Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Nakh peoples, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 22:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Uchar-hadji, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chechen. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Hello i can't seem to find the link anymore, was it deleted? if so can you restart it so we can get to the bottom of this? I was away on business the week this thread was started so i couldn't answer. --Goddard200020:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Titinstrily (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Cabayi, my understanding is that many east of EE Russian Federation territories still fall under WP:ARBEE coverage (though probably not as far east as Siberia or Kamchatka) — of course, Chechnya is unrelated to the Balkans facet of EE (ethno-nationally, etc.). Note, for example, that EE has also been traditionally applied to most central Europe nations (stopping at and not including Germany). El_C14:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please fix your signature so that it points to your user page User:Goddard2000 rather than a non-existent article
Goddard2000. Piping it like this -
[[User:Goddard2000|Goddard2000]]
is probably the effect you're trying to achieve. Alternatively just blank out the signature in your preferences since your intended sig matches the default. Thank you, Cabayi (talk) 13:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about the look, it's about where it links to. It should link to your (non-existent) userpage, not to a non-existent article. - Cabayi (talk) 14:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've just noticed that the timestamps are wrong by an hour too. How are you signing? You are using 4 tildes ~~~~ aren't you? Cabayi (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cabayi Ah right, yes sometimes i forget to write in the timestamp, still getting a hang of this. Oh so i have to add "User:" before? alright thanks for explaining. - Goddard2000 (talk) 15:58, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is very odd, shouldn't i write down the time when i post it? Right now on my watch its 16:47 so when i post this shouldn't i write down 16:48? what is "tildes"? - Goddard2000 (talk) 16:48, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, the software interprets tildes ~ when it saves your edit and adds the timestamp in UTC, not the local time on your watch -
I am an uninvolved administrator who noticed the report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Multiple insults and personal attacks. The WP:CIVIL policy is rigorously enforced. That's not because we're all nice people. Instead, the reason we are civil is so discussion focuses on improving the encyclopedia, not fighting each other. You must not refer to other editors other than perhaps mentioning, for example, that User:Example added particular text. Any further negativity will result in a block. By the way, in addition to what was said about signatures above, the correct procedure is to sign by adding a space then four tildes at the end of the last line of your comment. Johnuniq (talk) 00:43, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Chechen. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Abuzar Aydamirov, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.
The Show preview button is right next to the Publish changes button and below the edit summary field.
Meticulo I used it at first but then noticed some errors and typos after i already edited in the previous edits. Thank you nonetheless, ill be sure to fully review my edits before i post them. Goddard2000 (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problems at all - I've made the same mistake myself. And apologies for posting the warning when you already know about the preview button. Meticulo (talk) 17:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for May 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shuaib-Mulla of Tsentara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chechen.
Please do not add religion, ethnic, or descent categories or information to biography articles without first ensuring that 1) the category is supported by reliably sourced article content, 2) the individual identifies as such, and 3) it is a defining characteristic of the individual . Please see WP:BLPCAT, WP:EGRS, and WP:CATDEF for additional information.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots22:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So i can only add in the external link that he's a Chechen sportman if i have a source that confirms he is an ethnic Chechen? Because there are plenty of sources of him being Chechen and defining as Chechen. Where would i have to put the source to add this external link? Goddard2000 (talk) 22:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello, I'm Blaze Wolf. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Nakh peoples that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654515:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wow i wasn't aware that it was a personal attack, maybe there is a language barrier here but it is not regarded as a personal attack in my native tongue. I will keep this in mind, thank you. Goddard2000 (talk) 16:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
You have recently made edits related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans. This is a standard message to inform you that Eastern Europe or the Balkans is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh Goddard2000. I'm thinking of making pages about Dagestani, Chechen and Ingush (there's 4 of them) naibs in the future so I made this page about Asirko, who was naib of Mountainous Chechnya according to Khozhaev. Unfortunately it was deleted and moved to a draft place for some reason. Do you think it's notable enough that it could exist as an article? An admin declined the request, so I was thinking if you could give your opinion. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It does actually mention him, here: "МАХЬМАЗАН АЬРСАНАКЪА (Арсико-Махамаз-оглы) — наиб горной Чечни (кистинский наиб). Возможно, что Арсануко Арсанукаев и Арсико-Махамаз-оглы — одно и то же лицо". The admin said it's not notable but if he was Naib of Mountainous Chechnya, it should mean that he was big name and wasn't just a nobody. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 12:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah i see now, could you quote your other sources? because this one just calls him a "Kist" which was used for both Chechens and Ingush during this period. Is there any source that specifies which clan or village he was from? or mentions a historical document or letter? Because i only see sources that refer to him as Kist so far (i haven't read Dadaev), this letter that mentions him by name in 1848 only refers to him as Naib of Kist villages and mentions "Mitho and Maysti" which are Chechen Melhi and Maysto clans: https://www.vostlit.info/Texts/Dokumenty/Kavkaz/XIX/1820-1840/SSTAK/221-240/224.htm
How does Dadaev claim he's Ingush? this 4th source of yours is Khozhaevs i believe? and it only claims he's Kist but i haven't read Khozhaevs entire book so i'm not sure if he claims he's Ingush later on. Could you post a text from Dadaev and Khozhaev where they claim he's Ingush? Goddard2000 (talk) 13:13, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I looked up the Dudarov source (Дударов, А.-М.М. ИНГУШСКОЕ ОБЩЕСТВО В ЭПОХУ КАВКАЗСКОЙ ВОЙНЫ: НАИБЫ ШАМИЛЯ ИЗ ЧИСЛА ИНГУШЕЙ) and it says:
"The fourth person from the Ingush naibs of Shamil is the Kist Asirko-Mukhamad ogly (Kistinsky naib of Shamil). If
the above naibs from Yu.U. Dadaev are given separately,
then Asirko-Mukhamad is listed only in the general list of naibs of the Imamat [Dadaev 2009: 96], which is due to the lack of information about his
life and service with Shamil."
Here it claims Asirko was Ingush but again claims he's Kist, how does the source know he's Ingush? Kist was used for highland Chechens during this period. This all goes back to the Dadaev source since Dudarov uses him as a source. Can you post the text or explain where i can find Dadaevs book? Goddard2000 (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, thanks for sharing that document where Asirko is mentioned, it's additional source for the article. About that document, there was 2 Asirko mentioned historically, and as far as I know, with possibility of them being 1 person. Yes Khozhaev didn't claim that he was Ingush (I tried to make that clear by putting the reference at the end). I don't have Dadaev's work unfortunately, but Dudarov and Checheninfo referred to him, so I won't be able to quote him. By the way isn't Malkhiy Chechen and Ingush clan? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 16:23, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have only read Dudarov and Checheninfo source not Khozhaev, i don't have the pdf file for his book but we need to find Dadaev's book before even claiming Asirko was Ingush. Do we even know if Dadaev claimed he's Ingush? and if he did then what was his reasoning? So far only Dudarov calls Asirko Ingush but we don't know why. Dudarov himself is ethnic Ingush so we don't know if his work is biased, did he assume Asirko is Ingush just because he's Kist? there is a tendency among Ingush historians to claim Kists are only Ingush (similar to how there is a tendency to do the opposite among Chechen historians too). So we need to look out for biases when making articles.
As for Melhi being Ingush, Melhi are mostly Chechens, only very few claim to be Ingush. If we start calling Melhi an Ingush clan just because there are some few Melhi that refer to themselves as Ingush then we will start claiming pure Ingush clans such as Evloy and Tsuroy are Chechens because there are many Evloy and Tsuroy communities in Chechnya that refer to themselves as Chechen. We don't know what clan Asirko belonged to, "Kist" was also used for other teips such as Dishni, Ch'anti, Zumsoy etc Goddard2000 (talk) 18:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He basically implies Asirko is Chechen and never calls him Ingush, on page 173 he writes exactly like the Checheninfo source (Checheninfo basically copy pasted that part), he mentions just like the Checheninfo source that Asirko might be the same Naib referred to as "АЬРСАНАКЪА" who he mentions on page 169, that Naib is from the Chechen clan Dishni and they were often referred to as Kist. So According to Khozhaev/Checheninfo (2 of your sources) Asirko is not mentioned as Ingush and is implied to have been Chechen, 1 source Dudarov calls him Ingush and uses Dadaev as a source but we don't know if he made the conclusion that Asirko is Ingush or if Dadaev said it since he doesn't directly quote him. In my opinion we can only make this article if we at least find Dadaevs book first and discuss it. Goddard2000 (talk) 18:34, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
His ethnicity is another matter of discussion, for now to make it neutral, I will write that he was Kistin (The article is about the ethnonym) naib. The article deserves to exist, don't you agree? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah i agree, i see nothing wrong with it and i do agree with the idea to refer to him as Kistin, i would also recommend deleting the Checheninfo source since its basically a copy-paste of Khozhaev and imo you should mention that Khozhaev believes he could be related to the Dishni Naib Arsanak'a. Goddard2000 (talk) 19:39, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
169 but if you look up "Arsanuko" at nohchalla source then you'll see him mentioned there too since its copy pasted from Khozhaev's book just like checheninfo. I'll quote it here:
The on page 172 he says: "МАХЬМАЗАН АЬРСАНАКЪА (Арсико-Махамаз-оглы) — наиб горной Чечни (кистинский наиб). Возможно, что Арсануко Арсанукаев и Арсико-Махамаз-оглы — одно и то же лицо."
"It is possible that Arsanuko Arsanukaev and Arsiko-Makhamaz-ogly are one and the same person.", Arsanuko Arsanukaev being "Arsanaka" from Dishni. Goddard2000 (talk) 22:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thank you. I wanted to ask about Battle of the Assa River, I realized my mistake there, it was due to the fact that I was unexperienced user. It's been month and since that, my articles are now based only on reliable sources and information. But I would like to know how can I delete that page by myself? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 14:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to delete an article but you could comment and say it in the proposed deletion article. I appreciate that you admitted your mistake, i made many similar mistakes during my first time editing here. Goddard2000 (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Goddard2000 what could I write about this document —[1] in the article since it's historical mention of Arsiko which is important? Could you give me an example? I would also appreciate if you could send me more documents about him. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is the only document i found on him unfortunately, you could mention that he tried to negotiate with Khevsurs and that he was noted by the Russians to have been the Naib of at least 2 Chechen clans (Melhi & Maysto). Goddard2000 (talk) 21:59, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. I don't understand why you spammed this text "J. A. Güldenstädt also writes that all of the Kists (Nakh Peoples in this case) are also referred to as Chechens, he also includes the "Galgai district" among the Chechen districts." or "J. A. Güldenstädt also writes that all of the Kists (Nakh Peoples in this case) are also referred to as Chechens." across many unrelated pages. Are we gonna now add every single unrelated things Güldenstädt mentioned about Chechen and Ingush peoples to Small Ingush, Meredzhi and others? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Waaleykum Salam warahmatullahi wa barakatuh @WikiEditor1234567123 i only added the "Galgai" district to "Small Ingush" article since Galgai are mentioned as Small Ingush too. I don't understand the problem of adding "are also referred to as Chechens" to villages that are today Chechen. Guildenstedt never himself identifies these villages as either Ingush or Chechen (except Galgai), he says that Russians call Shalkha "Little Angusht" and that "Chechen" is used for all Kists. I personally don't see a reason to add this quote to other modern Ingush villages but in my opinion they should be added to modern Chechen villages. Goddard2000 (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could you show me where Galgai District is mentioned as part of the Small Ingush, with page and quote please? I really don't understand what's the point in adding the unrelated text that Chechens are often understood as the whole Kistin nation (note that Güldenstädt didn't say that Kistins are understood as Chechens like you said) in the article about the villages (Meredzhi, Yalkharoy and Galanchozh) that were mentioned by Güldenstädt in pages 241-242 as part of the total number of Ingush villages while opposing them to the Chechens? To me it looks like you're adding your unrelated text right after mine just to douse out some imaginary flame. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiEditor1234567123 Galgai district isn't included as part of Small Ingush, Galgai village is, he then adds it to Chechen districts. Similarly how he adds Galashki and Meredzhi as villages in one page and writes in the footnote that they belong to all Kist villages (i showed you where to look) but then also adds them below Karabulak district as separate districts, you can check from page 241-243, tell me if im wrong. Guldenstedt said clearly that the name of this okrug (Chechen) is used for all Kistins on page 242. I don't know why you're arguing against this we've been through it on the Orstkhoy article and even kept this sentence there. Guldenstedt himself never says that Meredzhi, Yalkharoy and Galanchozh are Ingush, this is original research, he says that Sholkhi district (Yalkhor and Galay) are referred to as Little Angusht by Russians due to their proximity to Angusht proper. There is no imaginary flame, there are articles that need a bit more context, if we include that Sholkhi was called "Little Angusht" by Russians then we also need to include the fact that Guldenstedt said all Kists were also referred to as Chechens. If this sentence bothers you then just rewrite it as we did in Orstkhoy i.e "but he thinks Kistin is more accurate of a name for Nakh peoples". Goddard2000 (talk) 10:46, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Galgai village and Galgai district isn't quite the same. Galgai village is the today Kambileevskoe [ru] in East-Prigorodny District, North-Ossetia, where Sholkhi and Angusht are located too. So this analogue of Galashki and Meredzhi that you brought isn't even comparable. Güldenstädt said Chechens are often understood as the whole Kistin nation, this doesn't mean that name of Chechen okrug is used for all Kistins, this is forgery of source. Are we gonna now mention every single thing Güldenstädt said about Chechen and Ingush peoples on the unrelated articles? Sure, let's even mention that according to him, the Kists fight for the sake of looting and prey and other things he said about the Kists! But of course no, we don't need to clutter up the space of the article with unrelated and unneccesary information. You can't claim this is original research when Bronevsky based on the information of Güldenstädt, quite literally also attributed the same villages as part of the Ingush in page 166 as Güldenstädt did. I already mentioned that you corrupted the original text to your liking above, Güldenstädt didn't say that all Kists were reffered as Chechens. This sentence really does bother me as first of all it isn't even connected to Small Ingush article as I have proven above, aswell as the articles about villages, second of all it's not even what Güldenstädt said, so this is forgery of source. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are we really going to pretend like Galgai district doesn't refer to Galgai village? when does Guildenstedt locate the Galga village in Kambileevskoe? The analogue of Galashki and Meredzhi makes perfect sense since Guldenstedt refers to their villages and okrugs separately despite them being the same.
