User talk:Ario1234

Hello, Ario1234, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Red Director (talk) 20:57, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Hello, I'm Netherzone. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Nordic Bronze Age have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Please do not embed links to external website URLs in articles or in photo image files/captions. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 20:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vix Grave interlanguage links

Hello- I undid your revert of my changes to the interlanguage links you introduced. Can you explain why you reverted my edits? Have you familiarized yourself with the {{ill}} template and its usage? Do you find my use of that template inappropriate? Your edit summary "edited links" does not provide any explanation of your reasoning. Eric ^talk 21:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry I thought the link didn't go anywhere but I can see that clicking on 'de' or 'fr' leads to the German/French-language pages I originally wanted to link to, because there was no equivalent English-language page. Ario1234 (talk) 22:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. That ill template is a nice improvement on the old way of doing those links, because it handles multiple scenarios. Eric ^talk 22:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Layout changes

Hi Ario1234. Thanks for your recent to prehistory articles, but just a few quick notes:

We don't add absolute sizes to images unless absolutely necessary, because this overrides the reader's user and browser preferences.
Appendix sections follow a standard order. For example, "notes" comes before "external links".

Happy editing. – Joe (talk) 14:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: copper metallurgy. The reference (The rise of metallurgy in Eurasia: Evolution, organisation and consumption of early metal in the Balkans. University College London, Institute of Archaeology. 2010) has a dead link. Also I think the cited text is actually from 2021: https://www.archaeopress.com/Archaeopress/Products/9781803270425. And the reference is placed in the 'Population' section of the text for some reason instead of next to the relevant part of the text about copper metallurgy. I also added another reference, a book from 2020: https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Archaeometallurgy_Materials_Science_Aspe/5LIKEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 but you deleted this.

So, 1) can I put the relevant references next to the text about copper metallurgy, 2) can I replace the old reference (which has a dead link), 3) can I add new references?

Thanks. Ario1234 (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More sources are always welcome. The reference in the population section seems to be indiscriminate WP:REFBOMBing because the archived version of that page doesn't say anything about settlement size. It might be better to talk about this at Talk:Vinča culture. – Joe (talk) 18:15, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello, I'm Wikipelli. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Oxborough Dirk—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Wikipelli ^Talk 23:44, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the photo to a better photo, how is that not constructive? Ario1234 (talk) 23:53, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Indo-European topics list

Template:Indo-European topics list has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. —⁠andrybak (talk) 07:23, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Oppidum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Your recent editing history at Oppidum shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 12:27, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indo-European topics collapsible list

Template:Indo-European topics collapsible list is one of just a few templates with Misnested tags. I wonder if this can be fixed. —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:58, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to fix that, sorry. The template seems to work without any problems so it doesn't appear to affect it. Ario1234 (talk) 14:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:51, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I made some changes to the draft. Thanks. Ario1234 (talk) 10:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Translation requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you translated text from pl:Kultura Somogyvár-Vinkovci to Draft:Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture. While you are welcome to translate Wikipedia content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the contributor(s) of the original article. When translating from a foreign-language Wikipedia article, this is supplied at a minimum in an edit summary on the page where you add translated content, identifying it as a translation and linking it to the source page. For example: Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if translation is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{translated page}} template on the talk pages of the destination article. If you have added translated content previously which was not attributed at the time it was added, please add attribution retrospectively for that also, even if it was a long time ago. You can read more about author attribution and the reasons for it at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 14:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ario1234 (talk) 23:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Bullenheimer Berg model.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bullenheimer Berg model.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Reconstruction of the Eneolithic village Crkvine-Stubline, Serbia, seen from the southwest.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Reconstruction of the Eneolithic village Crkvine-Stubline, Serbia, seen from the southwest.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but why do you think there is a freely-licenced alternative available? What led you to this conclusion? Are you a human or a bot? Ario1234 (talk) 08:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nordic Bronze Age

