User talk:Grandmaster/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Copyright of the Shostakovich portrait Image:Shostakovichportrait.jpg.

Why do you think, the portrait is PD? According to the Tair Salakhov article the portrait is painted in 1976, three years after the 1973 needed for sovietpd. Maybe the date is wrong (Shostakovich died in 1975)? Otherwise we have to delete the Shostakovich portrait and find something exponated before 1973. abakharev 23:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Dear Mr. Bakharev,

As far as I know this image is a public domain and you can see it all over the internet (at least Russian and CIS websites) without any reference to a copyright holder. As for the date of the portrait, it was completed after Shostakovich died, in 1976, as the great composer was fatally ill when he posed for the portrait. So the date is correct. If you speak Russian, you can also check this article for more details on this subject:

http://www.kultura-portal.ru/tree/cultpaper/article.jsp?number=492&crubric_id=100445&rubric_id=200&pub_id=479779

If you think that this image cannot be used due to copyright issues, then we can replace it with some other Salahov’s work, e.g. portrait of Kara Karayev (completed before 1973). But I think Shostakovich’s portrait is one of the best Salahov’s portraits and well illustrates his style of painting, so I would prefer to keep it. Thank you. Grandmaster 06:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

• I like the portrait as well (actually do not rember any other Salakhov's painting). Maybe we should email Salakhov himself and ask for his permissions? abakharev 08:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

That would be nice, but I don’t know Salakhov’s email, and I’m not sure if he actually uses email. If you think this image would cause a problem, we can use portrait of Kara Karayev (created in 1960), which is also exhibited in Tretyakov Gallery. Grandmaster 09:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Image:Shostakovichportrait.jpg has been listed as a possible copyright violation

An image that you uploaded, Image:Shostakovichportrait.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

---

I think it is better to delete this image and replace it with the one made before 1973. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to contact the author to obtain his permission. I will upload something else later. Grandmaster 12:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Redirects for Salakhov

Once an article is created in Wikipedia, you have to have administrative rights to delete it. Neither me nor you have such rights, thus, we have to go through voting on AfD page - that is reasonably cumbersome and lengthy. Thus, I would not recommend to delete an entry (unless it is somehow offensive, harmful, etc.), just make it a redirect to an article with the right name. See Help:Redirect. Usually redirect does not harm - they a take negligeble amount memory, but simplify search. Even the redirects with an orphographic errors might be helpfull, if you made such an error been our expert on Salakhov, then quite possible that an American schoolboy or whoever would look up the wikipedia would make the same mistake - so the more redirects the merrier.

Thus, the strategy would be decide the right name for the main article. Move the article there by pressing the move button on the top and entering the right name. It would create a redirect on the place of the right name. Check that all the other redirects points to the main article, so that there will be no double redirects, if necessary, edit the redirects. That's all.

Last few words, for the Russian-related articles we decided to avoid using patronimics in the titles of the main articles - they look foreign for the English-speakers, to long to type, introduce additional errors (what is right: Ivanovich, Ivanovitch or Iwanowitch?), etc. So we decided to use them only to distinguish among equally notable people - Aleksey Konstantinovich Tolstoy vs. Aleksey Nikolaevich Tolstoy, etc. It is in theory, but in reality many people are still using patronimics in the titles. I am not sure if it is relevant to the Azerbajani form of patronimics with ogly/kyzy. abakharev 13:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Help:Redirect

• Thanks for the useful info. Patronymics are used in Azeri mostly in official documents, and not used at all in colloquial speech, so I agree with your policy on using patronymics. They only make search more complicated. I suggest applying the same policy to Azeri names, patronymics can be detailed in the text of the article, but not in its name. The name of the article about a person should consist only of the person’s name and surname. Grandmaster 14:22, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Nagorno-Karabakh

Hi, do you have a reference for your change of number, I've reverted it for now as this is referenced from the LOC. - FrancisTyers 17:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I do. The official death toll for the events in Sumgait is 32, of them 26 Armenians, and 6 Azeris. This information can be found on Gorbachev Fund website: [1] Sorry, it’s in Russian. This figure is also given in the book “Black Garden” by Thomas de Waal (see chapter 2). That book is actually a good source of information about the history of conflict. It’s written in English, but only Russian version is available online. Grandmaster 19:43, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

External links

Hah, yeah it seems like we've been discussing this for ages :) Well, my point is not that she is unbiased (this doesn't exist), I'm fairly sure she presents an argument which is favourable to Armenians. However, I was very careful to distinguish between sites that will publish any perspective, that is, they are non-partisan, and sites that only publish one perspective, that is, they are partisan.

