User talk:Yastanovog

Historic cities
Hi!

I noticed you did some work on ancient cities in Mongolia. Just out of personal interest, there is one old wall in Khovsgol aimag, Burentogtokh sum, which now goes by the name Zagzuugiin amny shoroon kherem because it is located at the lower reaches of the Zagzuu creek (small Image here, the wall is actually square, it only looks a bit round because of the wide camera angle). Does your source happen to say anything about this?

I also think the list would be even cooler of there were some locations given, and maybe some words on whether they are accounted for archeologically (i.e. their remains have been excavated or at least identified) or historically (mentioned in old texts). Regards, Yaan (talk) 16:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It is really sad that nobody else (I am not talking about you) could come and improve the article. I feel isolated. I was thinking that someone with more expertise would build on the skeleton that I had provided.

Image copyright problem with File:Monght029 detail1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Monght029 detail1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Sources for Byambyn Rinchen?
Hi, can you please provide references to reliable sources for this information? It sounds almost too glorious, so we need a way to verify the details. Thanks! --Latebird (talk) 07:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I read about it from many different sources. The sources I can remember and provide now are: 1) "XVII zuuny Tov Khalkhyn zarim yazguurtny nuudel, tednii ur khoichis" (Migrations of certain 17th century Central Khalkha nobles, and their descendants). B.Enkhtuvshin, P. Chultemsuren. Ulaanbaatar, 2009. Page 87-89." 2) http://www.buryatia.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1777&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15 . The source in this case is what "songool" wrote in this forum. He states he reveres B. Rinchen and studies Songool history. There was another pink book in Mongolian but it wasn't available at the library when I checked today.    Btw, I'm Songool too and my ancestors were "taisha" like Rinchen's ancestors. They say Rinchen with his impressive moustache used to turn heads on his daily walks across Sukhbaatar Square wearing his traditional deel. Although the Soviets killed all the titled Mongolian nobles, there were still many Genghis Khan descendants like Rinchen and Natsagdorj walking the streets of Ulaanbaatar.

Dornogovi Khitan Stele
Hi Yastanovog,

In the Khitan language article that you expanded recently you mention "A Khitan stele with 7 lines was discovered in 2010 in Dornogovi Province, Mongolia by the joint Mongolian-Japanese "Bichees" project." Do you have a source for this information (it is important to always give inline references for such information), and do you know if the inscription was large or small Khitan script? BabelStone (talk) 12:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is one source (http://news.gogo.mn/news/print/75044). The inscription is in large script and was found in a place called Buleen in Erdene soum, Dornogovi aimag.

Mongolic numerals
Hi Yastanovog! I see that you added a lot of numerals to a bunch of articles on Mongolic. While I think that such information without further commentary is not particularly helpful, most articles are small enough, so that I am not going to challenge you on that - provided you provide proper sourcing. Unsourced information will be deleted. The Monguor numerals are even more problematic: you need to say who recorded them when and where. For Monguor has massively loaned Chinese numerals. G Purevdorj (talk) 07:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Purevdorj! Glad you noticed my meager contributions. I think the numerals are uncontroversial enough to not need sourcing. In other words they can be considered common knowledge. The works of Ujiyediin Chuluu and Janhunen come to mind. The list on Zompist (http://www.zompist.com/asia.htm#nahali) is fairly accurate. In the case of Monguor I know they mainly use Chinese numerals, but there also instances when they use the original Mongolic ones. They have a double system of numerals like Korean. A lot of Wikipedia readers highly appreciate small, convenient information like numberal tables, so I am grateful that you have not deleted my contributions.
 * I have amended the entry for Monguor, so that is in no actual danger. Note that you forgot diacritics for what you termed "Classical Mongolian" and what should better be termed "Mongolian script" as Classical Mongolian is irrelevant for the reconstruction of Proto-Mongolic if any pre-classical sources are available as holds true for numbers. But taking numerals of Mongolic languages as common knowledge is going a bit far and using a "fairly" accurate, but unsourced list is not a very good approach either. I leave it as it is for the time being, but if you want to make sure that this info is also retained in any future editing, supplying more reliable sources is the way to go. If you have no better sourcing for the time being, I suggest you give the link you provided me with in the article as well ... Sun 1991 is a sufficient, though usually somewhat suboptimal source. If possible, always add a source! G Purevdorj (talk) 12:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I have added the link on "Monguor language". The reason why I left out the diacritics is that many computers don't have those special letters installed or are configured in a way that makes them illegible. But thank you for adding them.
 * By the way, was it really necessary to delete the information about the word "cloud" on "Mongolic languages"? Many people thirst for that knowledge, especially Mongolians. I know it was under-referenced but I got it from some pretty solid sources. Can we please keep that one sentence on the article until I or somebody else provides quality references?
 * 1. Chinii minii sanaag buruu oilgoson doo. For Monguor I have already supplied a high quality source (and adjusted the transcriptions accordingly), so the link would be misleading there. But at any of the other wiki pages where you added the numbers, supplying this link would provide basic sourcing. 2. Well, yes, I had to delete the info on 'cloud'. Not only was it unsourced, I would not even know a book where I could look up such information. And the information that you provided was of such a kind that I would have looked it up, either to gain new knowledge or to reject it. Suggestion: if you have pretty solid sources, quote them! And if not absolutely necessary to correct some misinformation that is already present at Wikipedia: always provide sources if you add anything! G Purevdorj (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Re:Praise of Bogdiin Khuree
Greetings, Yastanovog! The reason I added that tag is because the article relies on a single source, when Wikipedia articles preferably have at least several sources (though I'll admit I've seen articles which met good article criteria on just two). Basically any third-party sources which provide encyclopedic information on the subject will do. I imagine that, given the song's history as described in the article, it is covered in a lot of other sources similar to the one provided. Hope that helps! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Wilhelmina! Thanks for clarifying. The thing is that the source I quoted is an encyclopaedia itself and unfortunately, I don't think that I will have time to go the library again to check on other sources. And I am quite sure that no one other than me will come and add those additional sources on the page. I am sure that actual singers and musicians know of other specialized sources. So for now I am going to add some links.

