for that sentence state ? We are talking sources here, ok, same point, the source(s) have to support what the sentence says . It is very clear that you do not like this sentence, "marker of the Proto-Indo-European language speakers", and your dislike of said sentence is not a viable reason to remove it. Maybe you should take your own advice, " be cooperative and neutral" and avoid accusing other editors of vandalism and/or nationalistic agendas. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:22, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't deformed my words. This is nothing about personel "feelings". But it seems Florian's (and maybe your's) actions opposite that. The information about r1a is not certain. If you can read, I gave you a source's link. Still can't you understand that simple fact? Clearly, you don't want to get your hands dirty. Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 22:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * There is something "personal" when you state that Florian's removal of a false reference is vandalism and nationalistic POV. Clearly you are quite biased about this issue. You have presented no facts to support your opinion about this matter and now are accusing me of taking actions on an article I have never edited! I believe we are done here. Do not post on my talk page again. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kansas Bear/Kyrgyz R1a


A tag has been placed on Kansas Bear/Kyrgyz R1a, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:00, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry meant for it to be a work page. I have moved it and made it one. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Question
Any advise on how i should deal with this guy? --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 19:07, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Start a discussion on the talk page, bring sources to support your position. If Anonim.lion does not respond within a week revert back to original. If you are reverted by Anonim.lion at that point, contact an Admin to have the page protected. If Anonim.lion does respond then work towards a consensus. That is how I would do it. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 09:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

watch article
Can you watch this article in light of recent deletions of sourced material? (Especially after the second person not only deleted material but committed copyright violation by copying new material directly from the .edu source, and original research by analyzing the newspaper article) Thanks.Rajmaan (talk) 18:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


 * He keeps on adding his copyvio and his own commentary on the newspaper article, which violate WP:COPYVIO and WP:OR and instead of listening he just started aping what I said in his edit summary. He did stop deleting content but he doesn't seem to understand copyvio and that you can't copy directly form the source.Rajmaan (talk) 20:08, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi
Could you look at the talk page of the article EOKA please? ArordineriiiUkhtt (talk) 06:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Also this. I have fixed the grammar (a/an). Sorry, I forget to add it. Does the article need it or doesn't? I do not know the policy well. Therefore, I want to ask it to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArordineriiiUkhtt (talk • contribs) 06:11, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Armenia
Re: this edit, I wonder if you could join the discussion here. I am trying to understand what should be a consistent policy toward these 'former entities'. Brad Dyer (talk) 00:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

hi
can you protect the page " List of Turkic dynasties and countries" I do not want anyone to destroy the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmeett21 (talk • contribs) 22:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No. Contact an admin. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * And if this IP82.209.191.118 is you, I would warn you against editing while logged out. Protection can only be done due to edit warring or vandalism, not for your ownership of the article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:33, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

HistoryAddict
Blocked him for 3 days after he made a completely unacceptable attack on another editor. He exploded, requested an unblock which was declined, exploded, requested an unblock which was declined, rinse and repeat until he got an indef with talk page access removed. Time waster. Dougweller (talk) 16:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Muhammad Ali of Egypt
Re your post to DW. I have the THR article, and posted a reply to the user on the article talk page. DeCausa (talk) 09:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Delhi Sultanate
Hey, have a look on Delhi Sultanate page. Another editor has edited my inputs. But, now it seems to be focused on mainly one sided "iconoclast" narrative. Facts are kept but explanations and reasons are edited out. Do contribute there if you also feel the same, especially even after reading Eaton. One can not say that some temples were protected but not giving reasons why some were protected and some others were not. And, also it was not a new thing but continued from 6th century CE.So such phrases or expressions like "beginning of an era" in the 12th/13th century are historically wrong.