Nowhere does it say "these are neutral sources". It says they are non-partisan sources - there is a subtle difference. We are presenting her piece as something published on a non-partisan website, there is even a link to her article, which you can fill out if you wish.

The final decision is not up to me, its up to you guys, I think I made a reasonable, verifiable distinction in the external links section which seemed to resolve the dispute at hand. Please let me know if you have any better ideas, aside from just labelling her as "Armenian POV" which is not constructive, as she has been published by the USIP, thats like saying the COE report is "Azeri POV" just because it favours the Azerbaijani position. Please feel free to leave a note on the article talk page or on my talk page. - FrancisTyers 17:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Francis, let's leave it for now. There are more important issues in that entry about Karabakh than this one link. Take care. Grandmaster 17:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

my RfA

Hi, we worked together on Tahir Salahov article. Maybe you want to have a look on my Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alex Bakharev? abakharev 08:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. WikiThanks.

I would like to express my thanks to all the good people who spent their valuable time time and effort working on my (failed) RfA voting. Especially for those who actually voted to support me :). Lets move on and make together our Wikipedia an even greater place abakharev 10:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. I hope next time you'll succeed. Grandmaster 10:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Petrograd

I see your point. Since either name links to the Saint Petersburg article, I think either one is fine. However, I think the city is best known as Saint Petersburg in the west. Go ahead and change it back if you prefer, but I would suggest putting Saint Petersburg in parenthesis after the first mention of Petrograd, such as: "Petrograd (modern day Saint Petersburg)" Hiberniantears 17:42, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I will amend it to read "Petrograd (modern day Saint Petersburg)". It would be more accurate from historical point of view. Also, do you think it is worth mentioning twice that he was the first and only Muslim to serve as General-Adjutant? Maybe, one mention will be enough. Regards, Grandmaster 18:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Nakhichevan

Please see my newest notes in the talk page. Thanks! --RaffiKojian 23:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Please see talk page for Nakhichevan for my response. Grandmaster 07:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

New rayon?

I noticed you added a new rayon to Nakhichevan - Kengerli. A couple of questions:

1. Do you have any further information on this, in particular a map? I can find no English language sources on it.
2. The only source I did find was in Azeri, and gave the name as KƏNGƏRLİ - this would transliterate to Kangarli, I do believe, but I'm no expert, I just know what I've learned while making my map.

I'd love to keep my map as up to date as possible, and this is the first I've heard of a new rayon. Thanks! --Golbez 07:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Golbez. It was a surprise for me as well, but I made inquires and found out that it has existed for about two years already. There is a link to the official cite of NAR at the bottom of the page, where this new rayon is mentioned along with other 6 and it is said that there are 7 rayons in the republic. At the same time the map is apparently out of date and shows only 6. I’ve made a search on the Internet myself and couldn’t find any map which showed the new rayon. As for the name, the letter “ə” is normally replaced in English spelling with either “a” or “e”, both are correct, so it’s up to you which one to use. It’s probably better to use the same spelling everywhere. Regards, Grandmaster 07:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

This is the link to the map at the official website, but it does not show the new rayon. Grandmaster 07:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've asked the chap at Statoids if he knows anything, and made a stub article. --Golbez 08:15, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

OK. If I find any new info, I’ll let you know. Take care. Regards, Grandmaster 08:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Nagorno-Karabakh

Ooops. I just checked out the history of the page, and it looks like you are correct. Sorry about that. --Khoikhoi 06:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Grandmaster 06:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Grandmaster. I try to show the real 18 million number of iranian azeris in "azeris" page. But Tajik and some anti-azeris try to decrease it. Can you help there?...Sincerely

-Inanna-

Thanks, I’ll have a look. Regards, Grandmaster 07:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Azeris Are ethnic Iranians

I have studied the history of Caucasia and the Middle East since I was a child. There language is a Turkic language but has heavy influence from Arabic, Persian, and Caucasian languages. Also in the Republic of Azerbaijan there is Russian influence. My grandmather tells me about how her father (my great-grand father) remembers the the stories his parent told him about how so many Iranians left the area once the Russians annexed it.