Hi, I was wondering why you are changing the order of the "Preceded by" section of the infobox? Is this not something that should be quite straightforwardly established? Thank you for all the work you do on these articles, it's just a bit unclear what you are doing sometimes. Edit summaries are great. TylerBurden (talk) 17:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my thinking was that the Pitted Ware culture doesn't directly precede the Nordic Bronze Age, rather it ends a few hundred years earlier and merges into the Battle Axe culture. Ario1234 (talk) 17:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you for the explanation, again it would be helpful if you include these reasonings in edit summaries so it's clear what you're doing. TylerBurden (talk) 17:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Ario1234 (talk) 17:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Silbury Hill, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. you don't seem to have read the source as your edit contradicted it. That wasn't the only error and I fixed the others as well Doug Weller talk 12:11, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The volume of Silbury Hill is given in the main text as 248,000 cubic metres, whilst the pyramid of Menkaure is listed as 235,183 cubic metres. The first reference (Malone 1989) actually gives a volume of 350,000 cubic metres for Silbury Hill. However a more recent (2018) study gives an estimate of 239,133 cubic metres, which is still larger than the given volume of Menkaure. https://historicengland.org.uk/research/results/reports/154-2002

Which other errors did I make? Ario1234 (talk) 19:01, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The other errors weren’t yours. English Heritage says “ compares in height and volume to the roughly contemporary Egyptian pyramids.”. Doug Weller talk 19:29, 11 November 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture has been accepted

Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

asilvering (talk) 02:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gumelnița–Karanovo culture

You should have explained your blanking. Xx236 (talk) 12:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the page to Gumelniţa–Kodžadermen-Karanovo VI complex and gave Gumelniţa culture a separate page. For some reason the links weren't working so I blanked the Gumelniţa-Karanovo page. Now I've put a redirect on the Gumelniţa–Karanovo page, redirecting to Gumelniţa–Kodžadermen-Karanovo VI complex. Ario1234 (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Xx236 (talk) 13:02, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Gumelnița–Kodžadermen-Karanovo VI complex into Gumelnița culture. 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) 22:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I tried to do that following your advice but I'm not sure if it worked. Ario1234 (talk) 18:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Ario1234. Thank you for your work on Mad'arovce culture. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating this article! Keep writing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:14, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of science and technology in Africa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maktab.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Late Bronze Age 'Feasting Hall', Romania, Urnfield period.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Late Bronze Age 'Feasting Hall', Romania, Urnfield period.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bronze Age Britain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cadbury Castle.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia! Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent uploads, such as the file you uploaded at Tumulus culture, did not appear to be constructive and has been or soon will be deleted. Please read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Two issues are at hand here, firstly, you need to review guidelines and policies surrounding reversions, in particular WP:BRD. You should have started a talk page discussion before adding the disputed image back to the article. As a newer editor, you may not have been aware of that guidance. In a nutshell, the Bold Revert Discuss cycle - Per WP:BRD means that if someone makes a Bold edit, I disagreed and Reverted to the status quo. If the Bold editor disagrees and feels their addition is justified, they have to start a discussion on the talk page to gain consensus rather than reverting back to their bold edit. Secondly, please do not add low quality and/or unencylopedic images as you did at Tumulus culture, the image adds nothing to the article and the gallery section is already bloated with much too many images as it is. The image is a cartoon of an artifact, which adds nothing to the encyclopedia, and the caption itself is misleading. There are many images of the artifact itself online that could be used (if you request the owner of the image to upload it under the correct license) that comply with our licensing requirements, or if there is enough content in the article about the artifact, a fair use copyrighted image may be able to be used, however with such a large image gallery that may not be appropriate. Our guidelines state that Wikipedia is not a repository for images, especially not low-quality ones, See WP:NOTREPOSITORY and WP:NOTWEBHOST. You should probably also read the guidance at WP:GALLERY and review the Manual of Style's section on image galleries. As an editor who also understands the value images can add to an article (although high quality images) I understand why you might want to add it, however in this case, please consider reverting your revert to avoid an edit war about a poor-quality image that does not appropriately represent the artifact. Netherzone (talk) 16:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"the caption itself is misleading."

