User talk:Beshogur/Archive 9

Mutlu tatiller

Tüm hayallerin ve dileklerin bu sene gerçek olsun, tüm güzellikler 2023'te seni bulsun! Mutlu, dolu dolu ve hiç unutamayacağın güzelliklerle dolu yeni bir yıl diliyorum! VisioncurveTimendi causa est nescire

User:Visioncurve (talk)

@Visioncurve: Teşekkürler! Sana da.

Balasaguni and Kutadgu Bilig

Hi, Beshogur. How are you doing? I stand in need of your opinion here: I have just reverted a number of certain edits in the "Yūsuf Balasaguni" (1) and "Kutadgu Bilig" (2) pages seeing them as edits which push views beyond the requirements of WP:NPOV. Being more precise, I believe these edits give undue weight to marginal nationalist viewpoints. IMO, adding Uyghur-language translation of Balasaguni's poetry to these pages is just that. I also believe that relating him to modern Uyghurs solely because of Kashgar is misleading just as it would be erroneous to refer to Avicenna as an Uzbek polymath owing to his birthplace being in Bukhara. Besides, Balasaguni is often regarded as either Karakhanid or Central Asian (Eastern Turkic) poet and statesman in modern (decent) sources (though there was one source which went as far as portraying him as a Chinese Muslim...). Let me know your view on this, please! Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 12:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Visioncurve: hi. I saw both edits, but just abstained. I agree with you. Beshogur (talk) 15:18, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to ruffle your feathers again, Beshogur, but I know you are pretty good in designing navboxes, so I dare to ask you for yet another favor, to give me a hand with the newly constructed Turkoman navbox. I have recently created it as per suggestion of the GA reviewer of the "Turkomans" page, who came out with an idea that it would be better to have Turkoman dynasties compiled in a navbox. Thank you, pal. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire}

@Visioncurve: you're overestimating me :p, anyways, I would remove bold text. Also need a comment on Terekeme people, I suggested to merge this with Karapapakhs, but nobody replied. If they're both the same ethnic group, we should redirect this to Karapapakhs, also maybe you can put Terakime instead of Karapapakh on the template. Beshogur (talk) 15:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Splendid, thanks. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire}

Heh

106 Funny Wikipedia Edits Internet Vandals Snuck Into Wiki Articles. #19 was pretty funny. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: onion hats 😎 Beshogur (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Turkic council

Why did you reverted national make-up of Kazakhstan? Baq Abdizhali (talk) 17:24, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Are you even asking? That's not what the source say. Stop inventing stuff. Beshogur (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:Late modern rump states has been nominated for merging

Category:Late modern rump states has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:45, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:Historical rump states has been nominated for merging

Category:Historical rump states has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bulgarian rump states

A tag has been placed on Category:Bulgarian rump states indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion options for Battle of Capakhchur

EdJohnston's advice per User_talk:EdJohnston#Possible_hoax_article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:15, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:Turkic Buddhist monarchs has been nominated for merging

Category:Turkic Buddhist monarchs has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:43, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ETR, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East Turkestan Republic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

My pleasure!

Responding to your message of gratitude, where you thanked me for bringing it to light that Persia was not part of Central Asia - you are more than welcome! Please feel free to hit me up anytime if you need help. Bye, Nashville whiz (talk) 10:28, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Stop reverting

Huda Party will contest on AKP's list. The information is sourced NOW. Panam2014 (talk) 15:34, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@Panam2014: so what? There is no official declaration. They are not part of People's Alliance. Beshogur (talk) 15:37, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Night attack at Târgovişte

Savaşın sonuçsuz olduğu konusunda ısrarcısınız anlaşılan peki kaynağınız nedir?Tüm kaynaklar gösteriyor ki Vlad'ın yegane amacı Sultan'ı öldürmekti ve başaramadı yanlış mıyım?O halde nasıl sonuçsuz olabilir?Hem taktiksel hem stratejik Osmanlı zaferi.Eflaklıların hiçbir kârı yok.Osmanlılar başkent Targovişte'ye girdi ve Eflak vassal oldu,bunu reddedebilecek tek bir kaynak var mı elinizde?Yok.Lütfen batılıların dogmatik varsayımlarını gerçeklerden üstün tutmayın.

Edit:Görüyorumki hala yanıt yok,korktunuz mu Bay Beşogur? :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.166.150.33 (talk) 17:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Ashina tribe

I responded to your request and when I added more information, it removed the entire thread! So I restored the thread. I have no idea what caused that! --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:53, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Otlukbeli

Gedik Ahmed paşa'nın otlukbelinde olduğun, Otlukbeli savaşını okuyan herkes bilir zaten kendi sayfasında Wiki bile eklemiş (Gedik Ahmed Paşa savaş ve catismalar kısmına). ve diğer kaynak verdiğim şeyleri neden sildin? Keremmaarda (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Turkish language

I added an Oxford University source. I would almost say this falls under WP:BLUESKY. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Grammatically incorrect?