What you say is basically right. Azeri language is Turkic and was lingua franca in the Caucasus back in the day, of course it has influences, as most of other languages. We have a lot in common in terms of history, traditions, etc, and Persian language was very popular with Azeri intelligentsia before Russia took the region over. Indeed, many Muslim people fled the region, as Russia started resettling Armenians from Persia and Turkey, and most of those who left were ethnic Azeris. Many people in Azerbaijan have relatives in Iran. As for Azeris being ethnic Iranians, I don’t share this view, and I responded to your post on the talk page of Azerbaijani people, please have a look. Regards, Grandmaster 07:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I was born in South Azerbaijan in the city Hastper when we my family got exciled from Iran, because we wanted democratic Itan, we fled to Azerbaijcan SSR. In Iran we people always said North Azeri are greedy and selfish and more negative things. But when we arrived in Baku, we were welcomed with open arms, we had so much support there. I had never seen such friendly people, it was very unexpected. Today I dont see myselfs as a Irani anymore but as a Azeri and nothing else. 99% of my family is still in Iran and alot of North Azeris also have relatives and family in South Azerbaijan. Azeris might be ethnic Iranians (although recent research has proven that the DNA and genes are of Caucasian people and not Iran or Turkey) but look at me man, I was born and raised in Iran and I see myself as Azeri. I dont know any Azeri in Azerbaijan who sees himself as a ethnic Iranian. Baku87

Re: Nakhichevan

I cut my addition from the Nakhichevan and added it instead to the Nagorno-Karabakh article. I apologize for any inconvenience (Google News made mention of both locations, so I included them both). -- Clevelander 14:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I hope you’ll keep contributing to these articles. Regards, Grandmaster 14:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is the link to the so called "proof"

http://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/pdf/Y-paper.pdf

You will notice that the researchers did not use any subjects from Turkey or Turkmenistan. They are using the data in the literature for Kyrgyz, Karakalpak, Kazak, Dungan and Uzbek. Though when they plot their data superimposed with the data from the literature. Azerbaijanis and Armenians cluster closer to Turks of Turkey compared to Iranian populations.

Same people are doing the same argument in "Turkish people" article. I would think quite a few of them are "Aryan race" supporters and the rest are the usual suspects.

Saglicakla kal. AverageTurkishJoe 06:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the useful info. Currently I’m very busy with the articles Nakhichevan and Nagorno-Karabakh, and I cannot get engaged in another lengthy discussion because of time limitation. If you check those articles you’ll see what’s going on there. I will try to contribute as much as possible to the above mentioned article as well, but unfortunately my activities there are limited for the moment. Thank you very much for your support, for the moment we are simply being outnumbered here, Hoşca kal. Grandmaster 07:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hejka

Привет. А ты был в Польше судя по флажку. A в каком городе? Я сейчас в Кракове сижу. Brandmeister 19:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Привет. Я был в Варшаве в 1991 году. Grandmaster 19:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your voting!

Thanks!

Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Wikipedia and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you.

If you feel I can help you or Wikipedia as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very much, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! I’m glad that you won. I wish good luck to you. Grandmaster 10:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Safavids

I read your contribution in the Safavids article. First of all, thanks for your effords to improve the article. However, your claim that Safavids were "Azeris" is deffinitly not true. The origin of the Safavids, Sheikh Safi al-Din Es'haq Arbabeli who traced his origin back to Firuz-Shah Zarrin-Kullah-e Kordi, was a Kurd and Persian-speaking. It is well attested in many documents that Safi al-Din was not a Turk. He wrote poems in the old language of Azerbaijan, the Iranian language known as "Adherbaijani". He was married to the daughetr of Sheikh Zahed al-Din Sanjani, a mystic from Gilan with origins in Khorasan. Of course, the Safavids intermarried with many other peoples - Armenians, Turks, Greeks, and later with Moghuls and Indian nobles - but the "origin of a dynasty" is defined by the male linage. And in case of the Safavids, they were of Persian-Kurdish origin.

As for the language, of course you are correct. The Safavids were Turkified Persians (the same way the Turkish Ghaznavids and Aibakids were Persianized and spoke Persian).

Claiming that Safaivids were of "Azeri origin" is wrong. They were Turkic-speaking Persians. Safavids are a symbol for Persian nationalism and the revival of Persian language, culture and nationalism after centuries of Turkish rule in Iran. Even their successors, the Turkoman Qajars were Persian-speaking.

Thanks

Hi. Thanks for your message. First off, Kurdish origin is just one of the versions, and not the most popular one. There is a great number of other sources that are available in the talk page archive, which prove otherwise. Some even doubt that Ismail was a direct descendant of Sheikh Safi. The claim that they were Turkic-speaking Persians is also disputable, it was rather the other way round, one can say that Shah Abbas was a Persian-speaking Turk. Regards, Grandmaster 13:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Azerbaijani people

Thanks for reverting. I though perhaps next time he reverts you'd be able to talk with that anon, as you are both Azeris. This isn't the first time I've heard this, I also encountered another Wikipedian way back who believed that they were "Turkic-speaking Iranians". It seems that Wikipedia is a magnet for people with minority beliefs who add their opinions to articles. Anyways, thanks again. --Khoikhoi 07:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Now it looks like some Iranian POV-pusher has messed up the History of Azerbaijan article. Please help me out here, as I'm trying to stay off edit-warring. --Khoikhoi 07:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Khoikhoi. He’s not an Azeri, Azeri people don’t think that they are Iranian or anybody else. Looks like this is a result of some sort of official propaganda in Iran, they desperately try to deny existence of Azeris as an ethnicity. Thanks for your resistance to these POV pushers. Grandmaster 08:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Apparently he is, but he's also an Iranian nationalist at the same time. Anyways, thanks for reverting on History of Azerbaijan. --Khoikhoi 18:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ibragimbekov.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ibragimbekov.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 06:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Safavids

I think no matter what Tajik is going to continue to revert, unless we come up with a compromise. What I suggest is to not state the origins in the intro, now that we have a section about it. However, we can mention all the stuff we can about Turkic origins at Safavids#Ethnic_and_linguistic_controversy. I suggest you make that section longer, and cite sources. What do you think? --Khoikhoi 07:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Khoikhoi. I don’t really think these people are willing to make any compromises in this issue. They continue to deny the facts established by many sources. But I think we should cite some sources the section you have mentioned, that would help to illustrate the conflicting views. I’m a little busy right now, but as soon as I find some time I’ll do that. Grandmaster 07:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I think if we just remove the fact that they're Turkic in the opening paragraph (which is true but I don't think is good introductory material) and just add sources for the other section, then I think we'll be fine and Tajik won't revert anymore. --Khoikhoi 07:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

But it does not now say they were Turkic, it just says they were Turkic-speaking as per Columbia encyclopedia. Grandmaster 08:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. We'll see what happens next. ;) --Khoikhoi 08:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

OK. Take care. Grandmaster 08:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Did you show this to Tajik? What did he have to say about it? I think this and the other source is enough to support your claim. We all know that they were initially Turkic-speaking, so I suppose we can add that for now. --Khoikhoi 18:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

As one might expect, he keeps denying Safavids being Turkic or Turkic-speaking. He keeps reverting no matter what. Have a look at the discussion at the bottom of this section: [2] So I’m thinking what actions can we take to stop the revert war. There are absolutely no grounds to deny that they were Turkic-speaking, this is supported by a number of reliable sources, including Iranica. The latter even confirms that Safavids were Turks, but just claims that the clan was originally Iranian and later became Turkified, adopted Turkic language and became the ruling dynasty. That is fine with me as well, even though there are sources that claim they were originally Turkic. So we have every right to mention in the intro their Turkic background, and I may consider applying for some formal conflict resolution to stop the guy from reverting. Grandmaster 19:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that would be a good idea. The guy's been reverting since early January, and I think we should add something to the Administrators' Noticeboard. It started with User:TimBits. Looks like he hasn't been editing in awhile. Oh well. --Khoikhoi 19:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

If he continues the same course of action, something should definitely be done. Noticeboard could be good for a start. Let's give him another chance for now. Take care. Grandmaster 19:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Grandmaster. Usually in disputes like these there are different stages. First there is the stage where all the parties talk about how they're right, and then once all the drama is over, comes the compromise stage. However I'm sure the latter will not happen for a few months now. ;) No, seriously, here's a proposed compromise:

The Safavids were initially a Turkic-speaking dynasty of that ruled Iran from 1501 to 1736, and which established Shi'a Islam as Iran's official religion and united its provinces under a single Iranian sovereignty, thereby reigniting the Persian identity and acting as a bridge to modern Iran.

Further down, we will have an Origins section, where we will explain all the points. How does that sound? --Khoikhoi 06:24, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The thing is that the Columbia does not say they were initially Turkic-peaking, it just says they were Turkic speaking. There are sources that indicate that they were Turkic-speaking at later times as well. Right now (apparently) Iranian editor Zmmz came up with the version that I found to be acceptable:

The Safavids were a Turkic speaking native Iranian dynasty of Azerbaijani origin that ruled Iran from 1501 to 1736, and which established Shi'a Islam as Iran's official religion and united its provinces under a single Iranian sovereignty, thereby reigniting the Persian identity and acting as a bridge to modern Iran.