I knew you would bring up the Bronevsky source but i never deleted the Bronevsky sources that claimed this. Bronevsky claimed a lot, he also claimed that "Gligva" are Mountain Chechens. Our source however (the most detailed one by Atalikov who studied the writings of Guildenstedt) never claims Meredzhi is Ingush, in fact like i showed you he includes them in a bunch of villages which he says belong to all Kists.
Guldenstedt said "due to it's notoriety the NAME of these inhabitants (Chechen) is often understood as the whole Kist nation", we both know what he means here, it's no secret that "Chechen" was used for all Nakh peoples, even the first Ingush author Chakh Akhriev wrote that he is an Ingush from the "Chechen tribe". Explain to me how pointing out that Small Ingush (Kist peoples in general) are also referred to as Chechen is irrelevant, this makes no sense at all, you want to include that Guildenstedt wrote that Russians call Sholkha (Small Ingush) but not the fact that Guildenstedt wrote that "Chechen" term understood as all Nakh peoples. This is hypocritical in my opinion, there is no need to claim that i corrupted the source. If we go back and look in the Orstkhoy article then you will see that I in fact corrected many sentences, not only that but after I pointed out errors in the article you yourself edited them out and claimed they were not there (like the "Karabulak okrug is mentioned as Ingush" sentence). Goddard2000 (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There was never a village called Galgai in the Galgai district (or call it society) which was located in Assa River, however there was a village called Galgai or Galga which is today's Kambileevskoe on Kambileyevka river. Your analogue doesn't even make sense as there was never such village in Galgai district/society and it's clear as day that the Galga village mentioned as part of Small Ingush is today's Kambileevskoe located near Oktyabrskoye (Sholkhi) and Tarskoye (Angusht). I really don't understand the point of you going off the topic to try to catch me off guard with saying "he also claimed that "Gligva" are Mountain Chechens" and that Chakh Akhriev apperantly claimed "he is an Ingush from the "Chechen tribe"" which isn't even true and is just hilarious to hear this typical misconception, but I don't wish to waste my time debating these statements of yours. I ask you again to check the published work of Güldenstädt in 2002, page 242, where after enlisting a number of villages as part of Ingush, Güldenstädt opposes these villages to Chechens. I explained many times the reason I'm against for the statement that "Chechens are often understood as the whole Kistin nation" to be added to the articles — it's quite literally not related with the article and by adding everything Güldenstädt said about Chechen and Ingush peoples in unrelated articles, the space of the article is gonna clutter up with unrelated and unneccesary information. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Guildenstedt doesn't specify where the village lies,nothing is clear about where "Galga" lies, this is your assumption. Why are you having such a problem with adding the "referred to as Chechens" quote? it exists on the Orstkhoy article as well. If it's in the Orstkhoy article then it should be on the Small Ingush article as well. We agreed to include it in the Orstkhoy article but now it can't be included in here? why are you claiming it makes no sense to add it in here but keep it in Orstkhoy? Goddard2000 (talk) 12:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your making here assumptions with your incorrect Galashki and Meredzhi analogue. Galga village is Kambileevskoe, which isn't too far away from Sholkhi (today Oktyabrskoye). I didn't agree to that quote being added to Orstkhoy article, but I let that slide if so to speak. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You still haven't explained how the Galashki-Meredzi analogue is wrong, Guildenstedt didn't locate Galga in Kambileevka. We can leave this topic for now since we are having 10 discussions at once. Let's focus on other topics for now. Goddard2000 (talk) 11:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sfn templates are basically the templates ppl (such as myself) use for sources. You first write the book in Bibliography section and then when citing a source you write {sfn|last name of the author here|year here|page=}. When you learn to use the sfn templates, could you rewrite the sources in Chechen section in Orstkhoy so that the article would be more appealing to ppl who visit the article? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 10:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmattulahi wa barakatuh. I think it's time to create a separate article for the Vyappiy teip? Some time ago I removed the section "Aukh Fyappiy" as I wanted to make a different article for it, to not make any confusions that could happen due to the similar names. My only problem is, I don't have much information about the teip, other than mentions of them coming to Aukh in 17th–18th centuries. Or should I just add it back in the article. So, what do you say? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 13:45, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, regarding the teip lists, you have no problem if I add "Aukh" section in the teip list and include three Ingush teips which make up the Aukhs (backed up by RS)? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Waaleykum Salam, i haven't checked the Fyappiy article yet so i don't know much about it, why was the Aukh Fyappiy section removed? creating a whole article seems unnecessary. Which three Ingush teips are you referring to? Also i am on the road right now for a couple of days so i can't discuss at the moment. I will get back to you when i'm free again. Goddard2000 (talk) 17:35, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because I essentially wanted to create a separate article about them, so that furthermore there wouldn't be confusions with the Fyappin society. Unfortunately didn't have the time to create it, nor did I have many sources to do it; I mean overall the Chechen and Ingush teips are horribly studied and we don't know much of their history even today, so Vyappiy aren't an exception. But yk what, I will probably add it back. Maybe some time later I will make an article for them when I get enough sources. Btw one of the other issues was that, due to the lack of sources, I don't know how to expand that section. I'm talking about the Ghuloy (famous representative is Akhmed Khuchbarov), Z'ogoi and Vyappiy (note that it's an mixed teip, not exclusively Chechen or Ingush, basically like the Orstkhoi teips). WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand Ghuloy and Vyappiy but Z'ogoi? i have never heard about it being related to Ingush. Can you post the sources and cite it if it's not hard. Goddard2000 (talk) 16:02, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem:
Ибрагимов, М.-Р. А. (2002). "Чеченцы" [Chechens]. In Арутюнов, С.А.; Османов, А.И.; Сергеева, Г.А. (eds.). Народы Дагестана [Peoples of Dagestan] (PDF). Народы и Культуры (in Russian). М.: Наука. p. 464. ISBN5-02-008808-0.
Del rez khil, could you provide pages and cite the sentence if you have time? (especially the second source, i don't want to download the pdf file from this website) i'll check it out when i come home. Goddard2000 (talk) 17:00, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the quote (from both sources): "В XVII-XVIII вв. из Чечни в предгорья и на равнину Дагестана устремились выходцы из карабулакских (ЦӀечой, Мержой и др.) и ингушских (3Ӏогой, Ваьпиий, ГӀулой и др.) тайпов, однако основную массу переселенцев в Аух составляли представители чеченских, преимущественно ичкеринских тайпов (Беной, Цонтарой, Курчалой и др.)." WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:07, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ну к сожалению, вроде на Днк-тесты мы должны оперироваться при помощи вторичных источников. Кстати на связь зӀогой с ингушами косвенно указал и Дешериев: "В Аухе были представлены следующие тайпы ЗӀогой (сравни ингушское зӀокой наькъе) (...)". WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Да я так и понял и вернул. Хорошо было бы если бы было больше источников по теме чеченских и ингушских тейпов; печально что малоизученная тема. А у тебя же нету никаких возражений против того что я 3 ауховских тейпов включу в список ингушских тейпов потому что их вышеупомянутые АИ называли таковыми? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:54, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Также при возможности Takhigeran Umar, дайте источники и информацию на ауховских вяппий. На данный момент раздел очень краткий и хотелось бы его расширить так как на данный момент сама статья Fyappiy баллотировается на статус good article (статус добротной статьи). WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Waaleykum Salam, my biggest issue with that book is that a lot of it is unsourced, i don't have the time to go through that book right now but off the top of my head i remember it having texts about "Hun invasions" that was completely unsourced. There are many moments like this. Goddard2000 (talk) 20:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Waaleykum Salam, i was away from home so i couldn't answer but i see your request was accepted. That is good, those articles shouldn't be on Wikipedia. Goddard2000 (talk) 16:56, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
