User talk:Erminwin

		The WikiCookie
		You've learned how to use basic wikicode in your sandbox. You can always return there to experiment more.

Posted automatically via sandbox guided tour. Erminwin (talk) 22:20, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erminwin! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) talk) 17:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply ]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am informing you that the fanatic tai-only user has striked again. He is currently reverting your edits and claim that you are aswell, like many other non-related users, a sockpuppet... 213.162.72.195 (talk) 21:54, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• GAB is closing that the sockpuppet investigation proposed by that Tai-only user (most likely User:Bokworm8899). Still, I decide not to revert their edits for fear of starting an edit war.Erminwin (talk) 06:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:09, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Barsils, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mandarin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the Reliable Sources may seem questionable, but we can't just drive-by change article text without a Reliable Source to back it up. HammerFilmFan (talk) 04:32, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @HammerFilmFan: The "Reliable Source" John Chambers's "The Devil's Horsemen" did not identify the "Saxins" (p. 48, 49) / "Saxin tribes" (p. 31) with "East Saxons".Erminwin (talk) 09:52, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

better read the footnotes more closely - the revamping of this article was done in collaboration with 2 professors who authored books on the Mongols, besides my own colleagues at Duke

Do you have an RS that has a better definition of "Saxins"? This article has been vandalized by drive-by IP's from Russia, etc., since we re-vamped it a few years ago - I am not sure without digging through the history of where the definition was obtained-several other history buffs have tried to fix the article when this happened, and it's possible a reference was lost-Chambers does indeed not directly define who they were-this may have come from email correspondence from Morgan, or Trumble. I am all in favor of improving this article. I'm going to search through my various sources in the meantime. Thanks. HammerFilmFan (talk) 20:36, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @HammerFilmFan: Hudud al-'Alam 'The Regions of the World' - A Persian Geography 372 A.H. (982 AD), by V. V. Minorsky & C. E. Bosworth would be such a RS. Minorsky wrote that: "The first element of Sārigh-sh.n is evidently Turkish [sic] sarigh "yellow" [...] I am strongly inclined that the name *Sarigh-shin is the original form of the enigmatic [...] Saqsin, as the geographer of Mongol times called a town situated by a mighty river and usually quoted along with the Volga Bulghar, cf. Bartold Saķsīn in EI." (italic in original)

Hello, the long term vandal and Tai only pusher Bookworm8899 seems to be back adding unsourced maps made by his sock on wikimedia. He is currently using several IPs. As example please see Vietnamese language. Greetings.38.121.43.37 (talk) 19:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, you already cleaned up his vandalism. So... good job! Erminwin (talk) 02:03, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kurykans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiele (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ashina Helu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khalaj (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western Turkic Khaganate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khalaj (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Hephthalites (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Indo-Iranian

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:34, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Xueyantuo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Tola and Chuluo Khagan

Chigi family (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IPA

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Season's greetings

I am looking for proactive expansion and update support/input help any of the following (So far neglected but important topic) articles. If you can't spare time but if you know any good references you can note those on talk pages.

• Islamic advice literature

Your user ID was selected randomly (for sake of neutrality) from related other articles changes list related to Turkestan

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 11:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the recent sock-edits, including the whole sequence in the leading part #Origins, about the proto-turkic homeland simply isn’t backed up by the sources. There is not one sentence in the given references. You have to check the sources before you allow abusive sockcontent. However, considering the context of that „Transeurasian theory“, an absolute minority view among linguists, these studies belong to the article Altaic languages. Yours thankfully —Lithuist (talk) 08:46, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:OWN

behavior. Take a look at the second half of their user talk page.

As an aside, I have to wonder, with only one or two edits attributed to your user name, I am wondering if you are a sock. Do you have a blocked account and are you circumventing that blocked account? Do you have other Wikipedia accounts? ---Steve Quinn (talk) 14:53, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

""@Steve Quinn: they are CU blocked, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tirgil34. Doug Weller talk 14:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller::Tirgil34 did psycholgoically project their sock-puppeteering too much.Erminwin (talk) 18:05, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

talk) 06:49, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Wario-Man: Can't tell if the vandal who has a pro-Turkic bias & keep vandalizing articles on Tuoba, Tuoba language, Rouran Khaganate, Tatar confederation, and Tatars were Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34 or no. Though that vandal embarrassingly exposed their ignorance, when vandalizing the Tuoba's article by citing Mahmud al-Kashgari to assert that the "Tuoba were a division of Turkic peoples" even though the Tuoba article contains an an entire section devoting to the semantic shift from the Tuoba & Northern Wei to Song China in Kashgari's time.

That IP-hopper is not Tirgil34 but they could be a

talk) 01:59, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rouran Khaganate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khitan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Donghu people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ordos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you review

@

Wario-Man: Thanks for bring that to my attention. I deleted the whole Ethnogenesis section. The writer stopped short of classifying many vanished historical Iranian-speaking groups as Turkic. Yet such assertions as "the ethnic continuity and cultural uniformity of the Turkmen of the present time with the ancient population of the western part of Central Asia of the Hunnic (4th-5th centuries) and even the Parthian-Kanguy (more than 2 thousand years ago) periods becomes obvious." are Pan-Turkic insinuations.Erminwin (talk) 13:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for solving the issues. Is Vasily Bartold's claim "特拘梦 was a transliteration of the country name Türkmen" verified? If the answer is yes, then are there alternative claims by other scholars? Please keep watching that article because that user seems like adding fringe, pov, and unsourced stuff; e.g. [4] and on other articles [5][6][7]. --

talk) 03:16, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

Wario-Man: To be honest, I do not possess any copy of Bartold's Four Studies, therefore I cannot verify that claim as of now. I assumed good faith on that user's part that they'd faithfully paraphrased Bartold's opinion on the link between 特拘梦 (pinyin: Tejumeng; writer's transliteration (presumable Bartold's): T’ö-kü-Möng) and Türkmen. Erminwin (talk) 13:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello Ermiwin, i am sorry that i sounded scournful on your sir-kivchak post on rereading the phonetics of the turkish runes (new to wikipedia, just learning the ropes and reread my posts), https://bitig.kz/?lang=e&mod=1&tid=1&oid=24&m=1, ive been looking on some alternative reading aswell on that site now, its a misstake to use on coam for diffrent works, but rereading that Inscription i am even more confused how that text was translated withouth knowledge of Chinese or the other eastern languages?.You seem to be keen on this, il save my questions for that you reply that we should keep in touch on this subject, and Ergins book you have, is its a new publication?. I kind of lost faith in old turkic as a science since it was show (by me reading) misstankely that some modern Persian christian prayers were bundeld together with Turfan manuscripts somehow, and there was a "translation" but the text was our father in heaven from the bible. I got 3 readings on that page wich are titles, and a list of words wich i would like to discuss, if you want that aswell. We should try new readings of middle chineses aswell since it seems you have been at study. Hope you are pleased to reply that you wish the same communications between us.Bennanak88 (talk) 21:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Turkic peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiele.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

