User contributions for 5.25.168.133

19 April 2021

• 20:4820:48, 19 April 2021 diff hist −417‎ Kâhta ‎ The reference in question, which is publicly available, provides no evidence, reference or proof or claim of independent research on the claim of the tribal membership or ethnic character of the inhabitants of the town. Not only that, the baseless claim is in regards to the period of 1915-1916 and the half a decade after that. It has no relevance to the present day. I will not be engaging in talks regarding something so obvious and easily verifiable. Do not revert. Editwars will be reported. Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:4620:46, 19 April 2021 diff hist −168‎ Samsat ‎ Editwars will not be tolerated. The source not only needs to be verified but is decades old! The population has changed significantly since then especially with the influx of Syrians and Turks from Gaziantep. I will not be spending time to research and provide as reference what the actual makeup of the town is, mainly because there is not likely to be a reliable source but also because I don't have to since I'm not making a claim one way or the other. Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit Possible vandalism
• 20:4520:45, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ Stop the baseless accusations of editwarring. Especially those that do not have the language required to verify the source. As mentioned in previous edits, the SETA source provides no evidence and is unreliable. The other two sources are available online and absolutely do not make any claims regarding the ethnic majority of Adiyaman. Bingol University paper only refers to Adıyaman as one of the places where Kurds live ("Kürtlerin yaşadığı bölgeler..."). The other political science journal art... Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:4320:43, 19 April 2021 diff hist −168‎ Samsat ‎ Editwars will not be tolerated. The source not only needs to be verified but is decades old! The population has changed significantly since then especially with the influx of Syrians and Turks from Gaziantep. I will not be spending time to research and provide as reference what the actual makeup of the town is, mainly because there is not likely to be a reliable source but also because I don't have to since I'm not making a claim one way or the other. Most villages' pages here do not have cla... Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:4120:41, 19 April 2021 diff hist −998‎ Adıyaman ‎ Nisanyan is neither a linguist or historian. His speculations are largely evidence free. Tags: Manual revert Reverted section blanking Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:4120:41, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ Stop the baseless accusations of editwarring. As mentioned in previous edits, the SETA source provides no evidence and is unreliable. The other two sources are available online and absolutely do not make any claims regarding the ethnic majority of Adiyaman. Bingol University paper only refers to Adıyaman as one of the places where Kurds live ("Kürtlerin yaşadığı bölgeler..."). The other political science journal article only refers to the mixed character of the region Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:3920:39, 19 April 2021 diff hist −416‎ Kâhta ‎ The article in question, which is publicly available, provides no evidence, reference or proof or claim of independent research on the claim of the tribal membership or ethnic character of the inhabitants of the town. Not only that, the baseless claim is in regards to the period of 1915-1916 and the half a decade after that. It has no relevance to the present day. I will not be engaging in talks regarding something so obvious and easily verifiable. Do not revert. Editwars will be reported. Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:3420:34, 19 April 2021 diff hist −274‎ Samsat ‎ Some random guy from Diyarbakir Medical Association is not an acceptable source. Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:3320:33, 19 April 2021 diff hist −167‎ Samsat ‎ The source not only needs to be verified but is decades old! The population has changed significantly since then especially with the influx of Syrians and Turks from Gaziantep. I will not be spending time to research and provide as reference what the actual makeup of the town is, mainly because there is not likely to be a reliable source but also because I don't have to since I'm not making a claim one way or the other. Most villages' pages here do not have claim regarding their ethnic make u... Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:2920:29, 19 April 2021 diff hist −417‎ Kâhta ‎ The article in question, which is publicly available, provides no evidence, reference or proof or claim of independent research on the claim of the tribal membership or ethnic character of the inhabitants of the town. Not only that, the baseless claim is in regards to the period of 1915-1916 and the half a decade after that. It has no relevance to the present day. I will not be engaging in talks regarding something so obvious and easily verifiable. Do not revert. Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 20:2620:26, 19 April 2021 diff hist −168‎ Samsat ‎ The source not only needs to be verified but is decades old! The population has changed significantly since then especially with the influx of Syrians and Turks from Gaziantep. Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:4719:47, 19 April 2021 diff hist +1‎ Adıyaman ‎ "There are certain exemptions to 3RR, such as reverting vandalism or clear violations of the policy on biographies of living persons; see below for details." Given that the previous claims regarding demogrpahic majority of the town reference two sources that do not make any claim regarding the ethnic majority of the town, and one source that is notoriously unreliable and evidence/research/reference-free, the repeated addition of those claims are vandalism and my corrections do not consitute e... Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:4319:43, 19 April 2021 diff hist −998‎ Adıyaman ‎ Nisanyan is neither a linguist nor a historian and provides very little to no evidence for his speculations. This sort of reasoning is not accepted in other regions' pages and hence will not be accepted here. Stop vandalizing. Tags: Manual revert Reverted section blanking Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:4219:42, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ Stop the baseless accusations of editwarring. I provided a thorough explanation of my edits, far more thorough than the usual explanations given on this site. As mentioned in previous edits, the SETA source provides no evidence and is unreliable. The other two sources are available online and absolutely do not make any claims regarding the ethnic majority of Adiyaman. Bingol University paper only refers to Adıyaman as one of the places where Kurds live ("Kürtlerin yaşadığı bölgeler..."). The... Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:2819:28, 19 April 2021 diff hist −998‎ Adıyaman ‎ Nisanyan is neither a linguist nor a historian. His claims are largely speculative. He should not be treated as a Respected Source. Tags: Manual revert Reverted section blanking Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:2619:26, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ Please stop the baseless vandalism. As mentioned in previous edits, the SETA source provides no evidence and is unreliable. The other two sources are available online and absolutely do not make any claims regarding the ethnic majority of Adiyaman. Bingol University paper only refers to Adıyaman as one of the places where Kurds live ("Kürtlerin yaşadığı bölgeler..."). The other political science journal article only refers to the mixed character of the region Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:2419:24, 19 April 2021 diff hist −417‎ Kâhta ‎ The article in question, which is publicly available, provides no evidence, reference or proof or claim of independent research on the claim of the tribal membership or ethnic character of the inhabitants of the town. Not only that, the baseless claim is in regards to the period of 1915-1916 and rhe half a decade after that. It has no relevance to the present day. Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:2019:20, 19 April 2021 diff hist −167‎ Samsat ‎ The source not onky needs to be verified but is decades old! The population has changed significantly since then especially with the influx of Syrians and Turks from Gaziantep. Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:1719:17, 19 April 2021 diff hist −41‎ Khoy ‎ I've verified both of the sources. They say what the claim here says they say. No further verification needed. Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 19:1119:11, 19 April 2021 diff hist −998‎ Adıyaman ‎ Sevan Nisanyan is not a linguist or historian and relies on speculation for almost all of his claims. Nisanyan Sozluk and his "map" are not RP. Tags: Reverted section blanking Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 18:5618:56, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ As explained previously, As mentioned in previous edit, the SETA source provides no evidence and is unreliable. The other two sources are available online and absolutely do not make any claims regarding the ethnic majority of Adiyaman. Bingol University paper only refers to Adıyaman as one of the places where Kurds live ("Kürtlerin yaşadığı bölgeler..."). The other political science journal article only refers to the mixed character of the region. Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 18:4418:44, 19 April 2021 diff hist −406‎ Adıyaman ‎ Diyarbakir Medical Association and a book called "Kurdish Awakening" are not acceptable source for the name of a city. Both are heavily ideological Kurdish irredentist nationalist sources, and someone from Diyarbakir Medical Association has no relevance on this subject whatsoever. None. Overwhelming majority of the country, international sources, locals call the city Adıyaman. Finally, "Kurdish" is not a language but a language group. Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 18:4418:44, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ I've given a very thorough explanation with direct citation to the given sources why the claim in the deleted content is not proven by the given references. They are publicly available. Please stop ideologically vandalizing the page. It is laughable to claim that my edits were unexplained. Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 18:4018:40, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ Username Semsuri needs to stop vandalizing and trolling. Reverting to previous edit. As mentioned in previous edit, the SETA source provides no evidence and is unreliable. The other two sources are available online and absolutely do not make any claims regarding the ethnic majority of Adiyaman. Bingol University paper only refers to Adıyaman as one of the places where Kurds live ("Kürtlerin yaşadığı bölgeler..."). The other political science journal article only refers to the mixed character... Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 18:3218:32, 19 April 2021 diff hist −406‎ Adıyaman ‎ Diyarbakir Medical Association and a book called "Kurdish Awakening" are not acceptable source for the name of a city. Both are heavily ideological Kurdish irredentist nationalist sources, and someone from Diyarbakir Medical Association has no relevance on this subject whatsoever. None. Overwhelming majority of the country, international sources, locals call the city Adıyaman. Finally, "Kurdish" is not a language but a language group. It has many constituents including Kurmanji, Sorani, Zaza,... Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 18:1418:14, 19 April 2021 diff hist −945‎ Adıyaman ‎ The SETA article does not provide any evidence for its claim nor any reference to any independent research. SETA is an AKP aligned think tank that is known for its sketchy research and erroneous claims. At the time the AKP was in negotiations with the PKK and frequently parroted their propoganda to intice Kurdish irredentists. The political science paper does not refer to Adiyamans demographics outside of stating that it is of mixed Turkish-Arab-Kurdish character and that there is a Kurdish p... Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 15:5615:56, 19 April 2021 diff hist −386‎ Adıyaman Province ‎ The vast majority of the people living in the province consider it part of Turkey and not part of "Turkish Kurdistan", and vote accordingly. The only people who claim Adiyaman Province as part of Turkish Kurdistan are Kurdish irredentists. Their claims are irrelevant in an encyclopedic article just as the claims of other irredentists are irrelevant in other encyclopedic articles of different regions. There is no evidence if a Kurdish majority in the province, "Encyclopedia of Islam" is not a... Tags: Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
• 15:4715:47, 19 April 2021 diff hist −587‎ Adıyaman ‎ The BBC article references the Financial Times which is not an aurhority on demographics and is just parroting Kurdish irredentist propoganda. The article makes NO mention of the ethnic makeup of the province and city other than to note its mixed Turkish-Arab-Kurdish character and that the Kurdish population is "significant". There is no proof or evidence whatsoever of a Kurdish majority in the province and city. It has historically been a Turkish region, run by Turkish states for close to 10... Tags: Manual revert Reverted references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit