Jump to content

Talk:Uchar-hadji: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Zandxo (talk | contribs)
Line 68: Line 68:
:It's better than before, but still incomplete, biased and ignoring my sources. I will fix it to something we both might approve once my block is over. --[[User:Zandxo|Zandxo]] ([[User talk:Zandxo|talk]]) 16:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
:It's better than before, but still incomplete, biased and ignoring my sources. I will fix it to something we both might approve once my block is over. --[[User:Zandxo|Zandxo]] ([[User talk:Zandxo|talk]]) 16:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
::[[User:Arsenekoumyk|Arsenekoumyk]] I didn't give consensus for you to delete your try to neutralize the article! Please seek consensus in talk! --[[User:Zandxo|Zandxo]] ([[User talk:Zandxo|talk]]) 18:13, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
::[[User:Arsenekoumyk|Arsenekoumyk]] I didn't give consensus for you to delete your try to neutralize the article! Please seek consensus in talk! --[[User:Zandxo|Zandxo]] ([[User talk:Zandxo|talk]]) 18:13, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
:::[[User:Zandxo|Zandxo]] pre-war consensus version is returned. if you didn't like the last trial version and think it's biased, it makes obvious you have some agenda of chechenizing Wikipedia. from now on you have to seek for dispute resolution in order to reach consensus with me always, and I do not wish to discuss anything with you directly without a witnessing third party.--[[User:Arsenekoumyk|Arsenekoumyk]] ([[User talk:Arsenekoumyk|talk]]) 05:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:58, 17 February 2020

WikiProject iconBiography Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Vandalism from Lamberd

Lamberd please, explain your vandal edits against sources--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 06:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lamberd still waiting, it's OK to use google translated messages on talk page if you struggle, if you want to bring value to the article--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disruption from Zandxo

Hi, Zandxo. Please explain your last disrupting edits against sources. You're starting an edit war which is forbidden on wikipedia. According to the rules of wikipedia if someone notices that your edits are questionable you have to give arguments on talk page. I also left warning and links to the rules on your talk page --Arsenekoumyk (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sala-Uzden are of Chechen origin and therefore Uchar Hadji is a Chechen. I have provided a source and provide more sources. You are the one kumyk-izing Chechens and Chechnya, claiming things left and right as Kumyk. -- Zandxo (talk) 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zandxo Although Chechen version is given in the article, I checked the additional source you provided. Firstly, what does "Lyrical poetry philological MYSTERIOUS IS SOUL'S LABOR…" source have to do with Uchar-hadji? Secondly, there is not a word about him in the source (even if it had, philological research on someone's poetry is a terrible source.
Thirdly the quote you provided here has nothing to do with Uchar-hadji. Forthly, You inserted a FALSIFICATION but not a quote here: "He belonged to the Sala-Uzden nobility of Vashindaroy, which are of Chechen origin and are related to the Chechen tribe Aukhovtsy." The source does not say that "he was", in fact there is nothing about him.
Do you think editors here are so stupid not to notice clear distortions?--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The source you are mentioning first was not added by me but was already given. The source I have given, which you claim has nothing to do with Uchar-Hadji, has indeed to do with Uchar-Hadji. Uchar-Hadji belonged to the Sala-Uzden, and my source proves that Sala-Uzden are Chechens who lived at the Salasu river, and are related to the Aukhovtsiy, Chechens that live in Aukh (North Dagestan). You are trying to butcher my source and falsly translate it in hope that other editors believe you.--Zandxo (talk) 18:02, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can read in Russian well and the source doesn't say anything about Uchar-hadji. give quotes here and we'll discuss why you claim there is anything about him. also, you for some reason seem to lie about adding Poetry as a source, you added it — proof. also you continue warring before reaching a consensus which is forbidden. I recommend you to stop.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 18:37, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zandxo also, in case you read it in a wried way not on purpose, the other quote you've given is "Sala, or Salatawians, ancestors of Kumyk sala-uzdens... are considered to be related (like relatives) to Aukh people." It doesn't say Sala-uzdens are Aukh, it doesn't say Sala-uzdens are Vishderoy or whatever. It says that Salatawians are (i.e. were at that time) considered to be related to Aukh people. completely different sense. stop misinterpreting, please--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 18:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
and yet there is nothing about Uchar-kadji--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't mention Uchar Hajji but it mentions the Sala-Uzden which you said "were only Kumyk", this is very false. The source I posted was from the 1800s written by a Kumyk named Shikhaliev and the book is literally called "a story about Kumyks from a Kumyk". There he explains the origin of several important peoples making up the Endirey city. He clearly explains that people like the Gueni and Sala Uzden are of Chechen origin, Sala-Uzden are mentioned as coming from the Vashindaroy which is an old Chechen teip in southcentral Chechnya. You can read book again and check 2. Сала, или салатавцы, предки нынешних кумыкских салаузденей, вышедшие из находящейся за Гумбетовским хребтом деревни Рикони; жили при речке Саласу, впадающей в Акташ; они считаются в родстве с ауховцами и принадлежат к Вашандроевской их фамилии; подобно тюменам и гуенам, сала составляют ныне в Андрееве особый квартал. --Zandxo (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see, and gave word for word translation, you clearly see there something only you can see. try rereading it a few times without biases and you might see that the quote you gave means something other than your imagination tells you. what you do is original research here, inventing meanings not present in the source Arsenekoumyk (talk) 19:21, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the quote is about relation of salatawians to aukh people. nothing about relation of aukh to sala-uzden, or that salatawians are chechen. Arsenekoumyk (talk) 19:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are clearly lying and butchering the quote by now. I am a Chechen, I understand what was written in the quote. The quote says that the Sala-Uzden, which you claimed are KUMYKS, are CHECHENS, from the teyp VASHTAROY (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B0%D1%88%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B9) and CLOSELY RELATED to the CHECHENS AKHOVTSIY (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BA%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D1%8B). UCHAR-HADJI was a SALA-UZDEN (according to other sources he was a Chechen from the teyp Gendargoy). --Zandxo (talk) 19:32, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