An Dương Vương

added a link pointing to Sino-Vietnamese

Hùng king

added a link pointing to Sino-Vietnamese

Âu Lạc

added a link pointing to King Huiwen

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

An Dương Vương

added a link pointing to Sino-Vietnamese

Hùng king

added a link pointing to Sino-Vietnamese

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Donghu people

added a link pointing to Gyula Németh

Kayı (tribe)

added a link pointing to Gyula Németh

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Donghu people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gyula Németh.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Barsils, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Toqto'a.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khazars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiele.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erminwin, you seem to be very knowledgeable about the Hephthalites, I was wondering if you know of any good/important soures about their fellow Hunnic cousins - the Xionites/Chionites and Kidarites? --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:26, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @HistoryofIran: In Prof Yu Taishan's collection, available here Kidara (Jiduoluo) were mentioned in passing. I'll look for more secondary sources. Erminwin (talk) 02:54, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Yeah that would be awesome. Even better if it included information about their culture, language and possible background. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:19, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi i have seen that you have been a great contributor to the Turkic pages and I would like to request your input to the Khalji dynasty page. If you look at the edit history i am sure you would understand the issue. If you look at the revert below, you could easily identify the information does not correspond to what is mentioned in the references. I wanted to see if you could help correct the article in accordance to the references or provide any advice. [[8]] Thankyou Regards Kami2018 (talk) 04:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate your reply in relation to this. Kami2018 (talk) 04:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Kami2018: I've been dealing with other obligations. Now to the the subject at hand, I don't think you and HistoryofIran disagreed substantively: both you & they agreed that the Afghan Khalji dynasty were of Turkic origin. More like they found the tone of your edit to be too subjective & therefore thought of your edit as POV-pushing. I'd recommend that you ask, in the Khalji dynasty article's talk page, about how to incorporate your sources (Jackson, 2003; Srivastava, 1966; Eraly, 2015; Chaurasia) into the article. Regards!Erminwin (talk) 02:50, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This has already been addressed [9], it was my bad. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erminwin. Grenet, Ur-Rahman, and Sims-Williams (2006:125-127) actually refer to another seal found in Kashmir (not Samarkand), which has the reading "ολαρ(γ)ο" (seal AA2.3) (in Grenet, Frantz. "A Hunnish Kushanshah". {{

]

• @पाटलिपुत्र:Thanks for the information! Erminwin (talk) 14:09, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The 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 2020 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply ]

Disambiguation link notification for December 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Oghuz Turks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rashid al-Din.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kumo Xi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Toqto'a.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

	Season's Greetings
	Wishing you a Happy Holiday Season, and a beautiful and productive New Year! पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 16:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• My many thanks, पाटलिपुत्र Pat! The same to you! Erminwin (talk) 05:03, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yami Qaghan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chinese.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading section "anthropology" in the article about Kipchak.

Hello, I wanted to delete/hide a misleading section in the article

WP:V. Could you please take a look at this section? You can check the references yourself and will see what I mean. Thank you in advance.213.162.73.198 (talk) 12:23, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I have now included a working reference and included some quotations to fix the first part. Regarding the second part of a reference from an Ukrainian anthropologist, I have not full access and can not verify if the content is correct. Maybe you have access?213.162.73.33 (talk) 14:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"At first, the Chinese quotation does not contain the words blonde or blue eyed people" Can you read Chinese? I can. I'm not Tirgil34 & I doubt that Tirgil34 can read Chinese. "青目赤髪" means "blue/green-eyed [and] red-haired". I even linked to the page in Xu Qianxue's later edition of Sima Guang's Zizhi Tongjian. Vol. 141 f.21a. Also, this is a direct quote from Lee & Kuang's paper 2017 "Concerning the physiognomy of the Qipchaq tribe, the Zizhi tongjian houbian [Later compilation to the comprehensive mirror to aid in government], a seventeenth-century continuation of Sima Guang’s Zizhi tongjian by Xu Qianxue, states that they had ‘blue eyes and red hair (青目赤髪)’." (p. 207) Also, Lee & Kuang quoted Yuanshi when mentioning the Kipchak clan's Ölberli, not Xu Qianxue's later edition of Sima Guang's Zizhi Tongjian Erminwin (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you improve/rewrite this article?

Hi. The

talk 15:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eastern Turkic Khaganate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiele.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at

Talk:Khwarazmian dynasty § Splitting proposal

 You are invited to join the discussion at

Talk:Khwarazmian dynasty § Splitting proposal. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 06:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Disambiguation link notification for May 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vokil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bulgar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tatars

Some IP user removed your additions, could you check maybe? Beshogur (talk) 18:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beshogur: Those ultra-nationalists again. Thanks for informing me!

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lý dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Annam.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of South Vietnam

Could you also add that information to the "

Autonomous Republic of Cochinchina and what did it symbolise (the same three regions as the later flag?) and what was the meaning of the white stripes? I have been able to find very little information about the Cochinchinese flag (on which the South Vietnamese flag was most likely based) and Musée Annam in all his arrogance never provides sources and was the originator of the "Thành Thái hoax" on Wikipedia (as well as a LARGE number of other fantasy flags), in fact, Musée Annam found the correct Cochinchinese flag but this one was deleted almost a dozen times as "a fantasy" off of Wikimedia Commons

because at no point did he ever provide sources other than "I said so" and just slung insults at anyone that ever dared question his reasoning (hence he is globally banned as this behaviour is a red thread through his contributions), but he did manage to correctly identify more Vietnamese flags than anyone else here (though this could be because he likely just throws everything he can find at the wall and then sees what sticks).