Hi, my fellow grammarian. I would like to ask you, since you give the impression of being a first-rate grammar specialist, to explain me, if possible in detail, which one of my edits is grammatically incorrect? Nashville whiz (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Stop trolling my talk page. Maybe figure it out yourself? Beshogur (talk) 10:09, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not trolling by any means. This goes without saying that it's rude as hell. I've never had a slightest thought of doing that! I asked you seriously: Why on earth would you deem this edit of mine as grammatically incorrect? I earnestly hope you will not leave my question without attention. Nashville whiz (talk) 12:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Alright. "epynomous". However problem is, Minorsky might be an old source, however your reasoning isn't valid. Doesn't provide new thing + makes it more vague. Which Turkic dialect exactly? I hope it helps. Beshogur (talk) 14:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

"Epynomous" was employed in the latter part of the sentence in question in conjunction with "tribes", in order to prevent repeating the word "Turkic" twice, which had already been used earlier. The problem with Minorsky is that modern academic literature do not explicitly state now that Nader's mother tongue was Tabrizi Turkish (aka Turkish of Azarbaijan) preferring to use "a dialect of Oghuz Turkish or just Turkish" for his native language, in a move to avoid discrepancies regarding the matter. It is indeed doubtful that a Turk born in the village of Deregez, northern Iran, during the Early modern period would speak the language native to western Iran, notwithstanding the fact that the tribe he belonged to was moved to Khorasan by Safavids a century earlier. In fact, it's now believed that Nader probably spoke Khorasani language. I hope it helps. Nashville whiz (talk) 09:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Today some dialects of Khorasani Turkish is closer to West Oghuz than East Oghuz. What you say is pure speculation. Can you comment this on the talk page as well, want to hear other users as well. Beshogur (talk) 09:37, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

HDP

Hi

How many small parties had MP seats after running under HDP umbrella during 2018 elections? Panam2014 (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but 4 left for TIP and 1 DBP. Beshogur (talk) 15:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Kazakh tamga list

It is provide information about another Turkic tamga symbols. You cannot revert it. How can table be spam? It is only suitable form of providing this information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aidos.taibekuly (talk • contribs) 16:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Tatar language

Hi,

I did not made it up. There are some sources in the text written Tatar language. I did only put the template and edit the page, you can see it in the history of the page. Zolgoyo (talk) 16:58, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

@Zolgoyo: Hello can you show exactly where? It isn't logical for me. Beshogur (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

You can find it in the references; Robert Stănciugel and Liliana Monica Bălaşa, Dobrogea în Secolele VII-XIX. Evoluţie istorică, Bucharest, 2005. Zolgoyo (talk) 18:12, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

How does this mean that Dobrujan Tatar is a dialect of Volga Tatar? I don't speak Romanian. Beshogur (talk) 18:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

This is a book about Dobruja, where you can find informations about Tatars of Romania. But I don't know, if this is possible to find in Internet. And also I speak the Dobrujan Tatar, it is not dialect of Volga Tatar, but has connection with the language, many of us can understand and speak Kazan Tatar (not fluent). Our elders tells histories about Kazan and saying that we do also came from there. Zolgoyo (talk) 18:36, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

And also I speak the Dobrujan Tatar, it is not dialect of Volga Tatar you say yourself. What's the problem then? This doesn't make its speaker. Beshogur (talk) 19:05, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Mahmud al-Kashgari

I was wondering why you deleted my edits on this page? Akul.kuppan (talk) 02:47, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't see any source except linking to azlibrary. Beshogur (talk) 04:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Elegest inscription

Hello. Do you have access to any sources on the Elegest inscriptions? I see you added a lot of sources there.

~ Gibby01 (talk) 00:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Gibby01: hello not really. Beshogur (talk) 18:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Question about your golden horde vassals page

Wasn’t Kingdom of Serbia also some sort of tributary state to it? Since Serbian king gave that Mongol emperor gifts, and hostages, and there was occupation of both Serbia and Bulgaria? And it says in most of the lists that Serbia was aswell a vassal or a tributary state.. WikiVeterans (talk) 00:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Which kingdom? Beshogur (talk) 09:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

1292 during Milutin’s rule over Kingdom of Serbia.. it says that Serbia accepted Mongol lordship and that’s why they didn’t occupy Serbia any further.. so I guess it was a tributary WikiVeterans (talk) 20:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@WikiVeterans: can you link a wiki page? Can't find. Beshogur (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

I forgot what the link was but it was said you had access or either you made it and it was called something like “list of vassals of golden horde” WikiVeterans (talk) 21:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Kazakh tamga list

