User talk:Semsûrî

Thank you for your efforts

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Your scrutiny and care for Kurdish articles that regularly get vandalized is impressive and I thank you very much. I just wanted to say thanks. TataofTata (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Current Events Barnstar
		Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Mass creation of stubs on Turkish villages

Hi,

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You currently appear to be engaged in the mass creation of articles on Turkish villages. Such mass creation can be disruptive, and if you wish to continue creating large quantities of short, similar articles on this topic (or any topic) you should first see if there is a consensus to do so, or if the community would prefer this content be provided in a different manner.

Thank you, BilledMammal (talk) 02:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add quickly he was initially engaged in redirecting Lugnuts village stubs (like myself as well) which found the opposition of Markussep. Following Semsuri began to adapt and also create similar articles as Lugnuts (in a better expanded fashion). But I can follow Billed Mammals concern and I'd also advise to request permission for future mass creation, which you can do here. Courtesy ping to @Markussep. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I received some backlash at first for redirecting village stubs but then went on a campaign to expand those stubs a bit and moreover create articles for villages and towns that lacked an article. There were articles for all of the villages in certain provinces, while no articles for the villages in other provinces. That doesn't make sense. Per WP:GEOLAND, my edits seem justified and my creations include articles for settlements like Altınbaşak, Üzümlü with 2K people and Gökçe, Artuklu with 10K. The community seem to prefer stubs over no article at all so I went with the flow and tried to make the stubs better than Lugnuts' by adding info on coordinates, population, attached hamlets if thats the case and so on. Semsûrî (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is uncontroversial when done is small numbers often becomes controversial when done in large numbers, and in the past two months you have produced more articles than any editor did in all of 2022. Further, semi-automated mass creation, which includes your creations as I assume you are using a boilerplate text and not retyping the content each and every time you create an article, is required by policy to be approved at WP:BRFA.

For the moment, please stop mass creating articles and open a discussion at that forum about whether the community supports the mass creation of articles on this subject. BilledMammal (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The articles that I've created are not uniform. I do have a boilerplate text which gives me the foundation (templates, categories and the primary references that confirm its administrative division + population). However, how the article will become, depends on info I have from secondary references that is not part of my boilerplate. Therefore articles can vary from stubs like Ortayurt, Erzincan to start-class ones like Gelinkaya, Midyat or Derecik District.

In regard to a bot, I would probably have to ask someone to run it but can't figure out how that would actually work practically (from the info found at bot requests).

I could cease the creation of articles and focus on cleaning the Lugnuts' articles that I haven't gotten around to but the issue of arbitrariness would still remain (as seen here Template:Adilcevaz District). Semsûrî (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think being productive is a problem, especially since the articles Semsûrî created are properly sourced and about notable subjects (Populated, legally recognized places). Semsûrî obviously does not use a bot, so WP:MASSCREATION and WP:BRFA do not apply here IMO, maybe WP:MEATBOT does. I have not noticed any errors so far, and I'm not aware of a consensus against creation of this type of articles. If someone thinks creating articles about villages in Turkey is problematic, they could discuss it at WT:TURKEY, for instance. Markussep ^Talk 09:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MASSCREATE also applies to semi-automated creations; by using a boilerplate Semsûrî crosses the line into semi-automation. You might be right and it is not a problem, but the only way to determine that is to go through WP:BRFA.

Semsûrî, WP:BRFA is also for requesting permission to engage in semi-automated creations, not just fully automated creation. BilledMammal (talk) 09:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

a doubt from technical veiw-point: Semsuri is currently auto-patrolled, a bot is by default autopatrolled. But creations by both of them would be similar in regards to NPP/R queue. The only difference here would be semi/automated creation vs manual creation. I'm pretty sure that I am missing something here. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Kurdish