Disambiguation link notification for October 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Mongolian monarchs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liu Xi (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) 11:14, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kublai Khan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dadu (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) 11:32, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bodonchar Munkhag, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tumed and Besud (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) 12:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Khaidu (ruler), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Yuanshi and Khitan (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) 09:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Loans into Mongolian
Hi Yastanovog! I am not opposed to your edits at Mongolian language, but if you don't source them properly, I have to consider deleting them ... G Purevdorj (talk) 13:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Purevdorj. I have to say finding sources for that is going to be a bit difficult. There is an article of Sh.Bira online with the Sanskrit information. And there is a random forum posting somewhere too with Sanskrit loanwords. For the Chinese loanwords and loan words I think it is too much of a "common knowledge" thing to require sources. The words are obviously Chinese-origined. There are many postings on Mongolian forums, like forum.asuultserver.com. But of course, forums are forums. So I don't know. You got me cornered. I can explain each of the Chinese loanwords if you want.
 * I read through the two lists once again. You are right. There are very few loans that are not common knowledge. Those that I would personally like to have sourced are changa, zuukh, dan, bai, especially the first two, but giving Chinese cognates for each and every word would presumably be helpful. For the Sanskrit words (which are mostly rather obvious, yes), just cite Bira's article, then I'm happy! Given that you had a good source for Sanskrit, why didn't you cite it in the first place? Best, G Purevdorj (talk) 15:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll do that sometime. I'll cite Bira and put Chinese cognates. I might have to get rid of zuukh. I was kind of doubting it myself too.

Re court music
First, there's already a link to music of Inner Mongolia in music of Mongolia. The reason why the former article doesn't have a lot of views is because some Inner Mongolia links and templates have been mistakenly linking to the Outer Mongolian music article. Second, Inner Mongolia's culture is very distinct from that of Outer Mongolia, since Inner Mongolia is (and has for a long time) been mostly Han, with traditions related to Shaanxi and Hebei. Third, even the Chinese Mongols' culture has been different for a very long time. It is not homogeneous Khalkha, but represents the other diverse Mongolic groups and is influenced by other Chinese culture. Perhaps our articles can emphasize this enough, and avoid the conflation of "Mongol" (ethnic group, cross-border) with "Mongolian" (nationality, doesn't represent the Mongol people in China or Russia). Shrigley (talk) 22:01, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * In the linguistic and cultural studies I am familiar with, "Mongolian" is applied to any speaker from Chakhar, Khorchin and Khalkha by ALL scientists. There is disagreement on Buryat and Oirat, but I daresay the majority of cultural scholars in the US and Great Britain would apply that word even to these two groups. The term "Mongol" applies to Dagur, Shirongolic and other Mongol entities that are not part of the Mongolian dialect continuum. But the MongolIANS in Inner Mongolia certainly have some distinctive features in their music culture that deserve special mention. Note, though, that labeling the court music of Ligdan Khan as Inner Mongolian fails the mark: during Ligdan's reign, Inner Mongolia did not exist and the respective geographic region was not yet under the control of the Manchu, much less Han. Overall, "Music of Mongolia" and "Music of Inner Mongolia" is the typical artificial split that could be overcome by an article "Mongolian music". But I won't press such a matter; just see that you use the English adjective "Mongolian" in an appropriate way, and don't refer to Inner Mongolians as "Mongols" unless you speak about people of Mongol ethnicity in general (i.e. Dagur, Shirongol, Mongolians, arguably Khitan, Moghol, Khazara). G Purevdorj (talk) 12:42, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Interesting terminological idea, G Purevdorj. I might be able to accept more of it if you provide some sources that discuss the issue. Yastanovog, I've added a teaser section to Music of Mongolia referring to the Inner Mongolia article. BTW, any "artificial split" that was created is the fault of Bogd Khan, but we have to accept the geopolitical reality of Khalkha secession and monopoly over the term "Mongolia(n)". Mongol is the official translation of 蒙族 in the China context. I see exciting potentials for cooperation around asserting the Mongolness (in contrast to "Turkic" or "Persian" claims) of the Qidan, Mogul, and Hazara people if you are interested. Shrigley (talk) 20:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks.Yastanovog (talk) 11:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inner Mongolia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Weeping willow (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) 09:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=601890812 your edit] to Karakorum may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:58, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * hevleliin horoo (Educational Printing Committee of Inner Mongolia), Hohhot, 2001  cite web|url=http://www.hicheel.mn/index.php?module=menu&amp;cmd=content&amp;id=3005&amp;menu_id=