I am actually planning on diving deeper into the history of 1940's French Cochinchina but I have been unable to find the exact origin or meaning of the French Cochinchinese flag (although I did find a possible designer called "Ton That" something). --Donald Trung (talk) 19:50, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @
  Học viện Quốc gia Hành chánh, so NNH is more reliable. Erminwin (talk) 22:14, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Thanks for all the information, for whatever weird reason I haven't been able to get any notifications from Wikipedia now for perhaps half a year when someone pings me (though I do still get them for Wikimedia Commons at times, strangely enough). Thanks for all the research and your additions. --Donald Trung (talk) 23:21, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly enough, the flag with white stripes has been deleted many times at Wikimedia websites as "fake" and some sources claim that the flag was a misinterpretation that never existed. Despite this however, lots of contemporary evidence exists. Both the flag with the white stripes and without it have been documented and many different reports exists on when which version was used. Of course, the flag with white stripes was only deleted as "fictional" because at no point did the uploader(s) ever bother adding primary sources that confirm its existence. --Donald Trung (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vietic peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bo people.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy flags of Đại Việt

• I am planning on covering the many fantasy flags of
  Vietnamese family flag design but I am heavily inclined to think that these are later made fantasies. Do you have any additional information about them that I might have missed? --Donald Trung (talk) 07:17, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The 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 2021 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

Recent edits on Xiongnu

Hey Erminwin, could you please check the recent edits in the article

WP:Fringe. There may be some useful references, but the section needs clearly WP:Cleanup. Anyway, happy Christmas and a good new year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4BC9:924:6152:DDE3:6173:B15F:F959 (talk) 17:38, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Would you please comment on the recent edits of Hunan201p, see the talk page, he is misrepresenting genetic data to serve an white supremacist agendas, as in the past. He even got blocked for 3m months and is also suggested to be either WCF himself or Tirgil34. Maybe a false flag operation.2001:4BC9:920:2636:8C6A:F1C7:7A24:D0FB (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin: The IP editor here is most probably a sock of WorldCreaterFighter. He is pushing the same edits as his most recently banned sock, RobertY20. Hunan201p (talk) 14:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agenda? I have shown that your additions are

WP:OR and racialist motivated.2001:4BC9:920:2636:8C6A:F1C7:7A24:D0FB (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pannonian Avars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khorasan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Panhu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IPA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xia dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Huangdi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Daji, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liu Xiang.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited King Zhou of Shang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liu Xiang.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Liam Kelley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Envoy.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request for reviewing some edits

Hi. Could you review [10][11][12]? They could be pov-pushing edits because similar stuff[13] by the very same user was reverted[14] by another editor. Plus such claims are not supported by main articles

Mann Mann (talk) 05:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Look suspicious to me,

Mann Mann - it's true that a consensus opinion is that the Huns might have spoken a Turkic language, but this is always acknowledged to be an unprovable surmise rather than a fact outside of popular books and summaries. I don't know much about Vlachs, but I'm sure the other Ermin- can help.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Greetings,

Mann Mann, Ermenrich

! This is Erwinwin, and these are my verdicts:

On Revision as of 13:47, 8 May 2022 for Turkic peoples: POV-pushing

• Tutsens Woman copy-pasted these references ^[1][2][3][4] from the problematic article Turkic history, which HistoryofIran (talk · contribs) proposed deletion for. This edit demonstrated that Tutsens Woman was the originator of this POV-pushing claim and its many other later versions
• She misleadingly lumped two over-40-year-old sources (Henning, 1948; Hucker 1975) into "most scholars today"
• Walter Bruno Henning's, Charles Hucker's, Nicholas Sims-Williams' statuses as experts notwithstanding, Tutsens Woman likely expected readers & other editors to simply believe that those three experts support her POV-pushing when she merely cited them without elaborating how they did so
• She misleadingly used Savelyev & Jeong (2020)'s thesis that the majority of the Xiongnu spoke Late Proto-Turkic to POV-push that the Huns must have been Turkic-speakers

On Latest revision as of 21:59, 9 May 2022 again POV-pushing, in almost all likelihoods to distance the Turkic peoples and Xiongnu (who contributed to the ethnogenesis of Turkic peoples) from "East" Asians, Tutsens Woman abused technicality ("The word 'east' asia is never mentioned in the source"). While Keyser-Tracqui, C.; Crubezy, E.; Ludes, B. (2003). "Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analysis of a 2,000-year-old necropolis in the Egyin Gol Valley of Mongolia". American Journal of Human Genetics. 73 (2): 247–260 only used the ambiguous term "Asian" to describe the mtDNA haplogroups "(A, B4b, C, D4, D5 or D5a, or F1b)" which 89% of the Xiongnu sequences belong to. Yet let us consider sourced information from:

• Haplogroup A (mtDNA)

  Its highest frequencies are among Native Americans, its largest overall population is in East Asia, and its greatest variety (which suggests its origin point) is in East Asia. Thus, it might have originated in and spread from the Far East.^[5]

• South East Asia.^[6]

• the Americas. In Eurasia, Haplogroup C is especially frequent among populations of arctic Siberia, such as Nganasans, Dolgans, Yakuts, Evenks, Evens, Yukaghirs, and Koryaks.^[8][9][10] Haplogroup C is one of five mtDNA haplogroups found in the indigenous peoples of the Americas,^[7] the others being A, B, D, and X
  . The subclades C1b, C1c, C1d, and C4c are found in the first people of the Americas. C1a is found only in Asia.

• Haplogroup D (mtDNA)

  D4 (3010, 8414, 14668): The subclade D4 is the most frequently occurring mtDNA haplogroup among modern populations of northern East Asia [many examples to follow]
  D5'6 (16189) is mainly found in East Asia and Southeast Asia

• Haplogroup F (mtDNA)

  Haplogroup F is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup. The clade is most common in East Asia and Southeast Asia.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] It has not been found among Native Americans.[18]

On Latest revision as of 11:43, 4 May 2022 POV-pushing. She selectively used Vásáry (2009) to argue for "a debated

Basarab dynasty

was of Vlach origin.