Hello Semsûrî, As for undoing my edits on Southern Kurdish article like this and this, look at Sorani and look for "(کوردیی ناوەندی – Kurdîy Nawendî)" in List of Indo-European languages. This is the same thing for کوردیی باشووری. Anyway, I wanna say that I don’t have much time on something like that. If you don’t like to believe, then don’t. With my respect. ⇒ Aram Talk 14:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference used in the article, Ethnologue writes "کوردی باشووری" which is also used a lot also on South Kurdish wikipedia[1]. We should stick with this one and not what I assume is Sorani you are changing to. Semsûrî (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think @Paraw: can correct us as he is the main user of Southern Kurdish Wikipedia. ⇒ Aram Talk 14:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram:,@Semsûrî:Hello dear friends; As mentioned in Southern Kurdish Wikipedia's Article, both "کوردی باشووری" and "کوردی خوارین" are correct. If you ask me, I prefer the first, because the later doesn't exactly mean "South" and actually means "lower" (in contrast to "Upper"- Serû and Xwarû/Jêrû in Sorani). It is necessary to pay attention to this point that this typology of Kurdish languages has established by linguists in recent decades and not only these two terms, but also "Nawendî" ("Middle") and "Bakûrî" ("Northern") Kurdish are academic terms of linguistics and is rarely used by native speakers. The words "Başûr" and "Bakûr" were not common in the southern Kurdish language itself until two decades ago, but in the last two decades, especially after the publication of the Ferheng-i Başûr of Ako Celîliyan and also due to the increasing connection between the struggles of our nation in four divided parts of our motherland in the last two decades, they have became common words even in Southern Kurdish. If you want to know my opinion, I think it's better to write "کوردی باشووری (خوارین)". Thanks and respect.--Paraw (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Paraw Thank you for your detailed reply, but I wanna say the purpose of the conversation was between "کوردیی باشووری" and "کوردی باشووری" for Southern Kurdish article. Which one is correct and why? ⇒ Aram Talk 14:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram:,@Semsûrî:Oh, so I didn't understand correctly! The later (کوردی باشووری) is correst, because the preposition equivalent to "from" and also for adjectives and adverbs in Sorani Kurdish language is "î / ی"; but in Southern Kurdish that is "i / - ". That is to say, the first one is stretched and the later is short. For example: "Maĺ-î Ême / ماڵی ئێمە" in Soranî, "Maĺ-i Ême / ماڵ ئێمە" in Keĺhuřî/Southern Kurdish. This issue must be respected everywhere.Paraw (talk) 00:32, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semsûrî and @Paraw Aha, thank you very much for your explanation. I thought that my edit, which was discovered in recent years, was the same for Southern Kurdish, but you know both Central Kurdish and Southern Kurdish better than I and know which style/format is correct. However, here, It looks like the Central Kurdish rule is not compatible for Southern Kurdish. Thanks and sorry for my edits. ⇒ Aram Talk 20:45, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kılıçlı in Benninghaus

What does "Al Tur" refer to then for Kılıçlı, whereas all the other villages and tribes are referred to as "Al Kur"? Aintabli (talk) 15:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the Benninghaus reference? The tribe is under "Kurds: Alevi" on page 137. There's no "Al Tur" as far as I see. Semsûrî (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See [2], [3]. Aintabli (talk) 15:32, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see that now but the "Tur" is not ethnicity but language (it says so on page 127). Semsûrî (talk) 15:39, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, sorry for the confusion. The repetition of Alevi or "Al" causes it to appear as if it's referring to something other than language. In either case, I would mention language as well. If it's too long, in a separate section for demographics, or maybe a new article could be started for the tribe. Aintabli (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any literature on Kılıçlı (other than where they live) so I won't be the one creating such page. You can just add language and religion to the village pages. Semsûrî (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Sorry for bothering you a second time. This is not relevant to my earlier question, but I don't want to bloat your talkpage with new sections each time. I was checking Kurds in Turkey#Middle Ages, especially the part about the Modanlı tribe, and something caught my attention. (I think you first added that bit.) 1184 is a year when everything was quite blurry. There was barely a well-established Muslim presence in the region with constant wars with the Byzantines. I am not an expert on this, but I don't know of any records that have detailed accounts on the demographics of the region with details on tribes. The Ottomans had that. 1184 appears like a year from the Islamic calendar, which would actually make it 1770, pretty close to the time of forced migrations of Kurds to the region. Alakom puts doubt on that date as well. This appears to be verging on WP:FRINGE. I'm not sure if he's citing this guy, but a regional historian, Halil İbrahim Uçak, appears to be the earliest source to suggest this (in 1986). It is very possible that there was a confusion on the year, and I wouldn't consider him an established scholar. Though, I don't want to be so sure, given once my doubts turned out wrong. I look forward to hearing your opinion on whether we should include it. It's best if there's another independent reference on this. Aintabli (talk) 01:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you're right about the confusion surrounding the dates. You can just remove it then. Semsûrî (talk) 09:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe that there should be a separate article for the Kurds of Central Anatolia. I have started a discussion at Talk:Kurds in Turkey#Separate article for Kurds of (Central) Anatolia for your information. Aintabli (talk) 15:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi Semsûrî, if you have any references about Kurdish villages and their names in Kurdish (especially in Turkey) please share them with me if you have time. my regards Sulaimanl (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't one reference that encompasses all of the names. Usually the reference in use on the article is the one that has the Kurdish name. Are there specific ones that you are looking for? Semsûrî (talk) 07:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No there are no specific ones I was just wondering if there are references about the Kurdish villages in Turkey as there are Arabic sources on the names of Kurdish villages in Syria that includes their meanings, the history of naming etc. By example Ovacık, Samsat in Kurdish Wikipedia is named Tozik but it lacks sources. Sulaimanl (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, Öncü does state that the Kurdish name of the village is Tûzik on page 344 in Ferhenga Devoka Herêma Semsûrê. Semsûrî (talk) 16:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes the etymology I can't think of any references, sorry. Semsûrî (talk) 16:57, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thank you for answering Sulaimanl (talk) 11:45, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update request

Hello.

