User talk:Alexis Ivanov

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of RussianDewey (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

You were a great mentoree Alexis, and I hope we can work together in the future. Remember that you can always drop a note on my talk page for any reason. Now down it in one! Irondome (talk) 03:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Improper reversion

Your reversion was not appropriate. By convention, removal of a post from a talk page is considered evidence that the editor has read the post. With some rare limitations which do not apply here, editors are allowed to remove anything they choose from their talk page.--S Philbrick (Talk) 15:12, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Understood now. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seljuk Turks

I had noticed your "discussion" and have been searching for some source(s). To suggest the Seljuk Turks did not speak Oghuz Turkic(or some Turkish dialect) is nonsense. To be able to write it out in the proper script, however, may take some effort(or a linguist). Anyway, I did find these two sources.

The Great Seljuk Empire, by A.C.S. Peacock, page 181-182, "Turkish remained the every-day language of court, and was probably much more widely used than the scanty surviving evidence suggests. Tughril relied on his vizier Kunduri to translate from Arabic and Persian into Turkish for him, and Turkish songs were sung at the wedding of Tughril to the caliph's daughter..[....].. The most telling evidence, however, of the importance of Turkish is the great Turkish-Arabic dictionary, the Diwan Lughat al-Turk, compiled in Baghdad for Caliph al-Muqtadi by the emigre Qarakhanid prince Mahmud al-Kashgari.

FYI, Al-Muqtadi lived from 1056 to February 1094.

The Ghaznavid and Seljuk Turks: Poetry as a Source for Iranian History, by G.E. Tetley, page 142, "That the Seljuk warriors and Oghuz shepherds of the 11th century were at first illiterate in Turkic is shown-among other things-by the way they adapted the Arabic alphabet(vowels and /?/) to what they spoke when they did decide to write their own Turkic dialect at the end of the 13th century."

The question mark is a symbol that resembles an "n" combined with the "j". I was unable to find something that looked like that. Sorry.

Hopefully this helps.--Kansas Bear (talk) 05:03, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know that word you are talking about, it is widely used in Turkic languages, and I tried to pronounce it, I remember Mengli Giray having that letter in his name. Also thanks for the A.C.S. Peacock reference, I think he is a leading scholar in the Seljuq studies, that book just came out last year, I will try to get my hands on it. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 12:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis I found another source;

Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, by Mehmet Fuat Köprülü, Gary Leiser, Robert Dankoff, page 207, "...become the local language of the regions invaded by the Oghuz tribes, especially Anatolia. The Oghuz literary language, which had taken form and developed even before the Oghuz settled in Anatolia, i.e. while they were still living in the Syr Darya area, retained its basic features, although it quite naturally underwent some minor changes in Anatolia. Thus, Western or Southern Turkish, which is known as Seljuk Turkish until the founding of the Ottoman state and Ottoman Turkish thereafter, is simply a developed form of the old Oghuz dialect.
After the establishment of the Seljuk state in Anatolia, Turkish became a written language, but we cannot determine exactly when. Oghuz Turkish had been used for written coorespondence even before the Seljuks settled in Anatolia." --Kansas Bear (talk) 07:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansas Bear: Thanks for these sources, I'm going to bookmark them and research more, thank you very much Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:10, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

seljuk empire-seljuk dynasty

I appreciate the efforts of Alexis.thanks

seljuk turks living oghuz yabgu state.they did not live in Ghaznavids domination.They conquered iran. they adopted persian culture and language. but they are not assimilated(persianate). Seljuk dynasty dynastic-military-army-daily talk language=oghuz turkic yes seljuk empire official language persian.but dynasty not persian speaking. They did not even know persian language.so persian language interpreters , and queen in the Persian had to turn around.

The military says that the Persian language. this is really a ridiculous situation. they were people with a culture of warriors and warrior. so the persian language was never army.--Osman bey (talk) 12:32, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree they lived in Oghuz Yabghu state, but you have to remember the main cities of Khurasan they conquered were Ghazanvid cities, Nishapur and Marw and many others. So it wasn't Ghaznavid domination 100% but it was Ghaznavid lands, but we all know what happened, Battle of Dandaqan in 1040, Yes they spoke Oghuz Turkic. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Seljuks spoke Oghuz Turkic, one of many Turkic dialects. However, the Seljuk leadership and military had already begun using the Persian language while living among the Ghaznavids in Khurasan. Throughout the period of Seljuk imperial expansion the rulers of the Seljuks used Persian in government and sponsored the writing of Persian literature. But the great numbers of Turkic nomads, herders, and raiding bands whose migration westward coincided with the rise of the Seljuks spoke Oghuz Turkic or other Turkic dialects and continued to do so. A century later, when the Mongols, another Turkic people, overran much of the Middle East and Central Asia, they brought still more Turkic-speaking soldiers and migrants into the region. Stokes, Jamie, ed. (2008). Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Africa and the Middle East. New York: Facts On File. ISBN 9780816071586. p 615.

Seljuqs were Persianized before gaining any power. Oghuz Turkic was the language of "Turkic nomads, herders, and raiding bands" and they have nothing to do with Seljuqs as a ruling dynasty. The source is talking about Turkic migration during Seljuq era. That's it. Beside that, the language was Oghuz Turkic, and there is no surviving evidence of that language as used by Seljuqs. Modern Turkish specially with Latin alphabet has nothing to do with Seljuqs -- Kouhi (talk) 09:07, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Showing in this way reveals the source of ignorance on the subject. Mongols not turkic people and turkic speaking. mongol people originate eastern asia(manchuria)

seljuks not persianized.This means that assimilated. they were adopted persian culture and language. persianized and adopted. it has another meaning. seljuks adopted not assimilate. I'm not saying to Turkish nationalism. but (kouhi) trying to convert them to the persian empire and Doing enmity. It should be unbiased on this issue.--Osman bey (talk) 13:28, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, don't worry we will discuss this at feature length in the talk page. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 13:57, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at [[:Talk:Kara-Khanid Khanate[edit]]], is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you must to edit your own comments, by all means do it, although striking through your comments is better. Do not delete other editor's comments. Adam in MO Talk 02:57, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Our colleague makes an important point Alexis. Do read it carefully and please do not alter other colleagues postings. This is part of your learning curve, so please do not do it. I was like you 30 years ago. Now I take time. Learn from an old man ;) Irondome (talk) 03:08, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, also can you look who is 94.176.80.243 and 188.158.99.4 , they are a clear sock puppet from someone. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

seljuk leaders

hello alexis please complained Kouhi.enmity-chauvanism-vandalism-racism doing. Please see the changes that have been made. Please contact the authorized person.--88.251.253.214 (talk) 19:49, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry things are under control. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis is not my purpose edit war. but that they do injustice and hostility.I did not hurt the page. I do not want to fight. Turkish people must be added the names of the people as it concerns directly.I do not want war but please fix this issue. Is that in all the leading page

--88.251.246.73 (talk) 14:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, I am working on it even though it is slow, in the mean time, try registering. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:14, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NW Sasanian Persia - Caucasian Albania - Balasagan

Hey Alexis, I noticed you being involved in several articles of that era, hence, I wondered whether you would be willing to create a minor section sometime in the future on the Arab military campaigns in the area of Caucasian Albania/Albania (satrapy)/Balasagan during the Muslim conquest of Persia. Doesn't need to be anything spectacular, just a few lines of a new section would be great on itself. It's actually the only region of the Sasanian realm that's kinda lacking on the article. Yes, the article is, quality wise, in a very poor state, but at least the "basic" headlines are "kind of" there except for, seemingly, the conquests/campaigns in C. Albania/Balasagan. Let me know if this would be something that you would be willing to do sometime. Bests and take care - LouisAragon (talk) 05:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Peacock Comment

I'm not going to edit war with you about it, but it isn't a good practice to direct people to an article that doesn't exist as you did here. You should talk to your mentor about it. They'll clear it up for you. Cheers mate!--Adam in MO Talk 03:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted it Alexis Ivanov (talk) 04:04, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abu'l-Fadl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kunya. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Katie^talk 19:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@KrakatoaKatie: Even after he insulted me, excellent job Katie. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Mamluk

Template:Infobox Mamluk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 13:32, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for harassing other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GorillaWarfare (talk) 17:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Campaignbox Mughal–Maratha Wars

Template:Campaignbox Mughal–Maratha Wars has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 23:59, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Message

@Qed237: Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments, I hope you can widen your eyes and read, and stop interfering in my talk page, I'm already tired from people like you. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 18:09, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DRN notice: Jesus

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Jtrevor99 (talk) 14:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Alexis Ivanov (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25587 was submitted on Jun 14, 2019 04:53:57. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 04:53, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Campaignbox Lithuanian–Muscovite War (1368–1372)

Template:Campaignbox Lithuanian–Muscovite War (1368–1372) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]