Erminwin (talk) 18:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xiongnu, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tiele and Khitan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xiongnu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Loufan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Turkic history, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiele.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Malicious editing by Erminwin

You've made multiple edits on the Luandi and have continuesly being making edits on their names supposed Iranic origin by using a source from Anno Dybo, in particular one of Anno Dybo's Turkic studies that doesn't mention anything on the subject of the r(h) wan-de. Her source is a source on TURKIC language comparison, its a source on proto Turkic Reconstruction nothing to do with the Xiongnu as you can see from page 6 to 9. This is the third time in fact that you've continued to edit in her same source, that you're using to fabricate information that ISN'T there, just for your own COI and or political goals. Therefore I'm leaving this on your page and request from you that you stop the purposefully malicious editing to push your own POV based on non existed information.. And ask you to stop using random sources in the hope that no one checks it. Mrsecurity39 392 (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @
  Mann Mann:: Methinks Mrsecurity39 392 doth lie and psychologically project too much (credits to William Shakespeare).Erminwin (talk) 20:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Disambiguation link notification for October 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bagua, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wuji.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin into Bashkirs. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I will do so properly in the future!Erminwin (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prolific new editor in Hunnic topics

Do you have an opinion on the edits of this user in Hunnic topics Giray Altay? I haven't seen any overt problem on main pages but I'm a bit concerned when something like Hunnic cuisine pops up, even though I can't see anything wrong with the page or its citations immediately. He's been making many, many new pages related to the Huns.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@

Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans and Gesta Hungarorum (II) / Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum, respectively), written several centuries after the deaths of Attila's, Ernak's and Csaba's. Erminwin (talk) 17:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi @Ermenrich:, I gently asked you to ping me before, you never did it, fine. But you should at least let me know when you talk about me or my edits with other users. I thought maybe you forgot both times, but you actually used a no ping template here. If there's anything wrong with any of the pages I created, or part of them, you should report it on the specific page, and if you have any doubt about them you could ask me first. And if you have anything against the topics I currently like, well, you should keep it to yourself, with all due respect, because each editor can freely choose which topics to edit. And just so you know, I am not making paid editing for any Huns. The last time I checked they were extinct.--Giray Altay (talk) 17:17, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin:, same with you, would be nice to let me know when some of my edits are discussed, so I can defend myself. I am willing to discuss the Attilid dynasty page or any other pages I created, but not in this fashion. You have doubts: place a template there, or open a discussion on the talk page of any given article.--Giray Altay (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Giray Altay:: "so I [Giray Altay] can defend myself" Wikipedia is not about you. EDIT: Why did you also mention "making paid editing" out of the blue? Why so insecure? Erminwin (talk) 17:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin: I am indeed an insecure person. However, in this case it wasn't meant that way. It's about defending my creation. It's like: I don't think I made any mistakes in the articles because I cross-checked them several times, but if I did, let me know so I can prove you wrong. Maybe I am not so insecure after all. Just kidding. But really, just tell me directly if there is something wrong next time, so I/we can fix it.

Regarding the Hunnic cuisine: that article is indeed stupid, I regret publishing it. I was bored to death, so kept writing the article till it was ready for publishing. Then read it over, and felt stupid. But I had spent quite a while on it, so I said to myself I might as well publish it, and so I did. If you propose its deletion I would agree. But I actually like the Attilid dynasty. I can answer your doubts about it, but maybe it's best to discuss there?--Giray Altay (talk) 17:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT after your edit. It was sarcasm, because, you know, the Huns are extinct. I said that because it almost (almost) looked like @Ermenrich: wanted to find something wrong with my edits, but couldn't, so started to doubt the editor. I thought you were more cooperative, and talked about insecurity to make me feel comfortable, to help a new editor, as an old and experienced editor should. But after your EDIT I think you ma also want to find something wrong with me, not the edits, which you know are fine.--Giray Altay (talk) 17:54, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Giray Altay "But after your EDIT I think you ma also want to find something wrong with me" I, Erminwin, apologize to you, Giray Altay. That EDIT will be stricken through.Erminwin (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@

List of rulers of the Huns, which I did not create, but recently expanded quite a lot.--Giray Altay (talk) 18:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

@

WP:ANI or a similar venue. It's also not normal to ping an editor every time you mention them - presumably you have talk:Huns on your watch list after all. Just be aware that this topic is subject to a lot of sock puppetry and nationalist POV pushing and that new editors who start making lots of changes are naturally viewed a little suspiciously.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

@Ermenrich, I don't know if it is normal or not but it is not nice. Even if what you say is true, the editor has to actually be a cause concern, but I don't see how any of my edits can cause concern except the Hun cuisine one. But if you had concerns about it you could at least try to discuss with me first. At Talk:Huns we were discussing civilly, might've continued there. I get your point of concern regarding sock puppetry and nationalists, because I know these are issues in Wikipedia. I would've never thought that also this topic was "hot", though, what with the Huns being extinct.--Giray Altay (talk) 20:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT then of course there are people (Hungarians, some Turks) claiming descent from them.--Giray Altay (talk) 20:35, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're one of a number of a new editors who have suddenly popped up editing Hunnic topics, which is why I want to make sure everything is on the up-and-up. The Huns are an integral part of Turkic and Hungarian nationalist movements' self-understanding so they attract quite a bit of attention.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ErmenrichSound strange because as you know I have been editing Hunnic topics for a while but I haven't noticed other users working on this topic. In fact I thought the topic was neglected by editors in general. Whatever your concern, if I haven't told you already: I am not a nationalist, and there is nothing else malicious with my edits. I have just decided to expand the topic of Huns, which I considered neglected, as much and as good as I could.