BTW,I reverted the Maratha Navy portion because it was done by an IP without proper reasoning.Ghatus (talk) 07:11, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I have contacted Dougweller, asking for his opinion concerning if what you added was "coatrack". In my opinion, I do not believe what you added to the section, "Destruction and desecration" was tangentially related to the section(ie. "coatrack"), if anything it was directly related and gave a more concise reason as to why they destroyed some temples and seemingly supported others. User:Beren Dersi statement in his edit summary of "primary sources" is nonsense. I am awaiting Dougweller's response on his talk page. --Kansas Bear (talk) 14:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Dandanaqan and Kakuyids
Hi, Kansas Bear. I watched your contributions and know you interested in Seljuqs, Ghaznavids etc. Could you share your thoughts about this discussion? --- Qara khan 13:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio
I give up before i get a brain damage and  --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * These articles, Bilgetigin and Böritigin have a reliable reference, Encyclopædia Iranica. --- Qara khan 14:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Are you kidding me.. do you even know what... You know what? it's not even worth it, i'll just wait until someone deletes the article and hopefully blocks you in order for you to read the rules next time, and hopefully train your English more so you will understand what other people mean. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 17:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * You know better, the rules of Wikipedia, right? then why you have been blocked | 5 times. --- Qara khan 18:51, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Yep, that's how you learn the rules the hard way :), seems like you need to learn it even harder if you continue like that. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 19:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

So.. should i do what you suggested or do you want to do it yourself, Kansas Bear? --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 16:24, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I would like Qara Xan's input on the proposed idea before we do anything. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:27, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Gone now. It was at Copyright problems so someone would have dealt with it if I hadn't. He's free to recreate it. I won't block him but I will if he does it again. Dougweller (talk) 18:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Dougweller: I was referring to another Ghaznavid-related thing, but thanks, that's one problem solved :).

Kansas Bear: That's the problem, Qara Xan don't want to answer, I'll guess i have to stick to this then. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 19:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Osman II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greek. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marie of Orléans, Viscountess of Narbonne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Ravenna. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Al-Karaji
Any suggestions on how to deal with Seanwal111111? --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 12:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have reverted him. He can bring his reason(s) to the talk page. As of right now both of you could be considered edit-warring!! --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Ghor Dynasty Article
Kansas Bear,

I want to know why you reverted my quote to the Fereshta text when I changed it to the following:

The native prince of the country, Mahomed, of the Afghan tribe of Soor (the same race which gave birth to the dynasty that eventually succeeded in subverting the family of Sebüktigin), occupied an entrenched camp with 10,000 men.

You obviously have not seen or read the text in English or Persian for that matter, otherwise you wouldn't have made such a blatantly incorrect revision, and one without even asking why I made the change.

If you would like to actually see the text in the book in English as I have posted it, please let me know so you can be enlightened, and next time please check before making changes, so you don't embarrass yourself.

In fact, I have taken the liberty of even posting the link for you below, so just copy and paste it into your browser and see the actual text of the actual book on the bottom of page 28 which is exactly as I have posted.

https://archive.org/stream/HistoryOfTheRiseOfTheMahomedanPowerInIndia-4VolsSet/HistoryOfTheRiseOfTheMahomedanPowerInIndia-Volume-1#page/n87/mode/2up

Thanks Afghan25 (talk) 08:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)Afghan25


 * . The source you have provided is a primary source.
 * . This source is not translated by an academic.
 * . The information stated within the source is not supported by academics(Soor/Sur tribe) see Ghurids. "..but this is generally rejected by modern scholarship, and, as explained by Morgenstierne in the Encyclopaedia of Islam, is for "various reasons very improbable"." (G. Morgenstierne (1999). "AFGHĀN". Encyclopaedia of Islam (CD-ROM Edition v. 1.0 ed.). Leiden, The Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV.) "Instead, the consensus in modern scholarship (incl. Morgenstierne, Bosworth, Dupree, Gibb, Ghirshman, Longworth Dames and others) holds that the dynasty was most likely of Tajik origin."(Encyclopaedia Iranica, "Ghurids", C.E. Bosworth, (LINK): ". . . The Ghurids came from the Šansabānī family. The name of the eponym Šansab/Šanasb probably derives from the Middle Persian name Wišnasp (Justi, Namenbuch, p. 282). we can only assume that they were eastern Iranian Tajiks.| Encyclopaedia of Islam, "Ghurids", C.E. Bosworth, Online Edition, 2006: "... The Shansabānīs were, like the rest of the Ghūrīs, of eastern Iranian Tājik stock ...")
 * . Therefore, this quote is factually incorrect and should be removed. Such information should be supported by secondary and tertiary sources.
 * If you were not in such a hurry to push an academically incorrect view of the Ghurids and make this a personal issue, like all POV pushers, you would have known this and not embarrassed yourself. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Another source, Toward Alternative Receptions of Ghurid Architecture in North India (Late Twelfth-Early Thirtheenth Century CE), A. Patel, Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 54, (2004), 35;"It remains uncontroverted that the Shansabanis established a long term political prescence in the northern plains of India during the last decade of the twelfth century. The clan was of Tajik origin...". --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