Then he replaced it with the current version that does not make much sense, adding words about ancient Turkic, etc. I think we can work up his version one before the current one and make it acceptable for everyone, except for Tajik, this guy is not willing to compromise. I already made a compromise, I’m not insisting they were Turks, even though I have every right to based on Iranica article, I just suggest to write they were Turkic-speaking. What do you think? Grandmaster 06:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with writing that they're Turkic-speaking. I'm not sure if they were Turkic-speaking all the way through however. I think Tajik agrees with this though, we'll ask him tomorrow. I can tell you for sure that he's not going to agree with the "Azerbaijani origin" part. Remember, just because someone is not willing to compromise doesn't mean they should be unheard. If we ignore him then he'll just continue to revert. --Khoikhoi 07:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

If you think that would be a solution for the dispute, it is OK with me, but Tajik removes any mention of Safavids being Turkic or Turkic-speaking. We also need to know the opinion of Tabib, who is apparently away for the moment, but he is one of the main contributors to the article, so his opinion should also be taken into account. I think we can stick to your version for the moment and see what happens. Grandmaster 07:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I'll implement it. I also recall User:TimBits reverted Tajik about 2 months ago on the same subject. Looks live he's been inactive though. --Khoikhoi 07:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

He's probably asleep. Let's wait til he wakes up. I wonder what's Timbit's take on the current situation. Grandmaster 08:00, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Tajik or Tabib? Probably the time zone difference. TimBit probably doesn't know the revert war's still going on. --Khoikhoi 08:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I meant Tajik is probably asleep, due to the time zone difference. Let’s see his reaction, when he wakes up, but I’m sure what it’s gonna be. Grandmaster 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

We'll see...Btw, you live in Azerbaijan, right? Do you live in Baku? --Khoikhoi 08:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I live in Baku. Grandmaster 10:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. I live in the US. :) --Khoikhoi 00:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Cool. You do a very good job fighting various nationalistic POV pushers. Not anyone can do that, I would have given up long ago. Thank you for that. Grandmaster 05:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm pretty burnt out right now because the conflict that I just got into with some anon on the Adana page. Perhaps you could take a look. --Khoikhoi 05:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don’t want to get into more disputes right now. I have a number ongoing, mostly with Armenian editors, I need to sort them out first. Grandmaster 05:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. You made a good choice. ;) --Khoikhoi 05:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

OK. What's your opinion about current state of Safavids? Grandmaster 05:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it's pretty good. What do you think? I mean, it's pretty close to a compromise. --Khoikhoi 05:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I’m not sure. Let’s see what other people think, i.e. people representing the position close to mine. Grandmaster 05:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I have been relatively inactive on Wikipedia for some time. But on the Safavid issue, I had given up knowingly. I have realized the futility of an effort to come to any agreement with User:Tajik. I do not believe that he/she is acting out of the concern for the correctness of the articles. The user has been searching for Turkic related, specifically Azerbaijani Turkish related articles and downplay the Turkish importance. I haven't observed him doing the same against any other people. I just think that it is pointless to try to come to any agreement with such a person. I was aware of the edit war and protection and continued war after that. I wish you luck and patience. --TimBits 02:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Tajik has some real problems with everything Turkish, especially Azeri Turkish. He keeps arguing even after his own source, Iranica, proved that Safavids were Azeri Turks. He’s certainly not a kind of a person who listens to what other people say, he just tries to push his nationalist agenda. Regards, Grandmaster 05:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Salam!

Salam kardas necesen? Senin e-mail ne dir kardas, bir suzum var sene??

Sağ ol. Bu səhifənin sağ tərəfində E-mail this user linkını basıb mənə yaza bilərsən. Grandmaster 14:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Bro your e-mail doest work, it says you havent confirmed it yet. If you cant get it fixed mail me at farhad87@hotmail.com I'll mail you my question to you there. Leave a message here if you have sended the mail.

Hi. I forgot to enable it, it is OK now. I've already e-mailed you. Grandmaster 17:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Question

I noticed your following comment:

I expressed my surprise that destruction of Azeri monuments was not mentioned. It is this time, but without going into details.

I would like to hear your opinion on my questions:

1. What is your opinion of the destruction of the Armenian monuments? 2. The destruction you refer to I assume is statement of Azeri Goverment"Armenians destroyed the cemeteries of Azeris Near Yerevan" The Armenian Goverment has denied even the existance of such a cemetery. Are there before or even after images of this cemetary? 3. Why would Armenians destroy it? If there was one... They do not have a history of destroying foreign monuments. 4. Obviously, there is dispute of history of Karabakh as well. How come then, if Armenians wanted to destroy anyhting, are there mosques in Karabakh, unmolested, and the mosque of Agdam has been left alone?