Can you remove the United Kingdom from File:European Union North Korea Locator.svg, since it is no longer a member of the EU?

Yours sincerely, Multituberculata (talk) 10:16, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Can you correct this map, since you are knowledgeable about SVG files? The original uploader, has not been active since February 2023.

Yours sincerely, Multituberculata (talk) 09:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried but it doesn't seem to be possible to separate the UK from the rest of the EU on the map. Semsûrî (talk) 09:52, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Never mind. Thank you for the reply. Multituberculata (talk) 16:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did figure it out and it should be updated now. Semsûrî (talk) 16:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the update! Multituberculata (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Languages of Turkey

I know there's a problem with the other editor but am not sure what's going on. Doug Weller talk 07:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ethnologue reference for the added graph does not contain those percentages, nor does the site give absolute numbers with the total population of the country (which would have allowed for the use of the pct template.) The edit is therefore OR. On other pages, they've added numbers and given the Iranian census as a reference, but the Iranian state does not enumerate their population by ethnicity or first language. Semsûrî (talk) 09:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And this version?[4] I'm trying to decide if I need to take action. Doug Weller talk 16:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The editor is misconstruing the numbers given by Ethnologue. The table below that bar called Main language families in Turkey according to Ethnologue, 2009 gives us both L1 and L2 speakers of certain language groups, so this is not first language numbers which the editor's bar template makes it seem like. It is simply misleading. Semsûrî (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi again Semsûrî, do you know anything about MENDELKANİ tribe around Mardin? And are they kurds? Sulaimanl (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also RESHAN, MAHMEDI, KESHKOLI, SIROKHLI, MUSIKAN, PENJINAN, RESHKOTANLI, BISHERI, KALENDELAN, TATAWAT, NAKIBAN, DEKSHURI, DERAVERAN. And “GARISAN and MISHAR” if they are tribe. Maybe the names are written incorrectly because they are from an old British document. Sulaimanl (talk) 15:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can recognize some of them but the Mardin section at Kurdish tribes is exhausted. Older documents may be outdated and should generally not be used. Semsûrî (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sulaimanl (talk) 20:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Language codes in templates

Heya, Semsûrî. I saw your your edit at Foreign relations of Kiribati. I'd like to remind you that the language code se is not for Swedish, but for Northern Sámi, an unrelated language; the code for Swedish is sv. Please be more careful when adding language codes in the future, thanks. ArcticSeeress (talk) 12:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish settlements in Turkey

Hi, I don't understand why you reverted my edit. I agree that the name "Ethnic enclaves" isn't great, we could rename it, but we need a common category for ethnic communities in Turkey, former and present. Currently Kurds are the only main ones not in Category:Ethnic enclaves in Turkey. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 08:49, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I simply removed it because Kurds don't live in an enclave in Turkey. I agree that the category should be renamed maybe to "ethnic communities in Turkey" otherwise its just not accurate to have the Kurdish category included. Semsûrî (talk) 08:53, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree but it seems to be the standard term on all Wikipedia: Category:Ethnic enclaves by country. So can we still rename the category? (I'm fine with this but I also like consistency...)

By the way: is "settlements" good for Kurds? Isn't "communities" better? For instance pages like Kurds in Istanbul, Tarlabaşı, and Esenyurt don't refer to "settlements" but to places with significant Kurdish "communities" and should be categorized as such. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 09:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not mistaken, the 'settlement'-category excludes areas where Kurds are a minority such as Istanbul or Ankara. If you want a category that includes all places that have a Kurdish presence, its frankly almost going to be a category for most cities in the country. In regard to changing the Kurdish category, there is a consistency here (Category:Kurdish settlements). For now, I'm okay with readding the Kurdish settlements category to the ethnic enclaves one but it just may give a wrong impression to readers. Semsûrî (talk) 09:10, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I was talking more about specific neighborhoods in Turkish cities rather than whole cities (which all have significant Kurdish populations indeed). Anyway I don't have a definite opinion on the subject, I was working mostly on adding data about non-Muslims populations before 1915 and official language data according to the 1927 to articles of Turkish cities when I noticed the absence of Kurds in the category. I'll continue my work and I may come back to this point later :) Have a good day. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 09:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Central neighbourhoods

Hi, as you know I'm working on the metropolitan districts/municipalities of Turkey now. I'm looking for references for the distinction that you made in for instance Artuklu District and Midyat District between central and rural neighburhoods. The reference you used does not make that distinction (they're all in the "mahalle" list). I asked someone at Turkish wikipedia, and he said that there is no formal difference, but it was determined geographically, which seems a bit arbitrary to me. In the population statistics database we can find out which were the quarters of the pre-2013 municipalities (e.g. Mardin had 23 of them, but not Yalım which was a separate municipality, and not Hamzabey, which seems pretty far from the city centre). Do you know of other sources we could use to distinguish between central and rural? Otherwise, I suppose we'd better merge the lists or use the pre-2013 quarters for central neighbourhoods. Markussep ^Talk 07:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Municipal authorities do in many cases differentiate between the two groups by using the term kırsal for the rural ones. Like in this report from Muğla muncipality.[5] I either found such a reference for Artuklu and Midyat, or simply used the pre-2013 quarters for central neighborhoods - not sure. Semsûrî (talk) 08:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, clear, I haven't found anything similar for Mardin, so I think I'll add a note with reference to TÜIK then for the pre-2013 quarters/neighbourhoods. Markussep ^Talk 11:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent place-name deletions

Recently, a user, @Omnibenevolence (courtesy ping), has been removing secondary language names from Turkish cities, usually citing MOS:LEADCLUTTER or that the history section already has the name. I'm writing this here as you've been the only person to engage with this issue; but I am unsure as to how to proceed.

Firstly, I do not think that these articles have especially "cluttered" ledes, and I don't think place-names clutter ledes in general, unless they're excessive. Beyond that, however, this is not the first time I've seen these types of edits, and while I would not want to read into Omnibenevolence's intentions, I believe, at least for some people, the real problem has to do with the enforcement of this consensus (i.e. WP:NCGN's guidance that all alternative names can be listed and explained in a "Names" or "Etymology" section immediately following the lead); that alternative names either go to the lede or a section beneath.

I believe that this consensus gives too much leeway to the community, especially for articles with high amounts of "language wars", so to speak. The general sentiment across the community seems to be that putting names to the article's lede 'legitimizes' the name more than say, listing it in the next section, which is why many editors argue about names in ledes (but not in sections). Having a 'foreign' name right at the very start emphasizes the city's past/present multicultural character, while having it tucked away in a section seems to 'cleanse' the city's past/present demographics somewhat. I believe that these rules should be reorganized to give less leeway to the community, whichever way that would be. (See this discussion as well.) But again, not sure what to do about that, or what anyone else would think. Uness232 (talk) 15:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Uness232 Hello, thanks a lot for your opinion on this matter. My intention is to bring the articles in line with the MOS of Wikipedia, which you seem to acknowledge but want said MOS to change. I do not know how such changes are brought, feel free to advocate your view to the necessary place.

As for the belief that removing historical and foreign place names in the lead erases its history, I vehemently disagree with this notion. This is because such information is already mentioned in the other paragraphs of the lead and the sections of the article right after (generally Toponymy, Name, History, etc). Everything has its appropriate place, and per Wikipedia MOS and place name conventions which you've also outlined, foreign and historical names are discouraged from being mentioned both in the lead and history section of a place.

Again, if you would like to effect change to these Wikipedia conventions and the manual of style, feel free to do so in the relevant places. Omnibenevolence (talk) 15:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, though I wouldn't want to start an argument on someone's talk page about this. I was mostly trying to get a second (and more experienced) opinion on this before taking any action, but it did not feel right to talk about an editor's behavior specifically and not notify them. Thank you for your response, and I hope you did not take this as an assumption of your intentions. My comments on intentions here come from a place of experiences with other editors in general, not you specifically. Uness232 (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that having the relevant local/historical (I don't like the term foreign here) removed from the intro and tucked away in a section can be problematic and misused by bad-faith editors. When it comes to LEADCLUTTER, I think its a question of interpretation — I, for example, think removing the transliterations here[6] would have been better than removing the four historically local names (that are not mentioned elsewhere). Edits like these are however problematic[7] and arguably disruption.

On WP:NCGN, a reorganisation that makes the guidelines more rigid is probably the way forward. Semsûrî (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign definitely was not the right word; I do not know why I used it. Historical/local is much better of course.

Anyway, I'll start a talk page discussion on WP:NCGN at some point, though I'm not sure it'll go anywhere (if you would want to do that instead, you are more than welcome to; because of how busy I've been with climate-related disputes I will likely be able to start a discussion a little later). Thank you for your response. Uness232 (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this too, and just raised the issue on User talk:Omnibenevolence#Removal of non-Turkish names. As far as the MOS is concerned, the relevent guideline is MOS:LEADLANG, which encourages the inclusion of relevent names in other languages. MOS:LEADCLUTTER does not address this specifically and I believe it's being misapplied here. I think it's noteworthy that Omnibenevolence is only removing non-Turkish names from places in Turkey, and simultaneously adding Turkish names to other articles (so apparently they're only worried about some types of 'clutter'). – Joe (talk) 15:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the article of Mahabad in English wikipedia

Hello Mr Semsuri. i hope you are doing well. one quarter ago i tried to edit the article of mahabad, but the article is locked and it is not possible to be edited. i have prepared a well sourced and good information about mahabad and the text is ready to be inserted to the wikipedia article of mahabad, i refer to you to solve this and i ask you to write the article of mahabad becasue you have extended access and you are one of the only two persons i know who have extended access and experience in editing articles in english wikipedia. again i ask you to please add the information i send you in the next message after this, and you can control it if there are any error or any lack of source. i send you the text and the only thing you have to do is to insert the text and information in the article. thank you in advance. --Zana piranshahry1 (talk) 09:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

You removed all the warnings I previously added to your message page, interestingly. You follow all the pages about Zazas and the Zaza langauge and subjectively undo the slightest change. You must provide a valid reason before reverting sourced changes. And you must provide a valid reason for admin intervention too. What is your reason? Vuzorg (talk) 16:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you'd better read these: WAR, 3RR and VD. Vuzorg (talk) 16:56, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not about me but about your behavior - you have been trying to change well-sourced information for years now, without any explanation. Even something as basic as the other names of the language, you've been trying to remove. Semsûrî (talk) 17:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to change information (for years) and I don't remove other names of the language. I did not do such a thing, other names of the language were in the article. If you have such a claim, you must show a proof. Can you adduce any proof? You indiscriminately remove all the content (glottolog's resource, comparative language research resources, literature, literary history, iranologists' resources, linguistic geography resources etc) in a lump. All my contributions are from reliable and easily accessible sources. However, you make different excuses every time (sources, citing, content etc). You follow all the pages about Zazas and the Zaza langauge and subjectively undo the slightest change, indiscriminately. After all, you report it as if someone else did it. I must remind you again: WAR, 3RR and VD. If you want to contribute, you can contribute to the article, however, you should not remove the content entirely at once. You remove even the most basic and very well-known sources. You also remove all the warnings about you on your talk page and on the other hand, you send warning messages to other users' talk pages. Do you find this fair? Vuzorg (talk) 18:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are issues with your edits. Lets start with verification, over and over do I remove your edits because they lack proper verification - just take a look at the first reference you added (Paul). Elsewhere you add pages for the entire reference instead of the specific pages used.

The article is contentious and edits will be examined throughly so even if your edits are constructive, lack of proper verification will alert editors. Academic references are divided on the language, so when you only add one-sided information, BALANCE becomes relevant. An example is the Glottolog section (which in itself is fine), but did you know that Zaza is considered Kurdic elsewhere in linguistic spheres?[8] Would you approve of an article that ascertains the language as Kurdish as this editor attempted to the other day?[9]

I also noted that you attribute certain information to its author (that is Arakelova), while elsewhere remove attribution (Ludwig Paul), which seems inconsistent. Semsûrî (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before anything, OOP and Whataboutism.

I shall say you this, when a part of the source is not cited directly, verbatim and you refer to an entire work or article, you don't specify the page numbers. By doing this, you show that you refer to a work. This shows that you are referring to (consequences of) that work as a whole. If you directly quote or strongly quote part of a work, it would be appropriate to give the page number. However, this is, still, not a valid reason to completely remove all content and this is, still, not a valid reason for you to follow all these articles and continuously remove content and contributions from these articles.

Again, I have no desire to get into a edit war or debate. As I mentioned before, you make different excuses every time. This is the free encyclopedia and anyone can edit it, as long as the contributions do not violate V, NPOV, NOR, IS and RS etc and you are a user like other users on Wikipedia. I remind you of these again. Vuzorg (talk) 20:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe you have a strong case, you should consider starting a discussion at Wikipedia:ANI. Semsûrî (talk) 20:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the one following all these articles and continuously removing content and contributions from these articles, even the smallest contribution, IDONTLIKETHEM, a little reminder. Vuzorg (talk) 16:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Dimli Problem

Hi Semsûrî gyan, may I start by thanking you for your constant efforts to preserve a neutral POV in Kurdish related pages on wikipedia, it is hard due to a lot of ‘anti-kurdish’ sentiment.

Regarding the topic above here, It seems to me that every half a year, there is a wave of POV edits on anything to do with Zazakis on wikipedia, as per Vuzorg’s ANI last year, a prominent ‘Zaza Nationalist’ chimed in suspiciously on time on the ANI.

I believe you should create another one in regards to the attempted use of Wiki rules to push a certain POV (as you can easily identity on the Zaza page) Volkish Kurden (talk) 18:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changes in Foreign Relations of Haiti?