User:Intothefire added the information to article. I would suggest the Afghan25 stay away from such contentious editing when he doesn't understand what a primary source is and that ignoring the facts won't do him any good. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, Redux
NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou! The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Tacitus
Hello, Kansas Bear -- Are you still watching Tacitus? I thought you'd be a better judge of the latest edits than I am. I don't know about the additional occupations (is "orator" an occupation?), but "lawyer" is capitalized. CorinneSD (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I will check it as soon as I can. Been rather busy lately. Thank you for letting me know! --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

A question about the definite article, "the"
I've been editing Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa and now Ebola virus outbreak in the United States. I see The New York Times and The New York Times, and "New York Times" (in references only). Can you tell me what is WP policy? To me, it was always The New York Times. Why is "The" being left outside of the italics? If you will let me know what it ought to be, I'll try to make it consistent. Thanks. CorinneSD (talk) 00:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * My understanding of citing sources would be to take the name of the newspaper(s). As per this, it appears to be "The New York Times". --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:41, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * That's what I thought. Thank you! CorinneSD (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Source Quality?
Kansas Bear, I noticed your recent edits to Eleanor of Provence and Blanche of Castile to remove the references to the Goldstone book. While I appreciate that this work is not as scholarly as some other sources, is it not better to have citations to a tertiary source than to have unreferenced text? 1bandsaw (talk) 18:16, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Goldstone's book is not a tertiary source, it is not a work of academic scholarship, it is, however, a "popular history" written by a non-historian . If said information in Eleanor of Provence or Blanche of Castile can not be supported by academic sources then such information should not be in the article(s). --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:12, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

yusuf adil shah
yusuf adil shah is turk!!


 * I would avoid using Elphinstone(not a historian and outdated) and Beale(outdated), they both detract from what you are trying to prove. As for his ethnicity, it is very much a debatable subject. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:23, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

if it is very much a debatable subject why do you write that he is georgian?:/

Anyway can you look on qasim barid i have but refernce there would like to know if they were good


 * I found the article stating, "The founder of the dynasty, Yusuf Adil Shah, was likely a Bahmani nobleman who was purchased by Mahmud Gawan from Iran." I systematically went through and checked each source for reliability. Per the sources already in the article, I changed his ethnicity to Georgian. Then I must have found a source stating Turkish ethnicity, which I also added. So I am not sure what you are trying to imply here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As for Qasim Barid I; Kenneth Pletcher does not appear to have any specialization in the history of India. The rest of the sources appear to be reliable. I removed the Georgian ethnicity which was referenced by two outdated sources. I left "Shia Muslim" even though it is unsourced. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

okay i remove Kenneth Pletcher as reference.Turkic_ Warrior 16:04, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Birthdate of Yusuf Adil Shah
It is said that Yusuf was born 1459, but Murad II died in 1451.

In Turkish Sources I found that Yusuf Adil Shah was the son of Murad II.

http://www.biriz.biz/osmanli/p6.htm

But he must born 1450 or posthumosly.


 * I see no source stating Yusuf's date of birth. It could be just speculation/opinion/guesswork. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Sunni Islam in Bijapur
There was not only Shiya Muslims in the Dynasty, it changed to Sunni Islam as you can read by the Life of the Adilshah dynasty members, this was the reason that I wrote sunni islam also there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.105.20 (talk) 20:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The source currently there states Shia. There was no source for Sunni. If you have a source please provide the proper citation. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:51, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Kansas, under the Page The Source is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Adil_Shah_II

Under Religion you see: Shia till 1552 and accepted Sunni Islam in the hands of Shah Sibghatullah Shuttari and Sunnism became the official religion of Bijapur Adil Shahi Dynasty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.105.20 (talk) 15:37, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Also here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Adil_Shah_I

Under Faith you can see, the change of Sunni Islam


 * I see two wikipedia articles stating Sunni, however I do not see any sources within the article supporting these statements . Also, Wikipedia articles can not be used to reference wikipedia. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:52, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Kansas, I didn't understand you, because in this two Articles it is said, that they changed shia islam to sunni. So why you said you can't see them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.105.20 (talk) 17:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not see any sources within the article supporting these statements, the statement that the Adil Shahs changed from Shia to Sunni is unsourced in both of the articles you mentioned. Also, Wikipedia articles can not be used to reference other wikipedia articles. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:00, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar...