I don’t want to get engaged in a dispute that has no relation with any article I’m currently editing, sorry, I don’t have much time to dedicate to that. But if you want to know about destruction of Azeri monuments in Karabakh, have a look at the current state of Azeri monuments in Shusha: [3] Another fact. Armenian militants used statues of Azeri composers, poets and singers in Shusha as targets for shooting exercises, and then sold them as scrap metal to Georgia. Azerbaijani government bought the statues from Georgian metal dealers and now those statues with bullet marks on the faces are kept in the courtyard of Museum of Arts in Baku. See the pictures here and here. As for the destruction in Armenia, Thomas de Waal describes destruction of an Azerbaijani mosque in Yerevan by a bulldozer in 1991 in his book “Black Garden”. It is available online in Russian here, at BBC Russian website, you can get the English version from Amazon. Btw, there were 7 mosques in Yerevan, only 1 remains today. So don’t be surprised that destruction of Azerbaijani monuments in Armenia was condemned by Europarliament. Grandmaster 16:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I simply asked for you opinion, not to dispute with you. Thanks, but you did not answer any of the questions I asked. Regards,

I think I did. You wanted to know about destruction of Azeri cultural heritage in Armenia and Karabakh, and I provided some info. Grandmaster 08:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

E-mail me

Greetings Grandmaster,

I am an Armenian Wikipedia user and I would like to email you and show you what I think would be an ideal solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh. I am enthusiastic to see what somebody from Azerbaijan thinks of my plan. Contact me on my talk page ASAP.

Best, Clevelander 15:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I tried using the "e-mail user" option and I keep getting this message:

This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users. -- Clevelander 16:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Please try again now. It should be OK. I forgot to enable it, sorry. Grandmaster 16:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for disturbing but Im Azeri aswell and I would also like to hear your plan, if you dont mind.

Baku Metro

Привет, there are a few questions that are up about the operation of the Metro. I need to know this prior to writing templates (I am a Metro Maniac). --Kuban Cossack 00:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Привет, ask you questions, I will be glad to be of any help for you. Grandmaster 05:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok

1. Is the transfer Jaffar/28th of May (do apologise for the incorrect translits)) still exists as it does with shuttle service on Jaffar-Hatai and then Memar Adzhemi-28th-Aslanov; Baki Soveti-28th-Aslanov and the same goes for 28th-Barmil. Or have they compleated the transfer as illustrated on the schematic further down here (I do invite you to that forum as well, there are more detailed questions that the people there are curious about). In other words does the metro exist as a full two-line network or does it still has that unusual branch service.

I remember once (many years ago) I tried to walk that transfer, and it took me forever to get from one line to another. I’m not sure if they still use it. Since I have a car, I haven’t used metro for ages. I’m afraid I won’t be much of help for you, but I’ll try to find out as much as I can about the things that are of interest for you. Grandmaster 10:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

1. When was the first section of Jaffar put into service? Was it 27.10.1993 as the source gives here?

Have a look at this: [4] Jafar JAbbarli = 28 May, they are linked. Grandmaster 11:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

1. Are the lines actually called anything, or is it as simple as Line1 and Line2?
2. The plan supplied by Baku87 seems quite dated, is it possible for you to obtain a newer one?
3. Also are these translations of station names correct? In that case what does Memar Adzhemi mean?

One is wrong. Should be Гянджлик and not Гдянджлик. Memar means an architect, Ajemi is name, this medieval architect built mausoleums, photo of which you can find here: Nakhichevan and Nakhichevan (city). Grandmaster 10:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

1. Fell free to copypaste this to Talk:Baku Metro --Kuban Cossack 10:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Azerbaijan

Don't revert again. If the anon reverts again, let it be. What you can do now is report him/her for violating the 3RR. Go to WP:AN/3RR. Make a note there that the anon knew about it because I told him/her, but continued to revert. I have to go now, adios. --Khoikhoi 09:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Grandmaster 10:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Azerbaijan got protected. Hallelujah! --Khoikhoi 07:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, long overdue. Grandmaster 07:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

No, I was refering to the anon/anons on the Azerbaijani people page who keep changing "Turkic" to "Turkic-speaking". --Khoikhoi 03:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The Barnstar of National Merit

		The Barnstar of National Merit
		For your contribution to Azerbaijan-related articles. Anyone who gets vandalized this often has to be doing something right. --Nlu (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
		this WikiAward was given to {{subst:PAGENAME}} by ~~~ on ~~~~~

Thank you. Grandmaster 05:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Momine.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Momine.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 16:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Arran vandal

Hey Grandmaster,

I've talked with this guy and I think we can try to work things out here. Leave another comment on you talk page and list what your concerns are with this guy's edits. I hope we can come to a compromise on this, thanks. --Khoikhoi 05:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Khoikhoi. The problem with this guy is that his additions are not well sourced, as per rules of Wikipedia. And they are all about Armenians, but the article is not about Armenians, Azeris or Persians, it is about the region. For example, I don’t find such passages to be really relevant to the article:

While the number of Armenians declined in the region through the centuries, their presence remained strong until the 1980's and the start of hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Certain sources cite than outside of Karabakh, in the 19th century, between modern Armenia and the Kura river, armenians constituted 5-20% of the population, excluding Karabakh. A large portion of the population was clustered in Karabakh and metopolitan Ganja, where up to 40,000 lived, a significant portion of the 200,000+ residents of the city.

Why should we specifically discuss the number of Armenians in the region and say nothing about the number of other people, say Azeris, Tats, Udis, etc. This info belongs to the article about Armenian people, but not here. And talking about Armenians, nothing is said about their massive resettlement to the region by Russian tsarist authorities, while more than 1 million Armenians were resettled to the region in 19th century. But inclusion of all that info takes us to a completely different direction. I think the article should be focused on the history of the region, and not history of particular people. I don’t know if the guy is willing to listen to what other people say, but if he wants to vandalize my user page, I don’t care. Such actions are not indication of a person being really smart, to say the least. Grandmaster 07:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I agree with that. You're right, we shouldn't get into detail too much about the people. I'll remove that paragraph for now. However, I don't think that we shouldn't mention Armenia in the article. We'll see if he's willing to listen, if he's not it's fine by me as well. --Khoikhoi 07:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I actually kept the mention of Armenia in the article, if you check my last edit I did not remove all of his additions, I just don’t think that article should be too much focused on Armenia and Armenians, while ignoring more significant influences on the region, such as Turkic, Persian, Russian, etc. Grandmaster 07:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I see. Is there anything else that should be removed? --Khoikhoi 07:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

The famous contemporary Armenian historian of the 13th century, Kirakos Gandzaketasi, was from Ganja.

Also not really relevant. How about other famous people, Nezami, Fikret Amirov, etc, etc. The list is very long. If we mention this particular one, we should mention all. Grandmaster 07:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Those deletions I accept, what are other problems ? (209.158.161.194 17:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC))

The rest remains for the time being. The article needs work anyway, there’s absolutely no info on the history of the region after 10th century. So if someone wants to expand it, he might wish to make additions or changes. Btw, why don’t you contribute under your registered name of Hetoum? I understand that it is easier to vandalize pages as an anonym, but if you want to be taken seriously, it is better to act in civilized manner. Grandmaster 13:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks and Happy Novruz- I propose not to change the article, we should expand History of Azerbaijan page and subarticles on the dynasties which I was planning to do for some time. I have deleted some of completely irrevant material. Arran is the right Bank of Kura. Unlike the east Bank (Shirvan), Arran, especially post 11-12 century was never a united polity or hosted any dynasty. That is why there is not much to say on Arran post 10th century. So as the region it is most hazy in definition and loses its meaning from Seljuk times as Barda declines . Some sources even mix it with Shirvan into one combined Arran. THis is the "argument" of those Persians who deny Azerbaijan name for the North. They forget that There is also Nakchivan, Mugan, Shaki,Absheron etc. The only reason this article is so expanded is the obvious reason of politics.Abdulnr 01:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Well I think I can do what I can for now. I would not want to waste too much time on Wikipedia.

Religion in the Az

Thanks for the info, I have restored the articles abakharev 08:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Alex. Grandmaster 08:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, sorry about that. I wasn't aware. --Khoikhoi 08:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

It's alright. Regards, Grandmaster 08:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

As for the Safavids page, don't you think it would be a good idea to not mention their origins in the intro but include all that stuff in the Origins section? --Khoikhoi 06:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with that, but the recent edit by SouthernComfort claims that they were Iranian. Even Tajik agreed to leave it out. Grandmaster 06:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, done. --Khoikhoi 06:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

What is Grandmaster talking about? Their nationality was Iranian - what does that have to do with their ethnicity? Is he attempting to come up with a new argument this time? SouthernComfort 06:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

What’s wrong with saying they were a dynasty that ruled Iran? The word Iranian has various interpretations, there was an agreement between all the editors to leave that out of intro, so I don’t understand why you decided to restore it back? Grandmaster 06:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

That's why it links to Iran, so that is no misunderstanding. We could call them a "Persian" dynasty, linking to Persian Empire but I think you would oppose that as well. You didn't oppose the inclusion of "Iranian" until this compromise issue with Tajik. So what you are saying is that unless mention of their ethnic background is included in the intro (which is problematic in and of itself), that we must also remove the fact that they were Iranian? That's not rational. SouthernComfort 07:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

If their nationality was Iranian, it is enough to say that they were a dynasty that ruled Iran. It is the same thing. But saying they were Iranian can be interpreted as indication of their ethnicity, not everyone is going to click the link to see what Iranian refers to. You started another round of edit wars, when everybody agreed to leave that out of intro. If you think that other editors agree to your version, you are wrong, and you’ll see the revert wars raging again. Grandmaster 07:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

