open a Topic =

Hello, I'm Kirkukturk3 better known as Kirkuk. Only open Topics if you have Important stuff to discuss with me. If you're here to open a topic for a mistake I did, Open a topic but make it quick instead of long discussions so I can understand what you want!

Break

I'm talking a break from editing for a while to relief myself, I won't be on Wikipedia for a while so opening a topic would be useless.

Khasa dam moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Khasa dam. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Waqar💬 06:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In this draft, you included material from a journal article that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future, should your account be unblocked. — Diannaa (talk) 14:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Diannaa, Can you check if the paper by the U.O.B is the original work or not? Since it seems like the paper I sourced has stolen it from the U.O.B [1]

It's published by Saleh Isa Khassaf and Ali Muzher Madhloom which I can't find anywhere on the Beall's List. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 14:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This paper is not a copy of this paper, it that's what you mean. They are on the same topic, but spot checks reveal no copying from one to the other.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the paper I sourced" since your article had no sources at all? I found the matching content via CopyPatrol.

I have to go to work now, and will reply later if you've any further qustions. — Diannaa (talk) 14:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article was later on edited to delete the source I added sorry for the confusion but this is it [2]

It turned out one of the publishers was on Beall's List and I didn't know. I just wanted to make sure the kne by the UOB is the correct one. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 14:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the topics mentioned in [3] had a degree of similarity to the UOB paper.

But thank you for answering. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 14:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The citation was removed by MarkH21, who said it's not a reliable source. He said that because the journal where it was published is a predatory journal which means they don't do any fact-checking and accept pretty much every submission. I had to re-add it due to the extensive copying and the need to provide proper attribution for the copied content. I think all the copied material needs to come out, as well as the citation. I will do that now. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 15:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 15:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also I see on the Commons you claimed that at least one image was your own work when you copied it from somewhere else. Not cool at all. File:Khasa dam 3.jpg is the one I corrected. Please go back to the other images and tell us where you actually got them. (You are not blocked on the Commons) — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 15:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sorry for the inconvenience, I was in a hurry uploading these images and forgot to credit the person who uploaded the khasa dam pictures, I think I got them from a Facebook post (?).

I will credit it when i get back home ASAP. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 15:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa

Done Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 16:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Material on Facebook is copyright, and you can't copy stuff from there without written permission from the copyright holder. There's full instructions as to what to do at your Commons user talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 18:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried finding the pictures and try to find the email of IMOWR and ask them about if it was reported on the site of the Iraqi Ministery of Water Resources i found nothing.

It seems like the pictures were just a repost and most likely taken from the authors of the analysis you credited for khasa dam 3.jpg Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 19:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without a permission email from the copyright holders, the files I tagged will be deleted. On the Commons, this sometimes takes a while. — Diannaa (talk) 20:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for nationalist POV editing and many problems

You have been blocked indefinitely for persistently unhelpful editing despite being provided with much information and advice. This includes confusion about copyright, see this together with this, and your unembarrassed canvassing on User talk:NICTON t, with insults towards a whole people ("Why do Kurds love vandalising pages?"). See Special:Diff/1230584619. Also confusion about reliable sources and (as with the other problems) unwillingness or inability to profit from advice from experienced users, as illustrated by this discussion. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 09:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Hello @Bishonen,

I hope it's alright to ask for further clarification regarding the recent block. As the recipient of the comment on my talk page, I didn't find it offensive neither i háve complained about it . I wonder if this context might be relevant.

Additionally, I've noticed that the blocked user often provided sources for their edits, particularly on pages related to our shared ethnic group. There seems to have been a content dispute with another editor frequently reverting these changes.

I'm concerned that this situation might have unintentionally led to the loss of well-sourced information about our ethnic group, because some guy from a totally different background having 0 info about us , Would it be possible to have a neutral review of the content in question and the sources provided?

I appreciate your time and any insight you can offer on this matter. NICTON t (talk) 11:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also could you please clarify if there were any specific warnings given to the user about these issues prior to the block?

I fully believe user dosent deserve a ban at all, and I'm trying to understand the full context of the situation and how it escalated to this point. NICTON t (talk) 11:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NICTON t, my complaint about Kirkuktuk's comment on your talk wasn't that it was likely to be offensive to you, or that you'd be likely to complain about it. On the contrary, Kirkuktuk was surely aware that they were speaking to somebody sympathetic to their POV (which is what canvassing means) after this exchange between the two of you in February and, as implied in that exchange, after discussions between the two of you off-wiki about how best to further that POV. I mean, you literally talked about using Wikipedia for "amplifying our “Turkmeneli” collective voice on a global scale". If I had seen that earlier, I would at the least have warned you strongly that Wikipedia is not for amplifying a nationalistic POV.