Hi, why you always revert information about Kazakhs? Please, explain why you think the list of Kazakh tamga is a spam? Aidos.taibekuly (talk) 08:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Did you even check what you've added? It occupies 1/3 of the page with no real information. Beshogur (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

27th TBMM

Hi

Why after 7 April, 27th TBMM had 166 MP? Panam2014 (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

What dou you mean? Beshogur (talk) 11:25, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

It was in the website until yesterday. Panam2014 (talk) 18:50, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

After 7 April, the size of Parliament have been reduced like Permanent Deputation in Spain Panam2014 (talk) 09:57, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

@Panam2014: I don't get 166 MP? Beshogur (talk) 10:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

It was a total of 166 MP until 2 June 2023. Panam2014 (talk) 10:07, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Where do you see that? Beshogur (talk) 10:08, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

in the turkish version of the page. Panam2014 (talk) 10:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

HUDA PAR and TOP

Hi

Why HUDA PAR seats under AKP's group, and TOP under Green Left? Also, why there a 596 MP not 600? Panam2014 (talk) 10:03, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

TBMM website shows like this, and also during their oath ceremony, they were mentioned as AKP MP. Unsure about empty 3 seats. Beshogur (talk) 10:05, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Orhan Gazi

Why did you reverted my edits? i added correct info only those actos really portrayed Orhan in Kurulus Osman you can watch the series and Malhun hatun was real mother of Orhan it is in real turkish records Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 20:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Orhan

I am not going in a edit war and i request you to revert your edits to mine Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 20:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Is this a joke? Beshogur (talk) 05:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

No this is not a joke@Beshogur Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 07:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I just requested you in a good manner but you are making fun? @Beshogur Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 07:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

You're stating a dubious information as a faact. Beshogur (talk) 10:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Wow, that is a terribly sourced article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

how can you say that? @Beshogur Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 12:04, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

In the first Ottoman sources, she is referred to as Mal Hatun / Malhun Hatun, and she is often referred to as Osman Bey's wife, Sheikh Edebali's daughter and Orhan's mother. Although there is a possibility that she was Orhan Bey's mother, it is certain that she had nothing to do with Sheikh Edebali. ... Based on this record and the rumors echoing from the Ottoman historical tradition, it is generally accepted that she is Orhan Bey's mother. However, this information is not certain. quick google translate.

https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/mal-hatun Beshogur (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

No it is not generally accepted that edebali's daughter is Orhan's mother.

Never mind you can do whatever you want

i am fed up and will be retire soon as i now know that on wikipedia no information is correct Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 15:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

No it is not generally accepted that edebali's daughter is Orhan's mother by you?

i am fed up and will be retire soon hmm why? Beshogur (talk) 15:56, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Chill friend why are you getting so hyper?

i said. that it is not accepted by me? i dont think so

and i want to leave because of the toxicity created for Malhun character just beacause of the love of Bala Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 16:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think there is toxicity. Beshogur (talk) 16:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Okay

it's alright

love and peace

take care Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 16:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

As a history lover i respect every historical muslim good person. Bala and Malhun both inspired me in different ways .I am a fan of too .i just wantes truth to prevail . as kurulus osman is not daily soap opera it is a historical fiction and was aired for a good cause. Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 16:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

. I"ll be happy to tell you that it is very childish but it is truth that these people are die hard fan of Bala hatun portrayed by Actress Ozge Torer and only beacuse she is so much beautifull. and as Yildiz Cagri Atiksoy portrayed Malhun , Bala's co wife so Malhun Character and actress faced unnecssary hate for a long period of time !!! This is the sick mentality that they cannot even respect a historical person. You know for a long period of time i wasn't able to even update the story plot of Malhun specially beacause of this 49.205.83.129 user.this person has a sick mind he even used to revert all edits on fandom and wikidata regarding Malhun. Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 16:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Osman Gazi

I think you dont know Bala And Malhun were totally different persons Malhun was also called as Mal hatun and Rabia bala was called as Bala Hatun. and Fatma hatun was Malhun hatun's daughter you can study turkish history i always add true information.some IP addresses like 49.205.83.129 always add bala hatun related false info but nobody stops them Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 20:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't learn history from fan fiction series. Beshogur (talk) 05:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Bro /sis whatever you are i also didn't learn history from fan fiction but definitely seem to have learn from this like you look like a Bala Hatun fan just like this Ip address user 49.205.83.129 who always add bala related fan biased info or may be is that you from the other account???? Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 07:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Bala hatun was never called as Rabia Bala Malhun Hatun ok? if you had read turkic history you could have know that Malhun Hatun was Osman's First wife whom he married in 1280 and Orhan his oldest born in 1281 .Osman married Bala in 1289 when orhan was already 8 years old . now look who is talking about history? and about fan fiction series. Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 07:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

It is in turkish records that Fatma Hatun was malhun' daughter. Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 07:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm tagging @Sira Aspera: she generally edits those sections. Beshogur (talk) 10:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

If she does this it will be a great thing Bluesapphire1999 (talk) 12:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

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. 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!