Also, even if I was a Hungarian or Turkish or whatever nationalist, what do you care as long as the contributions are constructive?--Giray Altay (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@

Attilid dynasty's talk page. That aroused my suspicion because this isn't the first time I saw unsourced, almost certainly pseudo-historical claims like it. Here are some from a past version of History of Turkmenistan

:

The Parthian Kingdom succumbed in 224 AD to the Sasanids – rulers of Iran. At the same time, several tribal groups—including in the Huns of Kushan controlled Balkan Province in 91 AD according to Tacitus and later the Alans according to Chinese records — were moving into Turkmenistan from the east and north. Although Ancient Persian traditions always mentioned the Turanian control of the area, these records provided the first independently corroborated evidence of nomadic Non-Iranian peoples into the area of Turkmenistan.
By the early 4th century AD, a Kushan noble from the Balkan province called Malkar of Khi, had become leader of the Huns settled there. In alliance with Dulo the Alan king on the Volga Delta, Malkar went on to forge ten tribes into the first proto-Turkic tribal confederation. The Dulo clan's first proto-Turkic Empire spread its influence as far east as the sub-continent under the Kitolo and as far west as Central Europe under Attila's Dulo. Wresting control of southern Turkmenistan from the Sasanian Empire in the 5th century AD, Malkar's "Dulo" Confederation of Ten Tribes caused a migration of Khurasanis into Dagestan as the Caucasian Avars. As a result of this backfire, the Sabirs settled there were forced to attack the Alan strongholds of the Dulo Ten Tribe Confederation in the Kuban steppe. To strengthen their position, Malkar's Confederation of Ten Tribes now under the leadership of Ernakh entered into an alliance with Byzantium at Phanagoria in the 460s AD. In the 550s AD, the Caucasian Avars pushed further conquering Phanagoria and forcing Sarosios of the Alans to petition Byzantium for land. Within a few years, Dulo's Ten Tribe Confederation in Balkan Province allied themselves to the Ashinas forming the Western part of the Gokturk Empire and were able to snatch Phanagoria back from the Avars renaming the Sabirs as Khazars under the rule of Kaghan Kazarig. By exposing the Avars' close ties to Persia, once again the Ten Tribes of the Dulo entered into alliance with Byzantium. The Dulo clans Ten Tribes soon seceded from the Gokturks to become the Western Turkic Kaghanate which thrived until 630s. They appointed Dulo Kaghan Kubrat to establish the short-lived state of Old Great Bolgary disintegrating upon his death with the majority migrated west where they carried out the first Hungarian conquest in 677 under Kotrag who also went up the volga to establish Bolgary, and Batbayan's Balkars who settled down with the Circassians north of the Caucasus. The Kara-khazars in the Balkan Province eventually revolted against the Aq-Khazars to establish the Yabghu Oghuz State of the Kara dynasty which produced the Seljuks who thrived until their dynasty was taken over by Temujin.
At this time much of the population was already in settlements around the fertile river valleys along the Amu Darya, and Merv and Nisa became centers of sericulture (the raising of silkworms). A busy caravan route, connecting Tang Dynasty China and the city of Baghdad (in modern Iraq), passed through Merv. Thus, the city of Merv constituted an important prize for any conqueror.

Erminwin (talk) 03:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin Why do you constantly fail to assume good faith? From the very first moment, you both tried to find something wrong with my edits, failing to observe a pillar of Wikipedia, that of assuming good faith. I found that content on the page Hunor and Magor, which I invite you to read:

After the

Thuringians. But as Hunor and Mogor were Ménrót's first born, they journeyed separately from their father in tents. Now it happened one day when they had gone out hunting in the Meotis marshes that they encountered a hind in the wilderness. As they went in pursuit of it, it fled before them. Then it disappeared from their sight altogether, and they could not find it no matter how long they searched. But as they were wandering through these marshes, they saw that the land was well suited for grazing cattle. They then returned to their father, and after obtaining his permission they took all their possessions and went to live in the Meotis marshes. ... So they entered the Meotis marshes and remained there for five years without leaving. Then in the sixth year they went out, and when by chance they discovered that the wives and children of the sons of Belar were camped in tents in a lonely place without their menfolk, they carried them off with all their belongings as fast as they could into the Meotis marshes. Two daughters of Dula, prince of the Alans, happened to be among the children who were seized. Hunor took one of them in marriage and Mogor the other, and to these women all the Huns owe their origin.

— Simon of Kéza: Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum^[11][12]

Daughters of Dula, also spelled Dulo.

List of rulers of the Huns

, which I had even previously invited you to check.

If you really can't assume good faith, Erminwin, then at least think before talking and prepare a good accusation. Giray Altay (talk) 09:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

1. ^ Hucker 1975: 136
2. ^ Henning 1948
3. ^ Sims-Williams 2004
4. ^ Savelyev, Alexander; Jeong, Choongwon (May 10, 2020). "Early nomads of the Eastern Steppe and their tentative connections in the West". Cambridge. The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic (Late Proto-Turkic, to be more precise).
5. PMID 18313026. Archived from the original
   (PDF) on 2009-03-25. Retrieved 2009-11-19.
6. ^ Yong-Gang Yao et al. 2001, Phylogeographic Differentiation of Mitochondrial DNA in Han Chinese Am J Hum Genet. 2002 March; 70(3): 635–651
7. ^ ^{a b} Haplogroup C.
8. PMID 18452887
   .
9. ^ Cite error: The named reference Duggan2013 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
10. PMID 23782551.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link
    )
11. ^ Simon of Kéza: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 1.4–5), pp. 13–17.
12. ^ Kristó 1996, p. 119. sfn error: no target: CITEREFKristó1996 (help)
13. ^ Edinen t͡sentŭr za nauka i podgotovka na kadri po istorii͡a; United Center for Research and Training in History (1988). Bulgarian Historical Review Volumes 16-17 (in French). Publishing House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. p. 78. Retrieved 17 November 2022.
14. ^ Uralic and Altaic Series Volume 66, Issues 5-6 (in German). Indiana University. 1966. Retrieved 17 November 2022.

@

WP:NOTHERE is to be applied. I detected the same problems - direct interpretation of primary sources, PoV pushing - when editing the article about Samuel Aba (see the quite esoteric Talk page discussions). Borsoka (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

To @Erminwin and Ermenrich:: this is a user that I earnestly believe is carrying out a sophisticated Wikipedia:Civil POV at Samuel Aba. They are trying to hide part of the story regarding Samuel Aba by all means, and I can't understand why. This is why I reported them to the administrators. It looks a bit excessive I know, but that is a Balkanic topic and this user is literally groping on mirrors to push their POV. I warmly invite you to have a look at Samuel Aba and its talk page, and to give therein your opinion regarding that matter.