But "Iranian" is not an ethnicity - the term, by itself, has no ethnic meaning in the English language. By leaving that small bit out, it could imply to the reader that they were a foreign dynasty. But they were not - they were an indigenous dynasty. SouthernComfort 07:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

And why did you also oppose Tajiks version that stated the Safavids were "initially" Turkic-speaking? Do you have sources which state that they always remained Turkic-speaking, even during Shah Abbas' time? SouthernComfort 07:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I kind of don’t think mentioning of Safavids being Iranian and omitting their Turkic background would stop the edit wars. The word Iranian has an ethnic meaning in English, see Iranian peoples. I never reverted the Khoikhoi’s version about Safavids being initially Turkic-speaking, but there are sources to indicate that the later Safavids were also Turkic speakers. [5] And Tajik always removed any mention of the fact that Safavids hailed from Azerbaijan region, so I actually find your current version to be more acceptable, but let’s see what other people say. Grandmaster 08:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

N-K map

I considered it a compromise. On the Azerbaijan map, I used the de jure borders and names. So for the Nagorno-Karabakh map, I decided to compromise by using the de facto borders and names. So far as I know, the official name for that province of Nagorno-Karabakh is Shushi, while the official name for that rayon of Azerbaijan is Shusha. The map is designed solely to give a map of Nagorno-Karabakh from a Nagorno-Karabakh perspective. It has the names of Stepanakert, Martakert, the split rayon of Khojavend, etc. It would be odd then to have "Shusha" instead of "Shushi", in a map mentioning Martakert, et. al. --Golbez 00:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Fuzûlî

Thanks for the thanks for my work on the Fuzûlî article. It's still far from done (the Works section still needs serious expansion, which I've been studying up to do lately, but at least it's a start. A poet as great and important as Fuzûlî certainly deserves a better page than he had before (which was actually a copyright violation anyhow, as I've found the web source where the earlier version came from).

Also, thanks for catching me out on the fact that Fuzûlî used Azeri rather than Ottoman; I've been reading up so much on Ottoman literature lately that I just sort of slotted that in there without thinking about its basic inaccuracy. —Saposcat 07:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Inapropriate edits re Safi Al-Din

1.You should accept that Kurds are indeed ( meaning "infact" and NOT "identical" as you understood, judjing by your curt rvrt comment!) commonly counted among Iranian/Persian ethnicities [[6]] The Safawid sheikhs themselves claim descent from Firuz-Shah Zarrin Kulah in their own Genealogy [[7]]. So it is not for you to impose POV here.

2. "apparently" is pure POV on your part (sounds like " I don't know better.. but...apparently")

3. Safi's own order was called Safaviyeh in contrast to the Zahediyeh which he inherited from Sheikh Zahed Gilani. No need to state "it was to be called."

4. The word "slowly" is POV in connection with the Safaviyeh's development to shiaism. The proper ENGLISH term would be "gradually" to indicate the pace of development.

If you want to contribute sensibly, then do so with solid intellectual background and with, at least, basic courtesy. An encyclopedia is not a sandbox , where you randomly enter errate spur-of-the-moment conceptions. This also goes for some of your other contributions, which clearly betray your limited knowledge on the subject, as well as total lack of preparedness for scientific analysis or research Pantherarosa 11:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

First of all, leave your mentoring tone when talking to other editors. It’s not up to you to judge the knowledge of other people and tell them whether they should contribute to a topic or not. That’s clearly against the Wiki rules. Second, nobody says that Kurds are not Iranian people, but they are just one of Iranian people, same as Persians, while Azeris are just one of Turkic people and are not the same as say Uzbeks or Kazakhs, or Russians are one of Slavic people and are not the same as Chekh or Polish people. And what’s the point in saying that he was of Iranian, and specifically Kurdish extraction anyway? Why not saying that he was of Kurdish extraction, it is known that Kurds belong to Iranian people. Kurdish origin is one of the versions, therefore the article says “apparently”. Grandmaster 11:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Buildings in Azerbaijan

You are right.Please feel free to move the Momine Khatun Mausoleum. If you have time (which I do not) you can add other buildings - I have in mind main Azerbaijani landmarks? Abdulnr 06:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for addition - it is good article to be included on Building and structures in Azerbaijan. We need to add also Shah Abbas Mosque in Ganja, castles of Shirvan, Shirvanshah's palace article needs to be rewritten which I will do.

I will be also working on Shirvanshah's Project. Will rework rulers of Shirvanshah, so far added only 3.

Also noticed we are very scant on Azeri literary figures of `9-20 century. I will try to add some. Do you have image for Abbasqulu Bakikhanov? Abdulnr 13:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)