How is it misleading? Ario1234 (talk) 19:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ario1234, The caption is misleading because it stated: The Bronze Hand of Prêles, Switzerland, 16th-15th century BC. yet it is not a photo of the Bronze Hand of Prêles; it is a single illustrator's digitally produced illustration of such artifact. (Which BTW, does not represent the object very well at all.) When I first saw it, I thought it might have been a very overly-sharpened, colorized and heavily retouched photo, but on closer examination of the original file and after viewing multiple photos of the object online, I saw that it is one person's version/interpretation of the artifact. It misrepresents what the artifact looks like, and captures none of the three-dimensionality of the object and misrepresents the colors.

If you really think it's needed, you could try sending a request to the museum or institution that owns the artifact to see if they would release a photo of the object (this is sometimes done with artworks) or you could try contacting one of the many photographers that have photographed the object, such as Philippe Joner of the Archaeological Service of the Canton of Bern, Switzerland, or or Guy Jaquenod of the Archaeological Service of Canton Bern, (both of whose names I found in the photo captions of photographs found via a Google image search.) Museums and other non-profit institutions are often quite helpful with providing images to Wikipedia and to Creative Commons. Perhaps someone at the Archaeological Service of Canton of Bern, Switzerland could help with this or with putting you in touch with one of their photographers.

Hope that helps, and happy editing! Netherzone (talk) 20:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so adding "(drawing)" to the caption may have made it less misleading, though I added a reference/link to a photo of the object in the caption, and there are other cases on wikipedia where an artefact is represented by a drawing. It's pretty obviously a digital drawing. Seeing as this image seems to be problematic I'll add a reference to the object in the text and a link to the page which has the same drawing which hopefully won't confuse other people who look at it. Ario1234 (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ario1234, I think the article is fine with the changes you have made with the inline links and citations that point to photographs of the artifact. I will continue to keep an eye out for a freely released photo, or one with a Creative Commons license that is compatible for upload. Thanks for your improvements to the article, and happy editing! Netherzone (talk) 13:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your great work

Lest you get discouraged from classing up so many of the archaeology articles around here for whatever reason 🙄, I for one want to congratulate you on all the improvements you've made. I'd give you a barnstar but I don't really have the time right now. But you probably deserve one. 😁👍 Tewdar 17:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate it. If you ever get the time to send me a barnstar I'd appreciate that too! Btw are you still working on the Bell Beaker DNA? Ario1234 (talk) 21:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Benin Moat

Hello Ario1234, I hope you're doing just fine :). I'm reaching out per your removal on the Benin Moat article. Why did you remove, your edit summary didn't clearly state the rationale. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a drawing that was unrelated to the Benin moats/walls and appears to be a drawing of medieval Baghdad. Ario1234 (talk) 16:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But, I don't see any relation between the image and Baghdad. Is there a source to confirm this to me? I would appreciate it. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:54, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the image I removed, which has no relation to the Benin moats:

This is the drawing of medieval Baghdad that it's based on: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/mar/16/story-cities-day-3-baghdad-iraq-world-civilisation

I've seen people posting this drawing of Baghdad online before and saying that it's Benin city: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a9/6e/01/a96e01fc459a6ea75a43aa8f6d56900c.jpg Ario1234 (talk) 17:25, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, great! Thanks, this is a good head-up for me. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:28, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

I won't use a template because you're a longtime editor, but please engage on the talk page and seek a new consensus at Ancient Egyptian race controversy rather than repeatedly removing well sourced content which has already been approved by consensus. See the rather extensive archives here. For a page which has been as thoroughly disputed as this one, it's best to assume that what you're seeing is the result of a thorough consensus-building process, and thus changes should generally be incremental. If you do choose to be bold, however, it's especially important to observe WP:BRD and not simply revert a revert. Thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 20:50, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are now undoubtedly engaged in an edit war. Please undo this edit pending a new consensus. Generalrelative (talk) 15:26, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please at least explain why you think that supposed 'methodological problems' in genetic studies are the same thing as bias. Also, what is 'providing misleading, interpretations on racial classifications' supposed to mean, and what does it have to do with bias? Wikiuser's only 'argument' is that he posted sources so it's valid. Ario1234 (talk) 15:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that the rest of the paragraph actually explains this quite well. Methodological problems can include biased sampling, which is what is being alleged here. In any case, the place to discuss all this is the article talk page. Generalrelative (talk) 16:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.

These edits warrant a template: [1][2]. WP:NPA and WP:AGF prohibit you from speaking that way to other editors, regardless of what you might think privately. Generalrelative (talk) 19:05, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okunev culture stelae

Regarding this [3]. I think the stelae are Okunev culture stelae, which were later inscribed by the early Turks. See:

Siberian Times
Poliakov, Andrey; Esin, Yury. "HORN FIGURINES FROM AN OKUNEV BURIAL ON LAKE ITKUL, KHAKASSIA, SOUTHERN SIBERIA": Fig.10. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
Turkic inscriptions on Okunev stone statues
"The impressive stone steles of the Okunev culture were originally erected at gravesites (...) anthropomorphic or zoomorphic faces or masks with geometric patterns are carved into these monument steles (...) Okunev steles end in a human head, bent slightly forward, others have a ram's head." in Baumer, Christoph (18 April 2018). History of Central Asia, The: 4-volume set. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 137–139. ISBN 978-1-83860-868-2. with photographs of the steles p.137.
"As shown by the three-line Old-Turkish runic inscription, Okunev steles were still being reused in the mid-first millennium AD" in Baumer, Christoph (18 April 2018). History of Central Asia, The: 4-volume set. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 322, note 148. ISBN 978-1-83860-868-2.

Best पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 08:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Your edit to Afro-Arabs has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. https://doi.org/10.1086/374384 is not compatible licensed for wikipedia. Nobody (talk) 08:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Eric ^talk 15:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Vučedol culture has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. This is your second warning. — Diannaa (talk) 22:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image was uploaded as a non-free, fair use image: Wikipedia:File upload wizard: Upload a non-free file Ario1234 (talk) 23:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My message was about some text, not an image. — Diannaa (talk) 23:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. I copied that text from the Vučedol page with minor changes. I thought that would be ok. Ario1234 (talk) 23:51, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see; you had no way of knowing then. The book is dated 2004, and the content was added to Wikipedia in 2008, so we can't keep it. — Diannaa (talk) 14:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

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

Belegiš

added a link pointing to Lovas

Vatin culture

added a link pointing to Lovas

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keita's comments on mummies of the 18th and 20th Dynasties

Hi, Ario,

I created a subsection for Keita's comments within the section on ancient DNA. This way, the comments are not linked to the study by Gad et al., but the article also does not have another section just for this purpose, unnecessarily.

I hope, with this, we have overcome our disagreement.

Best regards,

Dealmeida87 (talk) 00:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a genetic study though. The section is about genetic studies. Ario1234 (talk) 01:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keita's comments refer to STRs of the mummies of Amarna and Ramses III, therefore, they are relevant to the section.

I tried to reach an agreement even though they disagreed with their first modification. But, unfortunately, you choose the path of intransigence. Dealmeida87 (talk) 01:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe write a section on the original genetic study that Keita was referring to. Ario1234 (talk) 02:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:53, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Millet

Hi Ario1234, I'm a bit surprised at your removal of a reliably cited paragraph in this article with the simple claim that it's false. That basically isn't sufficient for such a case.

As I've said in my edit comment, contradicting a reliable scientific source is possible, but not just by saying so - you would need to cite a newer source that specifically refutes the old one, with scientific evidence. If you think you have good reason for objecting to the paragraph, please take that reason to the article's talk page; it will have to contain links to recent scientific papers that demonstrate the falsity of the cited evidence in the paragraph. Just to remind you, per WP:BRD, to take this further, you are expected by long-established Wikipedia policy to discuss the matter on the talk page until consensus is reached. I hope this is clear and transparent to you. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]