@

WP:BULLY, and now you are trying to tempt two other editors to join you. Do not think that at the administrators' noticeboard they didn't take notice of you. What you are doing at Samuel Aba's article is wrong, as it is what you are trying to do now. The fact I am a new user and you aren't doesn't give you the right to act in this fashion. And nothing gives you the right to push your POV at that article.--Giray Altay (talk) 18:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

@

WP:BULLY on Borsoka's part. Here's Bbb223's judgment at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Case_of_WP:BULLY_and_WP:CPP_I_have_trouble_handling_alone

:

This is a content dispute. The OP is a new editor, having created their account about one month ago. There is no bullying or incivility on the part of the two reported editors. It is the OP who, through their impatience, is causing problems in reaching a resolution on the dispute. The OP should go back to the article Talk page, behave better, and not be so quick to report other users.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:27, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Also @

WP:BULLY (at least to me).20:47, 21 November 2022 (UTC) Erminwin (talk) 20:47, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Well, it seems obvious something's going on here. Any sock-like tendencies recognizable? Otherwise, I guess we should just keep an eye on them.--Ermenrich (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Erminwin, I thought you were an objective person I guess I was wrong. That does not borderline anything, it is a useful advise, and only if you have a prejudice against me can you read it as bullying. If you are mad because I corrected you twice, I am sorry, but it was inevitable, and it is not my fault. From the first moment, you and Ermenrich tried to find something wrong with my edits, couldn't, so tried to find something wrong with the editor. Why? I don't know, my Turkic username, my "many, many edits on the topic of the Huns", as Ermenrich said. Whatever the reason, you lacked good faith, and without that it is impossible to move forward.

You don't need to tag team against me. I will myself leave as soon as the dispute at Samuel Aba is over. This way justice will be done at that page, Borsoka will not get what they want, and because of the two of you Wikipedia will lose my contributions.--Giray Altay (talk) 21:00, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Giray Altay "From the first moment, you and Ermenrich tried to find something wrong with my edits" I did not. I simply tried to fact-check your edits.

"couldn't" I could and I did. You incorrectly claimed that the Árpáds descended from Prince Csaba, which I had to correct.

"as soon as the dispute at Samuel Aba is over. This way justice will be done at that page, Borsoka will not get what they want," I'll wait. Know this, collateral descendants are still descendants. I cannot read Borsoka's mind to know why they did whatever they did, yet I think Borsoka was correct when they decided to keep the wording "According to the anonymous author of the Gesta Hungarorum, Samuel's family descended from two 'Cuman' chieftains, Ed and Edemen, who received 'a great land in the forest of Mátra'[non-primary source needed] from Árpád, Grand Prince of the Hungarians around 900." in the Samuel Aba article.Erminwin (talk) 22:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin, I was (and am) grateful for your correction regarding Csaba, having told you already that correction is quite fine. And I truly thank you because, without you, now not only that article but also the List of Rulers of the Huns article would be making false claims due to my mistake. So again, thanks.

Regarding the issue at Samuel Aba, I am afraid you haven't gotten the kernel of the argument (and I don't blame you, because the discussion at that talk page is quite long); the other editor, Borsoka, does not want to include in the article that also Simon of Keza (beside the

Illuminated Chronicle) mentions that the Aba descended from Attila. Now this is well-know, you only need to check the Aba

article in WP, which includes the full quote. However, they just don't want that piece in that article. Reason is unknown of course, but consider that by only reporting the 14th-century source's claim of Aba's Attilid descent, and implying that the 13th-century (1-century earlier) Anonymous doesn't make such claim, you have 1 source claiming Attilid descent vs. another, one century earlier source that doesn't, thus making the Attilid descent seem less likely. By reporting Keza you would have two sources claiming Attilid descent, one written in the same century as the Anonymous' at that.

To avoid inserting Keza in the article, the user first cited OR to undo my edits (understantable, I had indeed just used Keza, a primary source; thinking that the matter is so obvious that it would be enough); but then, after I brought up five sources, they started to grope on mirrors to keep Keza out. First, the sources are old, then they are primary sources (even though I explained them several times that the one, only one source they are talking about is in fact the commentary of a 21st-century editor, Frank Schraer, for Central European University, thus a secondary source). I came up with more source, up to arriving to eight sources (all this just to mention Keza) and they keep on removing the sources and that part of the article mentioning Keza. Besides, they always get rid of the templates (cn; no primary source; etc.) I added, legitimately (since they contest one source that has neither a link nor a quote, in one case; and a primary source, in another). To check the sources and their quality, just visit the talk page at Samuel Aba. Giray Altay (talk) 22:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Giray Altay: "because of the two of you Wikipedia will lose my contributions." WP:You are not irreplaceable.00:25, 22 November 2022 (UTC) Erminwin (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin: When did I say I am irreplaceable? Also, why are you replying now to that sentence (1), which you had already seen 2. Your and my last replies were practical, dealing with edits and articles, yet you went back to try and start another argument against the editor (me). Meanwhile, you ignore the practical message.-Giray Altay (talk) 09:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How likely is it that Giray Altay is WorldCreaterFighter? You have some experience with him. Krakkos? Might there be a connection to these other accounts that have sprung up this year? OrionNimrod, Gyalu22, Volgabulgari, Nihiluskyloren, Mrsecurity39 392. There are a number of others, but these are the most recent ones.--Ermenrich (talk) 00:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am convinced that Giray Altay is not a new editor because they knows several nuances of WP policies but they and WorldCreaterFigther do not look related. I think Giray Altay, Gyalu22 and OrionNimrod are not related either: their style of communication is different. Borsoka (talk) 02:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You two have again exaggerated with breaking wiki rules, and this time took it too far. Here there are grounds for an accusation of racism as well (since how do you otherwise explain this obsession with Turkic nationalism and this fury against me?). You two have both been reported to the administrators. Erminwin has not been reported. Giray Altay (talk) 11:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi Erminwin. I'd like to have your opinion on a matter. We know that Mundus was of Attilid descent, since, as stated in his article, he was said to be of Attilid descent by Jordanes, Theophanes and John Malalas. Also, most modern historians (including Maenchen-Helfen, generally a subconscious niggler of the Huns) accepts this claim. But I found some statements by Patrick Amory that bother me. He (here), citing Croke, puts forwards that Jordanes' statement could mean that he "came from a group that was part of the Hunnic confederacy of Attila". This claim was made in response to the seeming incompatibility of an Attilid Mundus and the Gepid ruler Mundo: some scholar stated that the Hun could not also be the Gepid, another scholar argued in response that Attilid does not necessarily mean of biological Attilid (Hunnic) descent, or something like that.