Hello, I understand your reasoning for removing my addition of Kosovo and Sahrawi Republic? But why did you also remove the section about multilateral organizations that Haiti is a member of or an observer? All others have a similar section. I.e. Jamaica. Port-au-princien (talk) 15:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you can readd that section. Semsûrî (talk) 15:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I have another question while we're talking. Why are the embassies of Japan and The Bahamas listed as former embassies here List of diplomatic missions in Haiti when they're only temporarily closed due the ongoing crisis in the country? Plus, shouldn't China PRC be shaded on the map since they have a representation office there? Port-au-princien (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should ask that question at Talk:List of diplomatic missions in Haiti where active editors can answer that since I haven't been involved in that matter. Semsûrî (talk) 15:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did but no one seems to be active or answering. But one last thing is I think this decision on at least Sahrawi Republic should be reverted because here it lists that they had an embassy in Haiti. Therefore, it wasn't just a simple recognition but formal diplomatic relations. Foreign relations of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic Port-au-princien (talk) 16:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The information about the embassy seem unsourced nor do I have access to the scribd document, but this one does not mention diplomatic relations[10]. Regarding the talkpage, it may take some time before you get a response - you can try to contact the editor who reverted you. Semsûrî (talk) 16:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23 April 2024

Hello mr, this isn't a request but I have a question. Does the SADR need a diplomatic relations list like the other countries have? Because I did make one on my sandbox, but a user got mad at me for adding it to the page. Akiro readded the list again but M.Bitton undid his revision again because "back to the stable version: see talk page rationale". Underdwarf58 (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at the page when I have time. Semsûrî (talk) 18:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorani Emirate

Why are you deleting the Soran Emirate inbox? Rabar ajax1 (talk) 09:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because you added unsourced information like currency, population and an unsourced flag) Semsûrî (talk) 09:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayn wardo

I was just reading this page of my ancestors village Ayn Wardo, and was shocked by the text mentioning it's inhabitants by the strange name "assyrians". It's already known by historians that the village's inhabitants name is Arameans or Syrians (Syriacs). Because Syria and Aram are synonyms. But in the other hand "assyrians" is a total different name, they are inhabitants of the extinct city of "assur" or "ashur" and they are an akkadian people.

There is no Assyrian ethnicity, they are the citizens of the extinct city of assur, their ethnicity is akkadian. Similar to Rome, the Romans originally are the citizens of Rome, but their ethnicity is Latin .

So just to correct that, my friend, the indigenous inhabitants of Turabdin (where Ayn Wardo is located) are Arameans/Syrians.

Can I correspond further with you if possible, in order to cooperate with each other for the benefit of Wikipedia's reliability among the people of the world. I'm interested in history and went to course in Syrology, within Aramistik.

Hope for your answer and that we can keep in touch!

Best regards

/Bar Oromoyo Bar Oromoyo (talk) 21:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Population updates

Hi, I see you've been updating populations for places in Turkey to the December 2023 data, very nice! Make sure you update the references as well, the "retrieved" dates were not correct. Markussep ^Talk 19:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do! Semsûrî (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Markussep ^Talk 19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cicektepe, Bingöl.

Im from the region and also know some of their villagers; I am a Kurd! Cicektepe is not Kurdish, they have never spoken Kurmanci or Zaza and don't look anything like us Kurds. Historically they originate from Erzurum and are Turkmens, please check the following link too: https://www.nisanyanyeradlari.com/?y=&t=Ki%C4%9F%C4%B1&cry=TR&u=1&ua=0/. 2A02:6B68:D169:0:709A:3F2D:52F3:4F9D (talk) 18:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nisanyan is not a reliable source. You need to find preferably an academic source that mention this. The source that is used at the moment lists it as a Kurdish village. Semsûrî (talk) 18:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on my edits

Hello, I would like to take this time by clarifying why I added Palestine to the lists in Foreign relations of Ireland and Foreign relations of the State of Palestine. My understanding was different from yours in that matter until now because I thought that they have agreed to establish diplomatic relations immediately after recognition since that part is written in present tense. Even more confusing is what this website says despite it not being government official. I'm really sorry for what I've done and I promise to be extra careful next time. Underdwarf58 (talk) 13:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its fine. Its not helpful when wordings like agreed to or decided to are used when reporting about this topic. Semsûrî (talk) 13:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But can you at least add Norway and Spain to the svg file? Norway's case is similar to Syria's, and the reference for Spain does say that Palestine has inaugurated an embassy in Madrid after recognition. If I'm wrong then sorry, but thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 14:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With Spain I will wait to see what the new Palestine document will contain[11] Semsûrî (talk) 15:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello mr, I recently found a website that says "Spain already had established diplomatic relations with Palestine": https://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/lang/en/gobierno/councilministers/Paginas/2024/20240528-council-press-conference.aspx#:~:text=Spain%20already%20had%20established%20diplomatic,the%20Spanish%20Consulate%20in%20Jerusalem.

Can you please check if it counts? Because I'm not sure. Thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello mr, I'd like to reply again because I'm afraid that you missed my previous message here. Underdwarf58 (talk) 11:49, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late response. I would personally still wait, but you have a reliable reference there (but it doesn't give a certain date). Semsûrî (talk) 11:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine Underdwarf58 (talk) 12:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Your recent editing history at Turkmeneli 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; read about 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. Doug Weller talk 19:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can't help with the issue

I'm about to start my 4th course of chemo, a type I had 2 years ago and is very aggressive and will mess me up badly for the 3 months and take at least a month to recover from. I'm doing to much Wikipedia work like this and avoiding writing User:Doug Weller/Pinxton Castle which I want to get done by July 3rd. Real life (eg a lot of treadmill work) takes up a lot of time too. RSN is the best idea. Doug Weller talk 08:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear about your situation. Don't worry about this and stay strong and get well! Semsûrî (talk) 08:25, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ANI for Kirkukturk3 can be closed now. See their talk page. Doug Weller talk 10:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My previous point

Hello. The reason why I added a few suspended states to your sandbox is because other lists have those. Looking back, a lot of them are unknown and unreferenced so I should've not added them in the first place. I'm sorry for messing up, but can you please readd the svg file? Underdwarf58 (talk) 22:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Venezuelan elections

Hello, I've recently read a Times Now Article that states that Venezuela issued a statement suspending relations with more countries and not just EL Salvador and Panama. There are other articles like this one that say this too. Is it okay to label them as suspended in their lists? Because I'm honestly a little skeptical. Underdwarf58 (talk) 04:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The main source for this confusion is [12] which does not mention anything about suspending diplomatic relations. Nor does the Spanish article you linked. Semsûrî (talk) 07:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

on the page foreign relations of venezuela, its stated Venezuela and the US severed diplomatic ties, but the map on the page does not reflect that, nor does it mention venezuela severing ties with ecuador. did venezuela re establish ties with those counrtries or is it just a discrepancy? Bird244 (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The info was wrong and now removed. Semsûrî (talk) 19:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

update for foreign relations of Niger

a news article on 4 August 2023 from the Anadolu Agency stated Niger severed diplomatic ties with france, nigeria, togo and the us. could u update the map on nigers foreign relations page? Bird244 (talk) 21:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AA usually gets it wrong - another reference would be great Semsûrî (talk) 10:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

il look for one Bird244 (talk) 09:02, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the links. https://www.kurdipedia.org/Default.aspx?q=20240223161436554461&lng=1 with also a photo of him. therefore https://kurdipedia.org/default.aspx?q=20220730223423425600&lng=22 and https://www.google.nl/books/edition/Kurdish_Nationalism_on_Stage/Lf2ZDwAAQBAJ?hl=nl&gbpv=1&dq=jwamer+hamawand&pg=PA209&printsec=frontcover

Here is the page i am referring to: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Jwamer_Aga

Kind regards. Sunflowerlilies (talk) 11:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You added "The Honourable 1st Marquess Curzon of Kedleston, The Lord Curzon of Kedleston, The Earl Curzon of Kedleston" which is not needed. Semsûrî (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Sunflowerlilies (talk) 16:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hello someone change battle of suleymaniah (1991):it was kurdish rebels victory not iraqi because peshmerga new launch in 20 july pls review this page

hello someone change battle of suleymaniah (1991):it was kurdish rebels victory not iraqi because peshmerga new launch in 20 july pls review this page 185.240.17.140 (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "Did I actually read the text?"

The title literally says "Albania establishes diplomatic relations with the Commonwealth of The Bahamas". Just Why? What was the reason that led you to reverting my pointless efforts? Just because of the Council of Ministers approval doesn't mean immediately establishing relations? Is that why? Is my effort always incorrect? Every time you do this I always get angry. Do I look like a bad person to you? Am I an idiot? Am I stubborn? Am I stupid? Am I an a-hole? Am I a wrongdoer? Am I over exaggerating? Underdwarf58 (talk) 07:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Competence is required and you tend to make erroneous or inappropriate edits. That's all. When you use a reference that clearly states that the government is now authorized to establish diplomatic relations with a counterpart it obviously does not mean that diplomatic relations have now been established. You've made similar errors before which would have avoided if were more careful like here[13]. Semsûrî (talk) 15:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay fine I'm sorry. By the way you forgot to add Spain in File:Diplomatic relations of State of Palestine.svg and vice versa. Underdwarf58 (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again mr, I need a little help in Foreign relations of Pakistan. Some user keeps on restoring sources on the list that you consider as redundant. I have reverted his edits, but he keeps on restoring them, saying "Please cite a policy for your action or gain consensus". Is it fine if those redundant sources are kept? Because I'm worried about the increase of bytes. Underdwarf58 (talk) 11:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Arabo-Persian script"

dude, you said it's an "Arabo-Persian script" alphabet. :) that's the Kurdish alphabet. but it's true; kurds in turkey write mostly latin script. in fact, i did it because i saw a flaw in the template (the flaw of not italicising).

how do you think we can write kurdish latin words in italics? i'd be happy for your advice. good work! Acratopotes (talk) 17:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You add "|italic=yes" to the template. Semsûrî (talk) 18:03, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit in Foreign relations of Armenia was reverted

Hello mister, so a user by the name of Archives908 reverted your recent edit in the page above because at first you claimed that the information is unsourced when the MFA webpage does mention that Armenia doesn't maintain relations with those countries. You might need to talk to him and express your opinion on the matter. Underdwarf58 (talk) 22:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting my edit‘s without explain

Why do you keep revert and blocked me? 2001:4BC9:914:3F34:14ED:43D3:6427:7E84 (talk) 16:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have painstakingly expanded all of these articles and picked sources, why, why? 2001:4BC9:914:3F34:14ED:43D3:6427:7E84 (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These people are well-known personalities and have a lack of information in their articles, much relevant and everything why. 2001:4BC9:914:3F34:14ED:43D3:6427:7E84 (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iran flag problem in Foreign relations of Pakistan

So a user by the name of Pro translator replaced Iran's flag with the Shah one because he thinks that it should be that way as Iran recognized Pakistan under Shah's rule. I undid his edit once because Pakistan still maintains relations with the IR but he came back to revert my edit again saying that my point is irrelevant. I need your thoughts on this mr. Should his edit be undone again or should it be kept that way? Underdwarf58 (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iraqi Kurdistan

Instead of reverting the article back to the previous version completely, remove those parts you claim are “unsourced commentary”. Not all what you have reverted is “unsourced commentary” unless you have a reason to revert all of it, but in that case provide a reason for it. Montblamc1 (talk) 11:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Words to watch before you continue to edit on Wikipedia. An example of a problematic statement you've added is: "Particularly within Kurdish nationalist circles, the area is often referred to as Southern Kurdistan" which is untrue as it has been used for a over a century in Western academia like here[14]. Semsûrî (talk) 11:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is much more productive of you, and that reason is much more understandable than “unsourced commentary” and reverting the whole page. Would a better alternative be “within the context of Kurdish nationalism”? Also on neutrality, my edits are exactly for this purpose, to add neutrality and explain in what contexts are these terms used. They are not neutral geographic terms and are used only within a specific nationalistic context. Montblamc1 (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a reliable reference that states that "Southern Kurdistan" is particularly used in nationalist Kurdish media (whatever that means) then add that reference. Otherwise you should remove it. A quick Google search proves that the term is commonly used among academics (as well). Semsûrî (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my comment again carefully. I said would a better alternative be “within the (context) of Kurdish nationalism”… Montblamc1 (talk) 11:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what is your opinion on the officiality of these terms, have you any argument for the removal of the word “unofficial term”. Do you think these terms are official in the sense that they should be interpreted as having the same legitimacy as the term “northern Iraq” for instance? Montblamc1 (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My main point is that "Iraqi Kurdistan" and to a lesser degree "Southern Kurdistan" are terms that have been and are used universally to describe the region in Iraq where Kurds live. They do not originate from a Kurdish nationalist context (although I agree that SK is commonly used among this group) but merely a description of where Kurds live geographically. The question of officiality is irrelevant to be frank. Semsûrî (talk) 12:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The current version of the page cannot stand as it is misleading. Semsûrî (talk) 12:03, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Montblamc1

Could you please stop editing the article, and instead come here to discuss with Semsûrî so we can reach a resolution? Sikorki (talk) 13:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explain how any of my edits were misleading? Montblamc1 (talk) 13:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please go ahead and explain how any of the following is incorrect:

1. “Unofficial”, explain how the terms are official, explain how my claim of them not being used by any authority such as the UNGEGN is incorrect.

2. “Context of nationalism”, explain how my point on my importance of specifying the context of use of the terms is incorrect. Montblamc1 (talk) 13:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you claimed the “official” part is “frankly irrelevant” explain that as well, or we just arbitrarily making things up as we go…? Montblamc1 (talk) 13:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would gladly discuss with anyone and reach a resolution on the issue at hand but one of you seems to be adamant on not only removing the parts we are talking about, but reverting everything to the previous state removing parts that are not in dispute, that I’ve added. Montblamc1 (talk) 13:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will go to ANI as you don't seem to know the basics of Wikipedia. Semsûrî (talk) 13:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By all means. But notice how you immediately resorted to that. It seems like you really have no argument to back your claim and are doing everything you can to just keep your own POV. Montblamc1 (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]