77.67.144.80 (talk) 22:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar

		Barnstar of Merit: Taking out the Sockpuppet 🤓
		For your excellent SPI to remove a sockpuppet.--Kansas Bear (talk) 15:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: Thanks lol. It was obvious since day one, just wondered why no one took action. Beshogur (talk) 15:14, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Category:Former observer states of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation has been nominated for merging

Category:Former observer states of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 (talk) 18:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Mehmed II father

Hello, can you please explain why you decided to remove links to Mehmed II father Murad II and vice versa, for me it was a bit confusing when I read it firstly from mobile phone and didn't find link to Murad II from Mehmed II page. Also I checked a lot of pages have these links to father/son etc.. So, I just confused why to not make it better. AleshaOleg (talk) 07:25, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

There is a rule that one link is preffered. It's not preferable to habe multiple links in the same infobox / article. Beshogur (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Need your assistance

Would you be interested in checking these source(s) to verify the figures are correct? It appears user:Raziel1975S is arbitrarily changing referenced figures to suit their opinion(s).

Thank you very much. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Just revert. The source also says 6,000 Chinese casualties. I'm not even sure if that number is reliable as well. I didn't research this battle to be honest. Beshogur (talk) 21:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Stay safe, Beshogur. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Why did you remove the new Suleiman picture?

"as suggested by Iskandar" I cannot find a Iskandar on this page. Deus vult fratres! (talk) 19:26, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Charles III requested move discussion

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 07:06, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

not correct emblem of Kazakhstan

Good day. Explain the reason for replacing the official image of the coat of arms of Kazakhstan with a mythical one that does not correspond to the image in life, is of low quality and does not meet the standard? https://www.akorda.kz/en/state_symbols/kazakhstan_emblem Returntoedenblr (talk) 14:36, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

"related"

Why on earth did you remove all the related Crimean Tatar ethnic groups and replace them with just the Romainian Tatars and Nogays (ok, they are related, but not at much as the Krymchaks, Urum, Karaites, and Chigene)? It is an objective and undeniable fact that the Urum (Tatarized Greeks) are incredibly related to Crimean Tatars, so much so that their language is often considered a dialect of Crimean Tatar itself. The Krymchaks and Karaites are very close to Crimean Tatars too, their Jewish faith is the only thing that sets them apart culturally and even then they share a lot of religious customs (like the curled lock of hair outside the scarf). The Chigene are very assimilated into Crimean Tatars and can even be considered honorary Crimean Tatars, you can't get more related than that. The relation of Lipka Tatars is distant, but there are some connections there, and the Turkish and Azerbaijani languages are very close to Crimean Tatar language of today. A few days ago I almost had a heart attack when I read the Kazakhs article which labeled Crimean Tatars as especially related to Kazakhs in the box even though the most related to Kazakhs by far are Karakalpaks and Kyrgyz (with Crimean Tatars being very distant to Kazakhs in every manner - culturally, genetically, linguistically). I would like you to show me one source that says that the Urum, Krymchaks, Karaites, and Çingene are "definitely not related" to Crimean Tatars before making such bold and wrong claims KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 13:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

You want me to show a source that they're not related? Maybe you should bring up sources yourself that they are related. WP:BURDEN. I didn't restore Lipka Tatars, etc. Only Dobrujan Tatars and Nogais, which are being considered part of Crimean Tatars often, as the article itself supports. Beshogur (talk) 13:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Some minority Crimean Tatars are Nogays, but most Nogays are not Crimean Tatars nor a part of Crimean Tatars. Keep in mind that many peoples (Kazakhs for example) who are not close in any manner to Crimean Tatars have very good reason to not want to be labeled as close to such a controversial ethnic group.KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Otlukbeli

Mr. Besogur, I am asking very seriously, do you have a tail pain against Fatih? Why are you pointlessly deleting the resources I gave you? Are you high-headed? Keremmaarda (talk) 12:31, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

You're literally putting a flag which has "fictitious" on its title. Also what's the purpose of adding non English "Ebulfeth" instead of "Conqueror". Also please read WP:Personal attacks. Beshogur (talk) 13:04, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

The Aq Qoyunlu state is in the alliance and this war is a part of the Ottoman-Venetian war. With this war, the power of the Alliance in the east was broken. But it's still up to you how you shape it. Good day, Mr. Beshogur. Keremmaarda (talk) 23:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, it's me who added the background section, but this doesn't mean it's part of Venetian war. Far fetched. Beshogur (talk) 14:53, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Official

Hi. Please stop using the rationale that if you can't find something in a country's constitution, it isn't official. As I wrote yesterday at Talk:France, This resembles the argument that has been voiced in other discussions that certain countries don't have a capital because one isn't designated in their constitutions. Countries had emblems and capitals long before countries had constitutions or thought to declare their capitals or emblems in them. In addition, there's more to a country's official designations than what can be found in their constitutions. If the constitution were the sole determining factor, then the United States would have neither an official flag nor an official currency. But, certainly, it does. This doesn't mean a source can't be required, but the absence of a mention in a constitution is 100% irrelevant. Imagine the reaction you'd get if you removed the flag from the infobox at United States, citing that rationale as justification. Largoplazo (talk) 12:39, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: You're comparing two different things. United States clearly uses US dollar, clearly use the American flag, clearly uses the Dollar, and clearly uses English. Where can we see the same for the supposed French emblem? Just because it is on passport doesn't mean it is the country's emblem. As for the French presidency example, that particular emblem is completely different rendered. then the United States would have neither an official flag nor an official currency. I'm pretty sure US flag was adopted by their congress, which makes them official, while this isn't the case for the supposed French emblem. Also I don't think currencies have place in constitution. These are regulated by the countries' central banks. Which makes them official. Beshogur (talk) 12:52, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Your answer to me is all over the place, being mostly unrelated to the point I was making. I am discussing one specific thing: It does not follow from the lack of mention of something in a country's constitution that it isn't official. Many things are official without being mentioned in a constitution. There may be other factors that demonstrate that something isn't official, but the lack of mention in a constitution doesn't stand on its own as a demonstration of that. So your explanations that something isn't official because it isn't in the constitution are irrelevant and you should stop making them. For example, the comment you added to the article Lebanon that "The Constitution of Lebanon doesn't specify an official coat of arms" is a non-sequitur. If it's declared elsewhere, then it doesn't matter that it isn't in the constitution. Largoplazo (talk) 14:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: Regarding Lebanon, it's even dubious that this supposed coat of arms of Lebanon is used anywhere. I don't even see where he took that supposed coat of arms.

About France; It does not follow from the lack of mention of something in a country's constitution that it isn't official. Many things are official without being mentioned in a constitution. There may be other factors that demonstrate that something isn't official, but the lack of mention in a constitution doesn't stand on its own as a demonstration of that. You're right, like the American case, however that description says it is used both by presidency and MFA, which is misleading since that golden emblem is not even remotely similar to this one. If you can create a svg version without the text, of this emblem, I can agree on putting this with the description they provide: The lictor’s fasces is an emblem which is very often used to represent the French Republic, although today it holds no official status. This can be justified imo. Beshogur (talk) 15:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

In your first sentence you once again evaded my point, as you began straight off with "it's even dubious that this ... is even used anywhere". I'm not arguing about whether it's a real coat of arms. Even if your overall doubt that it's real is valid, that doesn't alter the invalidity of your comment that it isn't official merely by virtue of not being provided for in the constitition. I'm only suggesting that, in presenting arguments, you include only valid ones and not invalid ones. When you include invalid ones, you undermine yourself. Largoplazo (talk) 16:49, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: well the constitution is a good pretext since all constitutions mentions how their coat of arms look, while Lebanon's, France's or Turkey's doesn't, unless they adopted a coat of arms later, while they don't. What are your thoughts for my proposal? [1] Beshogur (talk) 17:31, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

That's both poor reasoning and false. Poor reasoning: From "most X specify their Y in their Z", even if it's true, "No X specify their Y somewhere other than Z" doesn't follow. False: The coat of arms of the United States is not mentioned in its constitution, but it's real and official. Largoplazo (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

You are not trying to understand my comment. I say US flag and coat of arms were adopted by their congress while French one isn't. Beshogur (talk) 18:46, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

I've been ignoring that argument because it responds to a point that I hadn't made. In fact, it reinforces my point. You state your understanding that the US flag and coat of arms are official because they were adopted by Congress. But you've been telling other people that this coat of arms or that coat of arms isn't official because it isn't declared in the constitution. Well, either things do have to be mentioned in a constitution to be official, or they don't have to be declared in a constitution to be official. It's one or the other. It isn't a valid argument in the case Lebanon and France and then, magically, not a valid argument in the case of the US. It is uniformly invalid for every country in the world: things do not have to be mention in a constitution to be official. Therefore, every time you argue that something isn't valid because it isn't in a constitution, you're contradicting what you've said here about the United States. You're using inconsistent logic. Largoplazo (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah people can make mistake, but let me make it clear: It doesn't appear in a constitution but is adopted by a parliament -> official, and should be added. Eg. US flag/coat of arms. It doesn't appear anywhere, eg. Lebanese, Turkish supposed emblem -> should be removed.

French one can be justified, but it is still the wrong emblem if we're going to take French presidency one, which was adopted in 2018.

There is no such thing for Lebanon thus should be removed completely. Beshogur (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

let me make it clear: In this discussion you've put a lot more energy and words into making clear for me things that I hadn't brought up in the first place and never expressed any disagreement with than you have into addressing the thing you'd been doing that I told you was wrong. If making things clear is of interest to you, that's a bad way to go about it. Sticking to the point is a good way. Largoplazo (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

What? Beshogur (talk) 21:13, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

What don't you understand? The concept of addressing what someone said to you instead of addressing a bunch of things that the person didn't say to you? Or the fact that most of what you've written here wasn't responsive to what I'd originally said? You keep giving the impression that you're trying to express disagreement with me, but everything you wrote after "Let me make it clear" has no bearing on what I came here to tell you. It's a bunch of tangents, except that it partly reinforces my point rather than disagreeing with it. Largoplazo (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Alright. Can you answer to my suggestion on France talk page then? Beshogur (talk) 08:21, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Confirmation

Hi @Beshogur, could you confirm this info is correct or not? [2]

Thank you! OrionNimrod (talk) 12:04, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @OrionNimrod: [3] I don't find anything like that. Beshogur (talk) 14:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for checking, and changing it! OrionNimrod (talk) 16:12, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Editing without providing reasons/explanation

Hello user @Beshogur,

I trust you will be more careful when making edits without explanations, or deleting of verified source material.

Thank you.

Max45789 (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Beshogur, I am willing to discuss a compromise rather than reverting edits. Max45789 (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Funny because you're the one moving pages without discussion. Beshogur (talk) 19:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

@Beshogur, thanks for your message. Please note that you did so first.

Secondly, please note that in my change I have provided valid reasons which you have ignored. Max45789 (talk) 19:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

@Beshogur, in the spirit of cooperation, I am of course very willing to discuss and reach a compromise with you. Max45789 (talk) 19:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

The title aside, what is your explanation for removing verified source material, which has taken time to compile? Max45789 (talk) 19:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

@Beshogur, please note I am not here to pick arguments with anyone. If you have valid reasons, I am naturally willing to listen.

I have presented all arguments in my edit descriptions. To clarify, the term "Isfendiyarid" only covers a portion of the dynasty's/beylik's history, disregarding several generations beforehand, which are clearly mentioned in the article.

Moreover, "Isfendiyarid" covers a specific period which is the Beylik of Sinop, and is therefore not applicable as a title for the entire dynasty.

These points have been made in my edit descriptions. If you are in agreement, I would be very happy. If not, I am very happy to listen to your reasons and discuss further, and reach a compromise either way. Candar dynasty may not even be the best option and I am very willing to hear your thoughts.

Therefore, after reading the above, kindly advise whether you are in agreement, and if not, please advise the reasons, which is the very essence of cooperation that Wikipedia has been established upon.

Thank you for your assistance and understanding. Max45789 (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Notice that the user, despite having been explained to him that he needs consent and to respect it togheter guideline and policy to move the pages and that his judgment is not enough, continues with his behavior and refuses to listen to anyone, and insist to rename page as the name he want.Sira Aspera (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Sira Aspera,

As advised on your talk page, I await your reasons. Max45789 (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Need your assistance

Would you happen to have access to this book? It is being use as a reference, here. Thanks! --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:10, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It appears to be a deadlink now. Sorry to have bothered you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: hello, I saw this, and totally forgot about. I don't have access to that book. I don't think I'm much convinced about that "field battle" thing. No doubt the siege was unsuccessful. Have to see the exact quote. Also you're always welcome, no problem. Beshogur (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lebanon. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:38, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: Get blocked for what? Removing a non existent coat of arms with a reference of a website from 2007, which is hardly a reference? And there are two reverts of mine in almost two weeks. Beshogur (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Your edits were contested at the article, and other editors contested your removal of this coat of arms earlier on this user talk page. If you are convinced that there is no coat of arms of Lebanon, it will be more productive to raise the issue at the article's talk page or nominate the article Coat of arms of Lebanon for deletion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: and other editors contested your removal of this coat of arms earlier on this user talk page that was about France generally, and I guess we came to an agreement if not fully. Largoplazo (talk · contribs) did not even add the coat of arms back, his argument was that my reasoning was wrong (ie. doesn't appear in constitution). Nor Coat of arms of Lebanon, neither [4] will be deleted per wikipedia policies. And this source like thing which from 1994 (not even 2007), which is created by Society for Creative Anachronism, which the whole website is full of fictional stuff. Beshogur (talk) 19:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Also this was nominated for deletion in 2021, was not deleted per COM:INUSE. Beshogur (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay, but that still justifies nominating Coat of arms of Lebanon for deletion, which I did. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Category:Persecution of Turkic peoples has been nominated for merging

Category:Persecution of Turkic peoples has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Editing infobox

Hello, i saw your edit on the Barlas page where you removed the cadet branches of Barlas in infobox, and I would like to know why and what's the reason behind it? Shaykh217 (talk) 14:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Mughal is not a cadet branch. Mughals are Timurids. And where are the sources for those three? Beshogur (talk) 14:31, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay. However the Tanoli Tribe of Pakistan is known to be descended from the Barlas Tribe. They formed the Princely state of Amb which was known to be descended from Karluk Turks Barlas Tribe. Genetic research has been done to back this, you can find the sources in the wikipedia page of Amb (princely state) , source 6,7,8,9. And the Katooris of Chitral are known to be descendants of Timur, there are sources listed, most of the sources are written in Urdu language however they are true, same can be said about the Sheikhs who were landlords in Hyderabad under Nizam , the Kaulas fort was under their supervision from 1915 when the Nizams took over this land from the Hindu king and controlled it directly and appointed the Sheikhs as landlord, up until 1947 Partition of India, they trace their ancestry to Muhammad Shaikh son of Umar shaikh the great grandson of Timur, source listed in wikipedia page of Kaulas Fort . However asides from Tanolis and Princely State of Amb who are cadet branches of Barlas. Like the Mughals, the Katoor and Sheikh should be mentioned as Timurids cadet branches, correct me if I'm wrong. Shaykh217 (talk) 14:47, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: thoughts? Beshogur (talk) 14:55, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Not my area, sorry. However, I would caution against foreign language sources and sources written by British civil servants living in colonial India. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:56, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I understand, however the foreign language sources are written and approved by royal historians and can be translated, the sources are not written by British civil servants , as the Katoor Dynasty was established from 1570 AD at that time there was no British Indian rule. And Sheikhs in Kaulas Fort were part of Nizam Hyderabad princely state which was independent from British rule

If there are no doubts i would like to add Tanolis / Amb (princely state) as a branch of Barlas. Katoor Dynasty and Shaikh of Kaulas to be added as a branch of Timurids. Shaykh217 (talk) 21:16, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Beshogur Shaykh217 (talk) 15:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Well I'm not really convinced since those sources are not very reliable + one links familytreedna, which is not even a source. Timur's haplogroup is not even known, not to mention it is original research. Beshogur (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Chechens and Timur

Hello Beshogur,

I noticed that you reverted my edit on Timur (aka Tamerlane) noting his defeat at Ghonat-Ghala with the simple summary “Timur lost to Chechens story again?”. I would like to note that: A: the fact that Timur lost to the Simsir forces at Ghonat-Ghala is documented, as seen in the source I provided B: the story has also been passed down in the Chechen cultural tradition C: Though Timur eventually won the war against Simsir, he definitely was not an “undefeated” commander.

Also, when you revert a claim with a source provided, please provide a valid reasoning.

Category:Anti-Turkic sentiment has been nominated for merging

Category:Anti-Turkic sentiment has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 19:48, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Ottoman battle articles

Hi Beshogur! Could you check the long term activities of this or these (possible socks) users? Especially the edit war activity of Keremmaarda on many Ottoman battle articles.

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Long term edit war on Ottoman battle articles by possible sockpuppets, 5 reverts within 2 hours OrionNimrod (talk) 16:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Are you serious? What's your problem with me? I have told you many times that this is my only account and I do not know the person called Göktuğ. Really, don't bother me any more about this issue. Do you see the people who edit every Ottoman page as the same? Keremmaarda (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Chuvash Page

Hello, @Beshogur! Could you check the activity of Chuvash page? User Artem Petrov seems to be a possible sock of old violators of the page. Can you please check? 46.154.43.54 (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Source checking

Hi Beshogur! Could you check the provided Islamic encyclopedia is reliable or not? (written by users like Wiki?) Talk:Battle of Tahtalu

Because an article written by an user which claim the 14 years old King Matthias of Hungary attacked an Ottoman area deep in Serbia with 50,000 solders against Mehmed II and lost. But I do not find anything about this in Hungarian sources, I suppose it should be any mention of this high scale royal campaign if it was real. OrionNimrod (talk) 18:24, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

@OrionNimrod: It is reliable, and it is written by historians. However it's mostly using Ottoman primary sources. Also I don't have access to 50,000 number source, so I don't know. Don't forget that old chronicles always exaggerate numbers of their enemies. Beshogur (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Tahtalu Hello Mr. Beshogur, Would you please check and review this page? What are your opinions about this page? Keremmaarda (talk) 20:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Beshogur Thanks your answer! OrionNimrod (talk) 09:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Beshogur, do you have Turkish sources about the battle of John Hunyadi and Şehabeddin in 1442? OrionNimrod (talk) 10:01, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Grand National Assembly of TURKIYE

The State of the Republic of Turkey changed its official name from Turkey to Türkiye with its application to the United Nations in May 2022. In this context, on the pages of the Turkish administrators (President of Turkey, Vice President of Turkey and Prime Minister of Turkey) in Wikipedia, it is mentioned as Turkey instead of Türkiye. Although it is stated in English in the page titles, it is used as it is officially stated in the information boxes. Please let's not make unnecessary edits on this issue. Fatihoztrk950 (talk) 21:35, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Fatihoztrk950: don't use caps lock on my talk page. Second, Grand National Assembly of Turkey is a historic usage, related to the Independence War. Shouldn't be changed. Beshogur (talk) 21:52, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I find this explanation extremely inadequate. Turkish War of Independence and Grand National Assembly of Turkey pages are separate pages. They may be connected to each other. Fatihoztrk950 (talk) 22:10, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Fatihoztrk950: see the usage by year. It would be wrong to call it Grand National Assembly of Türkiye in historic context. Beshogur (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

You are right about this, but the same thing applies to the Turkey page. Then you should edit there too. Fatihoztrk950 (talk) 22:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Dolgan language: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Opal|zukor^(discuss) 11:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Opalzukor: it's an IP abuser, sock. Beshogur (talk) 12:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Wallachia expedition

Hello Beshogur, You want the page to be renamed Wallachian Expedition, but a page under the name Wallachian Expedition has been opened on the Turkish Wikipedia page. Is there a need for a new and separate page? Or can't we directly translate the Turkish article into English? https://tr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eflak_Seferi_(1462) Keremmaarda (talk) 12:43, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Keremmaarda: maybe try it first on your sandbox. Turkish page does seem unsourced a lot. Beshogur (talk) 12:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Neamt

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Neam%C8%9B_Citadel What do you think about this page? Is it a real war? I have never come across such a war in any of Mehmed the Conqueror's works. I think the war was described as a legend-epic by someone who lived in the 1600s. Isn't it ridiculous that this page is on the wiki? Keremmaarda (talk) 11:48, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Maybe. I don't know. Beshogur (talk) 11:53, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Don't be biased

I kindly ask you not to nominate pages for deletion just because they go against your views or feelings. I understand that the article SDF insurgency in northern Syria goes against your views because your Turkish. However, it's one of the chapters of the Syrian civil war and we are trying to document everything that goes in the war for history. Thank you for understanding. CatmanBw (talk) 18:04, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Nice personal attacks on identity. Beshogur (talk) 18:23, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

How is that an attack? CatmanBw (talk) 18:32, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

"Note that it is not a personal attack to question an editor about their possible conflict of interest on a specific article or topic" CatmanBw (talk) 18:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Also you violated 1rr rule on Syrian civil war. Beshogur (talk) 19:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Actually, you are the one who did. CatmanBw (talk) 19:10, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Prevention per WP:GS/AA

I am prevented from expressing my opinion in the "talk" section of the 2023 Azerbaijani offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh page under WP:GS/AA. I cannot claim to be very knowledgeable on the subject. So i would like to ask since you are more competent, is this practice correct or an abuse of power? Kyzagan (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I think you need to be an extended user with 600 edits at least. Not sure either. Beshogur (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Ming Sha

What would your opinion of this source be, concerning the battle of Ming Sha?

I translated the 4 paragraphs before the paragraph mentioning 450,000 Chinese(450 bin) and the previous paragraph only mentions the year 698!?? --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:48, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: Belleten is an official publication of the Turkish Historical Society. Taşağıl personally knows Chinese and can read primary sources. The 450,000 number is indeed inflated, but that's most probably how it were in the sources. Like medieval chronicles exaggerating every battle (eg. Manzikert, Didgori, Bolchu, etc.) If you look at the bibliography, it's mostly Chinese sources. Beshogur (talk) 20:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I fought with eight thousand’s army of Chacha sengun. the translation is kinda off but it says eight divisions = eighty thousand. So I don't know where the 450 thousand comes. Beshogur (talk) 21:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Can we verify that this was the battle of Ming Sha? We should probably add a non-translated note with a translation in the same note(and a link) to the article. Yeah, I checked on Ahmet Taşağıl who is an historian, I just could not find the information. My sincerest thanks, Beshogur! --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:30, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: Ah I didn't notice. Yeah doesn't talk about Ming Sha. Might be any of Qapghan's Chinese incursions maybe. Beshogur (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hmmm, ok. So did the link I post mention a battle in 707 or at Ming Sha? I could not find any evidence of either, unfortunately. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:41, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Yeah the 450,000 isn't about Ming Sha. Beshogur (talk) 09:31, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Byshek

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Byshek_(1467)

Hello Beshogur, can you review the file? Is there anything missing or wrong? Keremmaarda (talk) 13:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Samvel Shahramanyan

Hi

Currently in Yerevan, is he still president? Panam2014 (talk) 10:30, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea. Beshogur (talk) 11:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2023 disestablishments in Azerbaijan

A tag has been placed on Category:2023 disestablishments in Azerbaijan indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:Illiterate monarchs has been nominated for deletion

Category:Illiterate monarchs has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 02:12, 30 October 2023 (UTC)