I believe Amory's suggestion is preposterous but it bugs me because he is still a scholar with some influence in the topic.

This is what Jordanes said:

(English) For this Mundo, who traced his descent from the Attilani of old, had put to flight the tribe of the Gepidae and was roaming beyond the Danube [...]

(Latin) Nam hic Mundo de Attilanis quondam origine descendens Gepidarum gentem fugiens ultra Danubium [..]

(English literal) Nam (for) hic (this) Mundo (Mundo) de (of) Attilanis ([the] Attilids; Attilans; etc.) quondam (once; former; formerly; erstwhile) origine ([*] origin) descendens (descended[ed] [of; from*]) [...]

For me what Jordanes says is ever so clear and there is no room for Amory's interpretation. His conjecture is uncalled for and I believed he came up with it (or rather supported it; the idea seems to have originated with Croke) just to solve the Mundo/Mundus dilemma.

There are, of course, other reasons to believe Mundus was of Hunnic descent: he was a bandit; and had basically the same name of Attila's father.

I would like to hear your opinion. Also, while Jordanes' statement would already be enough (and Amory only refers to him), Mundus' article states that also Theophanes and John Malalas said he was Attilid. I wasn't able to find the spot where they supposedly say this, do you know anything by any chance? Giray Altay (talk) 00:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Erminwin, have you discovered what account originally added this footnote you removed [15]? Looks very similar to edits by Crovata, such as this [16].--Ermenrich (talk) 20:16, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ermenrich: User Hunan201p (who was once blocked for abusing editing privileges in 2020) was the person who had added that note, containing the exclusively Pan-Turkic kongor ("brown") etymology for Kangar, as part of this edit A on 02:47, 3 December 2022.

Recently, as part of this edit B User Bogazcili restored that problematic etymology, which I had removed. Even so, I think Bogazcili did so accidentally, because Bogazcili gave the reason for edit B as "(Reverting to version by Hunan201p (talk | contribs) at 15:45, 5 December 2022. Reverting sock changes, see talk page)"; because immediately afterwards Bogazcili made this Edit C "(→‎Kangar union (659–750): Restoring change by Erminwin)".

Erminwin (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing "problematic" or "pan-Turkic" about the Kongor etymology: it's

Andras Rona-Tas's theory from Hungarians and Europe in the Early Middle Ages: An Introduction to Early Hungarian History, page 420:^[1]

If, however, such a tribal name cropped up among the Pechenegs, the Pechenegs would certainly have associated it with their word kongor 'brown ( colour of a horse )'.

There is nothing "Pan-Turkist" or "problematic" about this author or his interpretation. I originally used a secondary source for it, as seen in "edit A", which Erminwin removed and also referred to as "Pan Turkist", unjustifiably, I might add, which is in keeping with their rather annoying habit of writing off sources as "Pan Turkist" and removing them for that reason alone.

I would also like to say that bringing up the fact I was banned in 2020, after edit warring with several sockpuppets run by an LTA who is chiefly known for their "anti-pan Turkist" stance, really looks like dirt-digging and also opens Erminwin up to cast aspersions. - Hunan201p (talk) 22:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hunan201p The reason the etymology is problematic and Pan-Turkist is because:

• you (Hunan201p) did not include other etymologies (e.g. Pritsak's proposed etymology from Tocharian *kāṅk "stone" (the secondary source has *kank [sic]), which are found on the same page 621 in that secondary source; and because of:
• your (Hunan201p's) misleading wording that Kangar is "[d]erived from Kongor, which is transliterated as 'brown', for the color of the horses they rode", which, imh, is a misinterpretation of
  • Róna-Tas, who cautiously wrote that If, however, such a tribal name cropped up among the Pechenegs, the Pechenegs would certainly have associated it with their word kongor 'brown ( colour of a horse )'. Word A's being associated with another word A does not mean that word A is definitely derived from word B (or vice versa) (ever heard of folk etymology and false cognate?);
    • in context: In the chapter on the Pechenegs the Emperor writes that ‘Kangar’ was not a common designation for all of the Pechenegs, but only for the people of three provinces. These were more valorous and noble than the rest. In the chapter on the Magyars, Porphyrogenitus claims that the Pechenegs were “previously” called ‘Kangar’. What exactly he meant by “previously” is a good question. Researchers must have been puzzled by the peculiar course ethnic names took in those days. The ethnic name ‘Kangar’ has been shown to have existed in the Caucasus region as early as in the 6th century, before the emergence of the Turkic peoples. It cannot be inferred from the Syrian sources which report on the Kangars exactly what their ethnicity and language was. Possibly they encountered the Pechenegs later, but there is no evidence to support this. If, however, such a tribal name cropped up among the Pechenegs, the Pechenegs would certainly have associated it with their word kongor ‘brown (colour of a horse)’. In which case we are again looking at the case of an ethnic name established by means of a popular etymology, as in the case of the ethnic name Turk (see also pp. 279-281).
  • The secondary source which includes Róna-Tas's proposal yet still cautiously words it on that page 621 as: András Róna-Tas thinks that the Pecheneg people joined the Caucasian name Kangar with their own name kongor 'brown (horse)' (Róna-Tas 1996, 325-6).

Who is the intellectually incompetent (very likely deliberately) one here?

Erminwin (talk) 22:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Erminwin: I am seeing nothing in this wall of text that demonstrates how either of these quoted sources/interpretations are "Pan Turkist" or problematic. You might also note that I never accused you of intellectual incompetence, nor did I imply that you are incompetent.

I noted very plainly in my original edit that 'kongor' is transliterated as the Pecheneg word for brown horse, which is what both of the quoted sources say. To make all this fuss over the word "derived", up to and including accusations of "Pan-Turkism", is bordering on charades. While I could have worded that note better, more sources support a Turkic and equine pigmentation-related origin for the tribal name "Kangar" than a Tocharian one, and not including a less popular Tocharian theory does not make my edits or these sources "Pan-Turkist".