As for specific warnings about the issues I have exemplified, yes indeed there have been, for all of them — copyvio, sources, canvassing. They would be a lot easier to find if Kirkukturk didn't briskly remove anything they didn't like from the page, but they're not gone; you can find them in the page history, and so can the reviewing admin who will come to this page. To see a post from the History, click on the word "prev" in the line you're interested in. I'm afraid I'm not prepared to dig out the relevant diffs for you, considering Kirkukturk has made it a bit of a chore. Bishonen | tålk 13:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Oh Semsûrî was aware they were talking to someone that viewed their POV about me too.

They wouldn't have contacted Doug Weller if he didn't contact me before.

also I did not delete everything on this talk page so that I couldn't be viewed as "bad" I deleted so that the page would be clean. I'm fully aware that anyone can access the old topics via the edit history. I wanted to archive all of them but I don't have the time to add all of them to one archive subsection.

Also I only talked to NICTON t because we're both well aware of Semsûrî and Kurdish Vandalism. Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 13:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are doubling down on accusations that are part of the reason you are blocked. By the way, clicking on your username, which for some reason you've edited (which is ok if you are consistent), doesn't go to your talk page. Your comment at RSN and your comments about the copyvio show you are confused. Doug Weller talk 13:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to fix the talk page problem.

Also my comments on the RSN are just two comments about how I just added the general information about the khasa dam, are you talking about the ANI by any chance? Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 13:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, [4]

"the "science publishing cooperation" includes many good details about the dam like its capacity and length, I don't see the problem since I only used the overall information about the dam and ignored unnecessary ones. Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 6:51 pm, Yesterday (UTC+1)Reply

Just because some of their publishes are regarded as terrible doesn't mean this one is terrible too as its only Info about the dam which other sites other than the paper use too. Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 6:53 pm, Yesterday (UTC+1}" Doug Weller talk 13:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These prove nothing, I've stated that I only used the info about dam and did not include any unnecessary info and it might be that the paper might be not terrible compared to their other ones.

The khasa dam draft page still includes the info I used. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 13:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also it seems like the predatory publisher might've just taken the paper from the University of Basra [5] and summarised it poorly, since the same data I used for the khasa dam is the exact same but explained better.(I've also checked publishers of the U.O.B paper) Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 14:01, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same publisher, right? So still not reliable. Doug Weller talk 16:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No,they're different papers. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 16:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are, and different journals. This one is also predatory.Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/Questionable1. Doug Weller talk 06:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're two different Publishers, please read the replies bellow. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 11:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that the publisher of the University paper, the " International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research" you linked to isn't the one mentioned in Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/Questionable1? Because it is. See [6] also. Doug Weller talk 13:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page literally says. "While many, if not most, publications and publishers on this list have some questionable aspects to their publishing practices, these can still be reliable (or be otherwise acceptable) in limited circumstances. The CiteWatch cannot determine the full context in which a source is used"

This is also why many pages still use it, your literally just calling them predatory and dubious just because they've published their paper in a questionable journal. Remember they're professors that are educated in this topic. the "International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research" sounds like a catchy name too.

They're overall not predatory. The journal might be predatory but accusing an actual reliable paper is debatable. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 13:27, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying they are predatory, although I do think that we need to be careful - looking at one of them I do see a lot periodicals that Scopus links, so those papers are likely t be reliable. You have no way of knowing if this particular paper is reliable. As for catchy name, yes, that's what the predatory journals do, use a catchy name hopefully very much like a clearly reliable journal. Doug Weller talk 13:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adnan Zedan,Mariwan Faris and Ahmed Amer Abdulsattar are the publishers of the unreliable paper none of them ever studied in The University of Basra or were ever professors Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 18:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saleh Isa Khassaf and Ali Mahzer Madhloom are both professors in the UOB that have profession in these types of topics such as their paper on Adhaim dam. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 18:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both are well known scholars.

For example Saleh.[7] Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 18:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing in a predatory journal makes them dubious, which is interesting. You can't get around that. Doug Weller talk 13:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you truly have checked my page history, you would've known that the canvassing accussation is recent and I have not been warned for it before.

Most of the sources part expect for the Neanderthal were sourced after the warn you can check the pages for yourself.

The "copyvio" one was only half true for one of the warns, the recent one by Semsûrî wasn't even fact checked by him and as I said in my appeal that the admin he contacted with his own POV didn't warn me, but word it better for me. Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 13:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the canvassing warning which I saw was actually on ANI (where you replied to it aggressively), not here on your talkpage. Bishonen | tålk 14:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I just replied to it aggressively because Semsûrî wasn't responding to any of my replies. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 14:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also I still haven't discussed anything off-wiki with NICTON t expect for a few short emails about the block and that's it. Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 13:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and you said you were going to phone him. Which puts him in a bad position. Doug Weller talk 16:56, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I said that?

I said I could contact him after I find my phone. I'm currently using an alternative phone which has none of my main Google accounts the only thing it has is my Wikipedia account. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 16:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really do appreciate your time for considering a further clarification for the ban , as I understood the ban has nothing to do with any of the reasons you mentioned previously as copyright and vandalism ect . The main reason for this ban was mainly because a comment made of me before 4 months and a comment made by him yesterday on personal talk pages .

i do think the indefinite ban is un reasonable , the comment ban should've had 3 warnings then a ban . As this is not top tier issue like changing the content of a page ect .

@Bishonen , I know how valuable your time is to make this platform a safe place to all of us , and how you don’t have to respond but id like you to know that I would really really appreciate your time . NICTON t (talk) 13:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The ban has nothing to do with any of the reasons you mentioned previously as copyright and vandalism ect". I'm sorry, NICTON t, I don't understand what you're saying. It seems to be nonsense. The block had nothing to do with the reasons I gave for the block (with diffs)? You believe the main reason I blocked Kirkukturk3 was actually something you, NICTON t, said four months ago..? That would be, well, unusual. I've replied to you once, trying to be as clear as I could; but there seems to be little or no communication going on. I'm done. My time actually is valuable, at least to me. Bishonen | tålk 14:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

@NICTON t You are far too new to understand our policies and guidelines or the basis for this block. Doug Weller talk 16:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+ bro im not perfect i don’t know everything . But i also think the “ indefinit ban “ is a bit over , i don’t know most things but I would’ve appreciated if the adminstors gave 3 warnings on this issue before the ban .

right q warning for copyright stuff were given, after the warning my friend didn’t insist on making these changes in simple terms he just gave up after the warning.

as i said earlier im far away from perfect and yes i dont fully understand the reasons , thats why i started asking for clarification. ( I know its non of my business, but the guy that were banned is my friend. ) NICTON t (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@NICTON t Huh? You’ve seen a number of the warnings they got, All of them before you started to post to this talk page. Is this enough warnings? [8]. Doug Weller talk 18:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read most of the warnings and check the page they're Referencing.

You can see that most of them were edited by me again but with sources especially the one you kept on mentioning the October 2023 warnings.

The Semsûrî warnings were made everytime I made an edit that did not match their ideas especially the reason why he started the "disruption by kirkukturk3" topic in ANI. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 19:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[9] This is a Personal Attack it still counts even if it's a weak one. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 19:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s a link to his talk page. I’m not clear who you think was attacked, quote it here. Doug Weller talk 19:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I wasn’t specific enough, if you are disruptive in the contentious topic area you may be topic banned, perhaps but not likely by me as my activity will be dropping. Your friend was to a large extent a victim of his lack of understanding and competence(hopefully you have seen some of their confusing sentences). Hopefully that won’t be a problem for you. Doug Weller talk 19:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC) Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 19:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of my edits were nationalistic it's just that Semsûrî does not accept of existence of Turkmen towns or areas

Turkmeneli is poorly worded and many of its claims are poorly sourced such as the "Historically dominant" part which the reference for it (Strakes) barely mentioned anything about turkmeneli and its boundaries. The most used term was that it's a Cultural region encompassing the lands that turkmens inhabit(I minorities and majorities)and I sourced it too.

Semsûrî kept on calling it "POV pushing" even though I sourced it.

Also in one case in Mandali when I deleted an unreliable source [10] which had no reference to the exact survey that conducted these estimates (Sulaymaniyah being 100% Kurdish and Kirkuk being 52% Kurdish) or even the survey for Mandali being 50% Kurdish.

Let me remind you that these are three regions that have experienced Assimilation and cultural shifts the closest I could get is kirkuk 1947 demographics (48%) and that's it.

Also when I added that Laylan Subdistrict is Majority Turkmen (it's one of the five predominantly Turkmen areas of Kirkuk) since in his POV, Laylan is Kurdish since its located in Kirkuk Governorate.

For example a Subdistrict like Shwan Subdistrict is Predominantly Kurdish which is also a page that I made.

He also has continuously removed the "Turkmen communities in iraq" category from multiple Turkmen districts and towns such as daquq [[11]]. Kirkuk☆ Selaj/konuş 12:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kirkukturk3 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

In my past appeal, it seems like I went over(No sections, mentioning of Semsûrî way too many times and poorly explained). My block happened due to some reasons that I will explain and also explain how I can change and be different: 1. Nationalistic POV: Many of my edits look Nationalistic due to the topics I edit usually being towards my ethnicity. In the future, I will make sure to source as much as my edits as possible, I usually forget to source when I do large edits, although I do sometimes get reminded about it when I instantly go and add sources. 2. Copyright infringement I didn't copy and paste from any copyrighted sources although I do word similar to them like the one in Laylan Subdistrict although thanks to Diannaa the land dispute section was worded correctly. Although in the future I will make sure to use copyrighted sources for short, straightforward sentences. 3. Convessing I wasn't even warned about this topic for some reason. I didn't mean to convess with NICTON t I wanted to talk with him about a topic but worded it terribly, it was a topic he mentioned on my talk page a 4 months ago. 5. Sciencepubco I used source from a predatory publisher which I did not know was even predatory. I wanted to provide reliable data for my khasa dam page and then I stumbled upon the source, it provided general info about the khasa dam that I used on the page. A discussion happened about the khasa dam page which i only participated in the wikimapia part (I deleted the wikimapia source from the page) then I woke up this morning to the block which also stated "I didn't listen to experienced users" but I was asleep during the time the discussion continued and ended. I promise that I will check if the publisher of a source is predatory or not every time I try to add one.(Today I found out that the original work that the predatory publisher summarised poorly is by the University of Basra and it provides more and clearer details) I promise to be a better editor on Wikipedia and i will not repeat the same stuff. Thank you, Kirkukturk3. Kirkuk☆ (Selaj/konuş) 11:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Here is my main concern: You were blocked for nationalistic POV editing and everything about this account, from the username, to your edits, to the discussions on this talk page, all point to the block being correct. While what you write in your appeal sounds like what we would like to hear, it doesn't go far enough. I don't think you can separate your POV from your edits as you feel so passionately about the topic. These issues are just going to keep popping up, and it's draining for all involved. Perhaps a topic ban could be carved out that will allow you to edit constructively elsewhere and demonstrate that you have a better understanding of copyright and sourcing; absent that, I'm declining your appeal. Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Ponyo I did wanna change my name but it stayed for so long now im just keeping it (My first accounts were Kirkukturk,Kirkukturk2)Also

how does my edits prove im nationalistic while i have a diverse editing history? the Turkmeneli one as you can see at this point was just trying to disprove the existence of the region rather than explain it.Even semsuris only reason was the anthem and map,which i later sourced.My discussion with Nicton t was barely Anything compared to the rest,if you mean by edits by the majority its still a clear no that most of my edits arent related to Turkmens its mostly about Iraq. The main reason you declined for was only accounted for 2 pages and nothing else,my name is my name and wont prove your concern.Kir kuk 07:12, 28 august 2024 (UTC) No obvious CU evidence of sockpuppetry. Kirkukturk3, please don't email me again. There's nothing I can do for you. --Yamla (talk) 17:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My email was nothing about my block, it was an apology due to what NICTON t did in the ANI, Sorry for the Inconvenience. Kirkuk 18:07, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laylan Subdistrict moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Laylan Subdistrict. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Subdistricts of Kirkuk

Hello, Kirkukturk3. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Subdistricts of Kirkuk, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Kirkukturk3. Thank you for your work on Shwan Subdistrict. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

no mention of this at the target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824: Hello! the page has been turned into a redirect by a user called Semsuri. If you can fix, please do it! Kirkuk 10:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you can message the user who did that on their talk page and see if you can come to a consensus. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:08, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will try. Kirkuk 13:09, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824 As they are blocked, they can't message anyone. And they should not be asked to someone to proxy for them. Doug Weller talk 13:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can email Semsuri to ask him about it and try to reach a consensus there, or tell him in the email to open a topic about it here (if he has an email). Kirkuk 14:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]