oh, you're from the blindly fanatical, OK then, if you see everything through Chechen prism, we have nothing to discuss here. in that case we'll call for a mediator. and you have to wait and stop edit warring. clearly I'm not alone disagreeing with your bold falsifications Arsenekoumyk (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are using google translator to change Chechens to Kumyks on the english wikipedia and I am somehow the blind and fanatical, Mr arseneKOUMYK? I am fully aware that you are asking others to change my edits. Both IPs are from Russia, to be exact from Dagestan. It's a group of you and other Kumyks claiming Chechens and Chechen lands as Kumyk with no proper sources. Wikipedia should do something against you and the likes, this isn't your nationalistic forum where you can simply claim people and territories as your own, people will read these articles and thanks to you, believe in misinformation and nationalistic lies. --Zandxo (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you to stop this nonsense and read wikipedia rules--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 16:36, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody needs to keep Arsenkoumyk from this page.

This person is clearly biased and removes the sources that don't suit him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archivarius Prudentiam (talkcontribs) 19:34, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

nice try, using a freshly created accounted for a mass distortion :) Wikipedia admins are not that stupid, you can create hundreds of accounts, edits speak for themselves Arsenekoumyk (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actual Wikipedia admins can see that I am a different person from Zandxo, due to my ip address and many other things like browser settings. Don't judge others by what you do yourself. You should stick to Russian Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archivarius Prudentiam (talkcontribs) 20:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
not saying you are the same, saying you're on the same editing vibe based on you edit history --5.76.35.176 (talk) 10:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
full support to Arsenekoumyk here, the vandals are madness--5.76.35.176 (talk) 10:46, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nice edit history you got there Arsen. Totally not obvious. Archivarius Prudentiam (talkcontribs) 19:34, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nice VPN Ghumki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zandxo (talkcontribs) 14:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kumyk vandalism on this page

I would like to point out that Arsenekoumyk is vandalising this page with the help of several people from Dagestan. I have provided proof for not only that Gerzel-Aul at that time was fully Chechen but also for the Sala-Uzden being Chechens. It's claimed that "while sala-uzden nobility class was inherent only in Kumyk social structure" while in fact, the Sala-Uzden are of Vashindaroy (a Chechen teyp) origin and closely related to the Aukhovtsiy Chechens, which inhabit the areas eastern of the Chechen-Dagestani border. The Gerzel-Aul fortress was a Russian fortress to stop Chechen raids to Kizlyar, there were Kumyks stationed there but NOT 300 elderman. It was a military fortress to fight off Chechen fighters, what would 300 elderman do at such a fortress? QEDK since you have blocked me from editing on this page for 72 hours, I would like to ask you to please read the conversation I had above with Arsenekoumyk and also the edit history of non-registered people, which are mostly from Dagestan. --Zandxo (talk) 14:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

nice fantasies, but you should just calm down and prove your point instead of giving bulks of nonsense--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 16:35, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can't believe you are still allowed to edit anything here. You constantly put yourself in the victim role, lie and change the translation for your own favor. I have given you my source, I can prove more source. All you did is simply stopped replying to me and reported me despite me being in the right. I demand a mod to read this conversation. --Zandxo (talk) 18:43, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps you should reflect on your edits and start discussing without emotional devotion to your cause--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 18:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have been wasting 2 days on you by now. You are constantly deviating from our conversation and not even bothering discussing this. I have provided sources, translated and even pointed out where and why my sources debunk your claims, yet all you did is pretend to be the victim and report me. Read our conversation above, read through it and tell me that I wasn't discussing properly. --Zandxo (talk) 18:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
no, you did not. I gave word for word translations. read carefully. you can also go to dispute resolution page. otherwise we have nothing to talk about. you proved inadequacy in your edits.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:01, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You completly ignored half of the text. Here, I will quote it again and translate it for you Arsène de Koumyk, "Sala (...) ancestors of the (Kumyk class) Sala-Uzden (...) lived at the Salasu river, which flows into Aktash (...) are considered to be related to Aukhovites (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BA%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D1%8B) and are of Vashandiroy family (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B0%D1%88%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B9)". Try to claim this is a wrong translation or whatever. --Zandxo (talk) 20:14, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
at last, it is not full but correct. although you forgot the part that Sala-Uzdens are Kumyk--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:16, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
it's Arsenekoumyk for you, not "de"--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care whether Salatawians-Sala are related to Aukhs or Vashndiroy, Sala-uzdens are not according to that quote. also contemporary sources state Uchar was Koumyk. I'm sorry for disappointing you.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:19, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
you should better call admins for dispute. it's not a pleasure discussing with you anything without a neutral judgement--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:21, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You do know what (...) means, right? It doesn't say Sala-Uzdens are Kumyk, it says it's a Kumyk class, which I mentioned. Arsène de Koumyk, I take this as seeking consensus with you, I will correct this wikipedia page in 3 days, we surely both don't want people to read and believe these misinformations that are currently portrayed on the article, right? And "Sala-Uzdens" are indeed in that quote, right here "салаузденей". Sala-Uzden are Vashindaroy that lived at the river Salasu, they are Chechens. --Zandxo (talk) 20:19, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zandxo I'm not Arsene de Koumyk for you, I'm Arsenekoumyk. there is not a word about Sala-Uzdens being some kind of Chechens, so stop pretending you're seeking consensus.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Arsène de Koumyk, I literally pointed out for you that Sala-Uzden are mentioned there. The quote clarifies that Sala-Uzden is a Kumyk class but the people are Chechens, belonging to the Teyp Vashindaroy and lived at the Salasu river. You're just closing your eyes and playing naive now. Read what the historian Amin Tesaev said about the origins of the Sala-Uzden, he uses Dubrovin and Shikhaliev as a source too https://kavkaznasledie.ru/?p=3719 --Zandxo (talk) 20:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
it's called WP:OR what you're doing--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 20:46, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See, again. You didn't take the time to read the source. Please take your time and read through it. If not, I won't be able to seek consensus with you and insist on the fact that I am in the right. --Zandxo (talk) 20:55, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
you are simply not right, call dispute and mediation if you want to prove your delusion, and we will see where it leads you.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 10:41, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would have done that long ago if I knew how it works. Go ahead and do it for us. --Zandxo (talk) 16:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

Zandxo neutralized the article. are you fine with it? will you stop edit warring and insults, and start constructive collaboration?--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 10:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's better than before, but still incomplete, biased and ignoring my sources. I will fix it to something we both might approve once my block is over. --Zandxo (talk) 16:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenekoumyk I didn't give consensus for you to delete your try to neutralize the article! Please seek consensus in talk! --Zandxo (talk) 18:13, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zandxo pre-war consensus version is returned. if you didn't like the last trial version and think it's biased, it makes obvious you have some agenda of chechenizing Wikipedia. from now on you have to seek for dispute resolution in order to reach consensus with me always, and I do not wish to discuss anything with you directly without a witnessing third party.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 05:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]