And you may also note that I didn't revert or challenge your edit, partly because I actually see merit in not posting etymologies for every Turkic tribe that ever existed on to that article, but also because I don't care about this. You can rest assured I'm not going to take up a Wiki-jihad with you over this microscopic bit of Turkic history, so why don't we let bygones be bygones and put an end to this needless hostility? I hope you enjoy your holiday break and have a happy new year. - Hunan201p (talk) 23:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hunan201p Are you sure you've read Zimonyi (2015:69) carefully?

On page 69 Zimonyi wrote:

• According to Györffy the Uyghurs defeated the Pechenegs, who escaped to the land of the people having piebald horses, being north and northwest of the Aral Sea. The Kangars might be identical with the Kängäräs and the people having piebald horses. Györffy argued that the Pecheneg tribal names consisted of two elements, the first elements in general the colouration of the horses: yavdï 'light-clored', küverči 'blue-grey', qabuqsïn 'cinnamon', suru 'gray', qara 'black', boro 'gray', yazï 'brown', bula 'bunt'. Thus, this might reflected a historical connection with the people having piebald horses. Györffy proposed a compromise combining the possible migration routes.

Did Zimonyi explicitly state that Györffy had explicitly "derived" (or used any other synonym to denote morphological derivation) Kangar(s) & Kängäräs from any Turkic word meaning "piebald"? NO! Just because Györffy's proposed Kangars = Kängäräs = the people having piebald horses, that still does not at all mean that Györffy thought that the words Kangars & Kängäräs must have been morphological derivations of a Turkic word for an equine coat-color.

Also, who were the "people having piebald horses"? Zimonyi's answer: "the Ha-la-yun-log, which name can be construed as ala yuntlug meaning 'having piebald horses' in Turkic." (on page 68, which immediately precedes page 69. So clearly, Turkic ala yuntlug 'having piebald horses' is the etymology of the tribal name Ha-la-yun-log, not the tribal name "Kangar". For more on the Ha-la-yun-log, see the article Alat tribe (which I did contribute to, & will do so in the future with information you've procured in Zimonyi 2015).

So, Györffy (1990:99-100) (apud Zimonyi 2015:69) does not at all "support a Turkic and equine pigmentation-related origin for the tribal name 'Kangar'". So your ssertion "more sources support a Turkic and equine pigmentation-related origin for the tribal name "Kangar" than a Tocharian one" is based on misreading of the sources.

Even so, my sincere thanks for your wishing me an enjoyable "holiday break" and "a happy new year"!

00:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC) Erminwin (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of any disputes I have taken to some of your edits, I think you are a really outstanding editor and that most of your edits have gone a long way towards improving Wikipedia, and in particular, Turkic-related articles.

And I can't emphasize how completely disinterested I am in this Kangar etymology business. Nevertheless I will respond since you think I have 'mis-read' the source.

You asked: Did Zimonyi explicitly state that Györffy had explicitly "derived" (or used any other synonym to denote morphological derivation) Kangar(s) & Kängäräs from any Turkic word meaning "piebald"? The answer is, of course, no. As you pointed out, Györffy only argued that the Pecheneg tribal names consisted of various Turkic names, all of which were related to the pigmentation of their horses, which is nothing new, several other authors made this observation before him. It was Zimonyi himself, not Györffy, who made the observation that the Kangar are identical with "the people having piebald horses".

Mykola Melknyk (2022) p.78: It is possible that the ethnic name Κάγγαρ, used by Constantine Porphyrogenitus, derives from Kängäräs “and the people having piebald horses”: Zimonyi, Muslim Sources on the Magyars, 69.

You're looking too hard for things Zimonyi wrote about Györffy and not at what Zimonyi himself argued. Perhaps you will say "he didn't specify a direct morphological derivation from a Turkic word". Doesn't matter. My description of the source was accurate.

Really, I'd hate to think that you are sacrificing any time off your life on this discussion about a topic that I'm never gonna edit around again. Is this really worth it when so many articles need repair? - Hunan201p (talk) 03:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hunan201p Without this observation of yours, I might as well have wasted

Is this [you [Erminwin] [...] sacrificing any time off your [Erminwin's] life on this discussion about a topic that I[Hunan201p]'m never gonna edit around again}] really worth it[?] Of course, no! This rhetorical question of yours doubles as a wake-up call for me.

when so many articles need repair Your observation is correct!

So far I have merely thanked you for your well-wishing; therefore, I wish you a merry holiday season and a happy new year!

Erminwin (talk) 04:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cumans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kipchak.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Erminwin,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Mann Mann (talk) 03:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Hi, Erminwin. How are you doing? I'm here to ask you for a small favor. The aforementioned page is currently under a GA review, and a reviewer posted a question as part of a review process regarding your respective addition to that article. It would be really helpful if you could give me a hand on this and provide your valuable expertise. Thanks in advance. Regards, Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 14:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Visioncurve The article already passed not one, but two GA reviews; several of its claims need to be sourced or rewritten to better reflect the sources' opinions tho'. Whenever I'll have time I'll again examine the sources, locate more sources, and contribute. Erminwin (talk) 15:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed the point, I asked to comment on your own addition to that page regarding the history of the term, not to go through the whole article or its sources. Thanks anyway, Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 04:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an

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.Volgabulgari (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I see I have not added an etymology for Urus. I didn't take the initial etymology from Clauson's dictionary but from Peter B. Golden's book, Nomads and Their Neighbours in the Russian Steppe: Turks, Khazars and Qipchaqs, page 42. He presents among others Franz Altheim's theory that the 'rsyyh, perhaps truly called the Ors-iyah or Urs-iyah, came from urus- "to fight," i.e. "soldier", with an Arabic ending. Later on in the book Golden builds on the Ors/Urs-iyah interpretation for his Aorsi derived etymology too. Minorsky's reading of the Arabic as "Arsiyah" and H.W. Bailey's "al-(l)arisyyah" seems to have stuck around in the vernacular.

Peter Golden's source for Altheim: F. Altheim, Geschichte der Hunnen (Berlin, 1959), I, pp. 278-279

~ Gibby01 (talk) 02:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I will source that in the article Cumans! Erminwin (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thought this might be of interest to you: https://deadline.com/2023/05/little-mermaid-box-office-profit-loss-halle-bailey-1235383099/

Have a read. 76.8.213.252 (talk) 20:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khagan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mongolic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xianbei, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tungusic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Happy New Year!

Erminwin,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Mann Mann (talk) 04:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.