Hello, Orkh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! (FYI: any image hosted at the Wikimedia Commons can be used in the English Wikipedia without needing to be uploaded) ˉˉanetode╦╩08:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagging for Image:Mehmed II enters Constantinople.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mehmed II enters Constantinople.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
I don't know if you really act in good will while pushing "Huns" to "See also"s of many totally unrelated articles, but please stop it.
Wikinist (talk) 00:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Stop placing this image as the representative of Turkic peoples in relevant article
Turkmen girl.
May I ask what makes you think that this image should represent a face for all Turkic peoples? Try contributing text so that we can see how much you know about the subject. Trying to impose images according to your POV is not the way to go. You wrote some insulting comments in the discussion page for Bulgars. --Nostradamus1 (talk) 16:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You insist on this picture without even bothering to explain why it should be included. It is going to have a lasting as much of yours. Orada burada saldirganlik ve terbiyesizlik yapacagina once kendini egit. Cagdas Turkleri bu Kizilderli benzeri resim temsil etmeyecek.Nostradamus1 (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:Turkish people for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you. Also of note, you have an open account at WP:WQA. Please be more civil in your comments and refrain from typing in all capitalised letters, as that is considered shouting.Seicer (talk) (contribs) 06:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
User page vandalism
This is the only warning you will get. Vandalistic edits to other users's user pages containing abuse and obscenity are absolutely not tolerated here. Next time will get you blocked for a long time. Fut.Perf.☼21:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So what? You are still not allowed to insult people on here. Discuss content, if you must, otherwise leave the other guys alone. This [1] is also unacceptable. Fut.Perf.☼20:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in what your content disagreement is with Wikinist. I'm interested in seeing you behave. BTW, nobody here "wants" to "destroy" anything, we are all here to improve things. If you can't bring yourself to believing that, then there's something wrong with your approach. Fut.Perf.☼20:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3RR Warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Huns. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Pudeo⺮16:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orkh: I am not sure that your edits (diff) to the first paragraphs of Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm have produced a clearer article. Over the past several months, other editors and I have placed the various names for this principality with appropriate explanations into the second paragraph. In removing the second paragraph and spreading individual sentences around, you have, I believe, unintentionally muddled the text. If you are concerned that the article may not be found easily by those searching for it, please know that redirects have been created for all of the variant names, including those in Turkish. In the future, please discuss sensitive issues of naming on the talkpage before making changes. Aramgar (talk) 16:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for experimenting with the page Great Wall of China on Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. It looks as though you were deliberately putting in incorrect information. If not, apologies, but the Ming wall was certainly not built to protect the dynasty from the Xiongnu of the 2nd century BC!Doug Weller (talk) 21:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Great Wall of China. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Please add a source or raise your concerns on the talk page. Thank you, Kafka Liz (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Warning
Hi, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. You have recently been involved in an edit war on Azerbaijani people, and have been editing against consensus as well. Also I have noticed that you have been removing sourced material from articles without any explanation ([2], [3]). Both of these are contrary to building an encyclopedia, both are blockable offenses. Please cease from disruptive editing and try to contribute to Wikipedia in a more positive way. Consider this a warning, for if you continue in this manner you will be blocked. Khoikhoi01:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles, such as those you made to Bulgarians, even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. LaveolT22:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I respect the Turkic peoples, however the Bulgars were Turkic! Your problem are the reliable sources. According to Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. Regards! See:Wikipedia:Verifiability, Stop vandalizing, articles as you do with Turkic peopleS, please! Jingby (talk) 17:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:123bvc.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:123bvc.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