 * Thank you very much! --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Lite baklava till dig!

 * It looks extremely delicious, thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:49, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Tatar confederation
is Tatar confederation turkic-mongol confederation kansas bear? I'm confused :)Turkic_ Warrior 14:05, 2 December 2014 (UTC)


 * What do the sources state? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:44, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

it is a Turkic confederation it can read it in kul tigin inscriptions!Turkic_ Warrior 21:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppet?
The edits certainly are suspicious. Edward321 (talk) 00:21, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * And the edits are persistent. Edward321 (talk) 13:58, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thesnowymanlan
He's now reported at Sockpuppet investigations/Theshitman. Thanks for cleaning up my talk page. Meters (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Not a problem! Thanks for reporting that sock. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:45, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

hi
there are two who vandalize List of Turkic dynasties and Countries! it is Bulgarians who do not want to know his past haha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmeett21 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Starting a discussion on the talk page is your best option. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

kansas bear do you now how to fix a Wikipedia Bots on the pageTurkic_ Warrior 21:42, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No. I don't mess with bots. Sorry. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators,

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar for you
Thanks! Was just trying to help. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
The problem is definitely getting worse. The sockpuppets have started following me to unrelated articles. They should definitely be reported. 00:08, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * What's the proper forum to report this blatant personal attack by one of the socks? Edward321 (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I would report it to the admin on whose page it was posted. Anywhere else and it will be buried under red tape or simply ignored. Although, since it mentions me specifically, nothing will be done about it. I have been called a racist on my talk page and other pages so many times, it is blantantly ignored by all admins. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:23, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

FYI
You may want to comment at Sockpuppet investigations/Turan22, there are some more suspects. Edward321 (talk) 22:57, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I added a "new user" for them to check at the SPI. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * And they found some sleepers. Edward321 (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Turan22
On the 20th, checkuser said Siktirgitir was unrelated to Turan. On the 24th, checkuser said O.Turani was unrelated to Turan. Based on edits, I'm wondering if they're related to each other, though. Another suspicious SPA is George$653. Edward321 (talk) 05:57, 28 December 2014 (UTC)


 * If Siktirgitir and O.Turani are the same person, I willing to let him make the mistake. Siktirgitir has already made the mistake of vandalizing my page, since he is incapable of being productive. As of right now, his actions have proven that he is not here to build an encyclopedia, but to push some childish concept not supported by academia. As for them being related(Sikie, 0.Turan, Georgie), time will tell, I suppose. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)


 * He is here. Submit an ip-range block and indef-block for that user. --103.41.63.11 (talk) 11:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Tajik people
This article has a multiple IPs repeatedly adding pic of historical figures whose articles do not show they were Tajiks. Their personal attacks against me haven't stopped The Turan22 socks from supporting me there. George$653 is brand new with no other edits. Edward321 (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

In need for help
Any suggestion(s) on how to deal with this guy so i can expand this article in peace?. Yes, i know that i have made some.. reverts. But i don't want to make the article more messy than it already is and that's why i am here - if you have time, of course. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


 * First off, do not use anything from Sir Percy Molesworth Sykes, he was not an historian. Next take your sources and information to the talk page and engage Caprimanali in discussion. That's your best option. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:29, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Alright - thank you. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 13:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Greetings

 * Thanks, Nedim. Hope you are doing well in your part of the world. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Al-Farabi
Question on Al-Farabi's birthplace. It is listed as Fārāb in Syrdarya Code: Fārāb in Syrdarya Otrar redirects to Faryab Province and Syrdarya redirects to Syr Darya which is a river that appears to be substantially north of Faryab Province. Something seems amiss... Would you know how to remedy this? Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 19:33, 31 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I will take a look at it. Most likely, since the article has suffered multiple POV edit wars, something may have been changed. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:36, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Would never had figured that out! Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 21:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, Jim. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)