Disambiguation link notification for March 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Karakorum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jin Dynasty (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) 08:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Яагаад хүннүгийн хуудас сүйтгээд бга юм бэ
чи хаанахын хүн бэ. Khartakhan (talk) 10:15, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Where are you from
Your ID is Mongol but i don't think that you are Mongol. Right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khorichar (talk • contribs) 15:20, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well thank you for stalking my ID and demanding my personal information like the person above. Regretfully I can't reveal my personal information. You still haven't explained why you summarily deleted the Example Sentences section in Mongolian language. Looking at your edit history you have a history of deleting things without offering any explanation. Most of your edits are simple additions of categories, moving things around and throwing in a few pictures and flags. You haven't contributed anything of note. You're also known for asserting the Mongolic-ness of the Xiongnu, a position which has been opposed by many on the Xiongnu page. You need to wait for the scholarship to catch up before asserting the Mongolic-ness of the Xiongnu. Contribute something of note before destroying others' work. Thank you.
 * Khorichar, there is no special moral right that a Mongolian or non-Mongolian editor would have (except possibly native-speaker proficiency which was not really at issue here), both must simply be knowledgeable and cite their sources precisely. And then, there are of course quite a number of editors who for some reason or the other don't disclose their names. For instance, I remember having been threatened with violence once on WP, and your real name would, so to speak, supply a concrete target. You should respect this. Thus, needlessly asking for information about the identity of YO can be seen as quite rude. G Purevdorj (talk) 14:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mongolia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eurasian Avars. 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) 10:19, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Xianbei
If you are asserting that the quote itself has been falsified maybe you should also correct the quote? As it stands, the removal from the summary sentence doesn't seem to solve the issue you raised.犬ヶ崎 (talk) 16:57, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No, I did not assert the quote has been falsified. I said someone inserted Turkic into the quote "a while ago". I remember because I undid that vandalism a while ago. My point is that there are pro-Turkic people inserting Turkic everywhere. There was even a Korean who said the Khitan language was Koreanic. I'm just trying to protect the integrity of the article. If Turkic is really the dominant hypothesis then everyone is welcome to put that under a separate paragraph.--Yastanovog (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced by this explanation. The quote is primary discussing the role of Xianbei to Clauson's theory about the origin of Turkic languages. Would it resolve the issue to indicate that this is only about Clauson's thesis instead of using the unsourced language "widely theorized"? 犬ヶ崎 (talk) 17:08, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * One correction. I think I mixed up my undo of the Koreanic assertion with the Xianbei quote edit. The Xianbei quote vandalism was undone by someone else, but I clearly remember the quote vandalism. It was up for quite a while. About Claus Schonig, his quote is from a chapter in Juha Janhunen's "Mongolic Languages" which is recognized as a standard, or even "the" standard, textbook on the Mongolic languages. I have read most of the book. Claus Schonig wrote a chapter about "Turkic and Mongolic" with a focus on Mongolic and its potential genetic relationship to Turkic. It's the last chapter. Claus Schonig's chapter is fairly authoritative. It summarizes the standard consensus in a standard textbook. So I think the "widely theorized" is not problematic.--Yastanovog (talk) 17:19, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you for this explanation.犬ヶ崎 (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Minor edit
Please read WP:MINOR. Some of your edits violate that policy. -TrynaMakeADollar (talk) 21:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I see that some of my minor edits on the Ogedei Khan "Character" section may have unintentionally veered into the qualitative (POV) over quantitative. I apologize if it did so. Thanks.(Yastanovog (talk) 10:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC))