Jump to content

User talk:JohnCengiz77/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Welcome

Hello JohnCengiz77, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

JohnCengiz77, good luck, and have fun. --roleplayer 23:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Turkish names

Hello. I've found some of your articles about Turkish names, listing notable people. In general, the leading sentence for our articles should include a brief description of the subject, so I'd recommend expanding your leads just a tiny bit. E.g. I have turned

"X may refer to:"

into

"X is a Turkish given name for males. People named X include:"

on some of your lists. Moreover there is a template {{foreignchar}} that is quite useful for denoting alternative script for non-English characters such as ü, ı, and so on. Happy editing, De728631 (talk) 15:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for the tips, I've just used them on Eyüp (name)

JohnCengiz77 (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Özmert

A tag has been placed on Özmert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mr. R00t Contact me 00:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Lutfen gelin

'Turkey' maddesinde turk-dusmani ermeni ve yunan milliyetciler bize karsi"soykirim" propagandasiyapiyorlar . Silebelir mi? Tsk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.145.201.147 (talk) 23:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages, and moving pages

Hallo JohnCengiz77

I see you have made a lot of edits to disambiguation pages, adding people who share a forename or surname. Please see MOS:DABNAME for how these people should be listed.

The Go competition is the only thing known as "Okan" so it should still be at that title. You could create an article about the forename "Okan", called Okan (given name), which should have information about the name (meaning, derivation, where it is used, etc) as well as possibly a list of people with that name.

Please also note that if you move a page (as you did in moving Okan to Okan (Go competition), it is your job to check all incoming links and change them, so that the many links which were pointing to that article do not now point to a disambiguation page.

PamD (talk) 09:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I have moved the dab page, sorted out hatnote, and requested that the redirect be deleted to allow the page about the Go competition to go back to its correct title, which will also mean that the incoming links all work correctly. Please take more care with any future page moves. PamD (talk) 09:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Use of stock templates

    At Talk:Nez, you coped with the unsuitable Redirect left by the "Move" of the old Nez page and its talk page by, obviously, trying to replace the Redirect markup with what we usually call a {{DisambigProject}} tag. (When you are fully sure you know what to expect in doing moves, and have read all the check-box options offered, feel free to ask me how to avoid the talk-page Redirect, if you care to, by the way.) I'm not quite satisfied that i know exactly what you did (there, and on Talk:Kubat), but suffice it to say that the markup you wanted at Talk:Nez was

{{DisambigProject}}

which is easier, more compact, and without the side effects that brought your error to my attention. The coding of pages like Template:DisambigProject is tricky; it is usually important

  1. to check the documentation such a template page includes or points to know whether it is suitable for a straight call (transclusion), e.g. {{myTemplate}} on one hand or substitution, e.g. {{subst:myTemplate}} on the other;
  2. not to copy the markup from the template's edit window (at least close to what you did, i think), unless you understand a lot more of the pitfalls than you do now.

The problem is fixed, and no doubt you'll do it the easier, problem-free way soon, if not on the next try. Happy editing, and thanks for your work.
--Jerzy•t 07:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

CFD nominations

Re this nomination and the one below it—next time you nominate a category for deletion, don't empty it prior to the nomination. When you do that, other users can't see what the contents of the category were. That really bugs a lot of users, and it is generally considered a disruptive move. I assume you were unaware of this, but it's good to know for next time. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Objectivity and reliability

A number of allegations made on the Mohamed Atta page are merely police allegations, not authenticated facts. Such allegations may not be stated as proven facts unless they are beyond dispute. Regarding the participation of Mohamed Atta in the attacks of 9/11 there exist no verifiable evidence that he boarded Flight AA11: His name does not appear on any authenticated passenger list; his boarding card was never seen by anyone; no one saw him board this flight; there is no CCTV of his boarding on this flight; and his mortal remains were not identified from the crash site. More generally it appears questionable that the person who purported to represent Mohamed Atta in the United States, was the same person as the Mohamed el-Amir (Atta) who studied in Germany. There are therefore numerous question marks remaining about his identity and his alleged participation in the crime.

The Wikipedia must be a repository of solid information. Anonymous police or secret-service reports are not reliable information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Emetvetzedek (talk • contribs) 13:34, August 8, 2010

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Mohamed Atta, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jojhutton (talk) 12:30, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Mohamed Atta. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please be aware of the policies. WP:Verifiability is strictly enforced, and you have reintroduced uncited material on several occasions. Jojhutton (talk) 13:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Mohamed. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. I'm not sure why you refuse to add a citation. If the facts are out there as you claim, then it shouldn't be difficult to do so. Please be careful. You are very close to a block for reintroducing uncited material. Please read WP/;Verifiability and provide proper citations, so we can move on. Jojhutton (talk) 14:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Mohamed Atta

Is there a reason why you feel that theses statements need to be the article without citations? All they need are citations, but you seem willing to reintroduce challenged material without citations. Please read WP:Verifiability and become accustomed to how things actually work on wikipedia.--Jojhutton (talk) 14:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Wow, 9 years later you show up to deny 9/11. They don't need citations.

Like I said before, are you going to change the composition of every 9/11 article to say that Atta was not the pilot?

You are being juvenile.

JohnCengiz77 (talk) 14:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure why I being attacked like this. Did I harm you in some way? All I'm asking for is single citation to support the claim. No one is denying 911. You must have me mixed up with someone else. Please provide a citation, thats all the article needs.--Jojhutton (talk) 14:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

recent changes to Abdul

Please respond at Talk:Abdul. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

It's great to see you createing so many new pages to Wikipedia. May I suggest you request having autopatrolled rights so that another editor does not need to patrol the pages you create? Thanks, Stickee (talk) 07:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide yo do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Generally it's best to link to articles that have the most information about the origins of the name. Many of the links you changed in the article were to the English versions of those names which also included a list of all the foreign variants and the history of its usage, etc. Please don't change those. You also removed statistics that I had added to the article that I went back and added again. Please don't revert and remove that cited information. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 00:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, JohnCengiz77. You have new messages at Skier Dude's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

--Just be careful and you should be fine. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Militants

Hi, i saw you changed "Alleged Militants" to "Militants in the War on Terror" in a couple of templates. Like in this edit. I am a bit concerned that this caused BLP issues as some of the listed individuals in some of the templates are simply alleged militants, some are even proven innocent and others are not part of the War on Terror. I am thinking of reverting these changes but would like to ask you first if you have another idea how to solve this. - IQinn (talk) 22:08, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

  • I think it's better without "Alleged" for the main title because most are known terrorists - It would be stupid to have the US one named as "Suspected terrorists who have lived in the United States". If there's any proven innocent they should be in a seperate labelled category - or not there at all. Some of the categories below may need an "Alleged". I think me removing "Alleged" from the 9/11 hijackers one sums up an overuse of the word "Alleged". I think "War on Terror" is a good title for most of the templates and an other category below, if needed.
  • The symbols are there for the Algerian one, but there's no key showing.

Regards. John Cengiz talk 22:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

In general i agree with you that the old name was strange but that was maybe for a reason.
If we stay with "War on Terror" that would mean we have to remove all other militants or alleged militants that are not part of the "War on Terror" what would be maybe possible but could be a POV magnet as their is quite a disagreement what belongs to the "War on Terror" and what not. I suggest not to do this.
You may be right that this would be the better title and i might agree with you but it was named like that because there are quite some people on the template that are simply alleged or innocent. So we would need to clearly indicated that on the template or we must remove them from the template. Quite a lot of work. Are you planning to do that?
That could be also quite a POV battleground who qualifies as a militant, who is only alleged and who is innocent. IQinn (talk) 23:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, JohnCengiz77. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JamesBWatson (talk) 19:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I have unprotected Naveen for you. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. John Cengiz talk 20:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

"Abdul" names

I have revised a couple of moves you made. This is because the main criterion for the choice of the form of names must be the way they appear in reliable sources, in accordance with WP:RS. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 11:26, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Prophets of Islam (Turkey)

Template:Prophets of Islam (Turkey) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 17:07, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Did you see my comment at the deletion discussion? Although I believe that the template should be deleted, I don't believe that this content should be gone from Wikipedia: as you say, it should be quite useful to list the Turkish names for these prophets of Islam. The problem is that this is information that belongs in the article namespace, not in the template namespace, and simply moving it wouldn't work well at all. Nyttend (talk) 03:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, but listing them in this format seems to be the easiest to comprehend. Do you not think a "Prophets of Islam in other cultures" template would work? Rather than have, "example1" name is this in "example2" and this in "example3" country". John Cengiz talk 10:40, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Ali Dizaei, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 17:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Mehmood

Hi, now that Mehmood points to a disambiguation page, please help us clean up resulting misdirected links per WP:FIXDABLINKS. Navigation popups with the popupFixDabs flag set to true is a big help. Thanks, --JaGatalk 16:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm on it! This is fun. John Cengiz talk 16:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi John. It's a minor thing sorry for the terrible pun ;-), but some of the edits you made to September 11 and marked as minor were certainly not minor edits. This for instance. Winston365 (talk) 03:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

IPA for Arabic

Hi John. The intended vowel in WP:IPA for Arabic is [o]. In RP and AM English, the letter o in got represents [ɒ] and [ɑ], respectively. The vowel in more, mole (not a diphthong) is nearest equivalent. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi again, John. Sorry, we can't add [ɒ] in the page, because this vowel doesn't exist in any variety of Arabic including Modern Standard Arabic. So, it is useless to add there. Thank you. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 08:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

See the talk page for IPA for Arabic.

Regards. John Cengiz talk 14:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Why do you alter the IPA notation of Egyptian names pronunciations? --Mahmudmasri (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Because it's not clear to people viewing, especially how the "IPA for Egyptian Arabic" page redirects to the "IPA for Arabic" one, it seems as if you gear it towards your preference of Arabic dialect. Using the "Egyptian Arabic pronunciation" bit would be better, possibly with the more common pronunciation next to it.
And the "ːæ" you use in "Muhammad" doesn't match up to anything on the key.
John Cengiz talk 20:52, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

BLOCK WARNING

If you do not stop edit warring over this, I will ask to have you WP:BLOCKED. Provide a source to support your claim, or knock it off. — kwami (talk) 22:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I could ask the same of you, you keep editing it out, like you're an Arabic expert, all the while it is I who knows about Arabic and I am just trying to share some basic knowledge. You don't need a source to show the "O" in "Mohamed", "Osama", or "Omar".
The table is meant to easily show to someone how "Omar" like the country "Oman" is pronounced in Arabic.
You don't have a clue about Arabic.

John Cengiz talk 22:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

At Wikipedia, we don't rest on our laurels. We use sources, particularly when there is a dispute over facts. Also, the table is designed to help readers and editors understand IPA transcription of Arabic at Wikipedia. Since we don't use that character, it shouldn't be in the table. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 22:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
It would appear from the edit summary of your latest revert, "The last IPA one was more like "doll" or "pod" apparently. Look at IPA for English: the "Thought" sound, you cannot even say "Mohamed" without this sound." that you are not familiar with the IPA and may be confused as to which language we're dealing with. Why would we instruct people to pronounce Arabic with English sounds? — kwami (talk) 07:50, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
JohnCengiz, it's becoming clearer that you are acting beligerantly; your edits to WP:IPA for Arabic have no consensus and so far no editors have taken your side. You therefore are not acting with WP:Consensus. Despite calls for sourcing, you've only repeated your nonsensical examples of the English pronunciation of a handful of names of Arabic origin (which, whether you like it or not, are not even close to universal in the anglophone world anyway). Because it's not exactly clear that you know either the IPA or the purpose of IPA for Arabic, I suggest you cease editing the content of WP:IPA for Arabic and stick to the talk page until a new consensus is reached. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 09:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:APO needs your help

Hey, we need your help at WikiProject Anthroponymy!
Come check out our new layout.
Wikipedia ad for Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy
Wikipedia adsfile info – #226

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Anthroponymy at 02:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC).

Feb 2011 Newsletter

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Anthroponymy at 06:34, 2 February 2011 (UTC).

Amer

My apologies for not spotting that it was vandalism on the Amer page rather than irrelevant advertising. I don't know what happened there because I usually check the history etc. Sorry about that. - Sitush (talk) 22:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. John Cengiz talk 22:37, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

List of accidents and disasters by death toll

I notice that in your last edit to List of accidents and disasters by death toll, you removed the link to Adel[disambiguation needed], but didn't delete the {{dn}} tag itself. It's not clear from your terse edit summary if that is what was really intentioned, or if you just overlooked the tag. I'll see any reply here, or if you reedit the article. Tim PF (talk) 00:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I suppose the link should be to "Adel (disambiguation)" now, but there is no mention of the boat there. So maybe it's better as I left it, waiting for the page on the boat. John Cengiz talk 00:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I thought that Adel was redirected to Adel (disambiguation) as it looks like, but isn't a {{disambiguation}} page. The hatnote at Adel is unclear; it should perhaps better be "{{About|Arabic male name}}, to give: This page is about Arabic male name. For other uses, see Adel (disambiguation). It could also do with a "See also" section with a further Adel (disambiguation), as with Adell.
I don't think that Adel (disambiguation) is too much better, but have you any idea why Adel Rootstein is linked to from Adel, rather than Adel (disambiguation)? She clearly isn't named as a male from the Arabic, but others may be less obvious (or non-obvious). I wonder if there's any real point for keeping things separate.
Task in hand: You perhaps should change the original link to point to Adel (disambiguation), but you then need to consider if you should add a WP:red link entry to the dab page. Whichever way, I'm not sure what you should do with the {{dn}} tag itself. Tim PF (talk) 01:27, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I previously didn't note the impact of your use of the word "now". Please note that I have agreed with another user at Talk:Adel that your recent changes to Adel and Adel (disambiguation), which caused my confusion, should not have been made without prior discussion, especially given the previous August 2008 changes.
I suggest that you revert the changes yourself and create a new article for Adel (Arabic name) (or something similar), with a link from the Adel dab page like all the other candidates.
Adel (boat) appears ok for List of accidents and disasters by death toll, but it probably ought to have an entry in Adel, which could always link back to List of accidents and disasters by death toll. Tim PF (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Added the boat to the Adel page, and linked to List of accidents and disasters by death toll#Maritime. John Cengiz talk 23:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:APO template deletions

Hey guys, a couple of templates used by WP:APO have been nominated for deletion. We could use your help to Oppose their deletion. If you agree the project needs them, as per WPAPO:HN then please vote Oppose here: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion#Template:Aboutgivenname

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Anthroponymy at 04:05, 24 February 2011 (UTC).

Abdul

Hi. Thanks for your prompt rescue mission of my edits. I was wondering whether I've done it correctly. Now I know - I haven't. :-/ :-) Best regards, --Biblbroks (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. John Cengiz talk 02:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:APO March Newsletter

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Anthroponymy at 09:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC).

Adele

As an administrator and an editor of Wikipedia for over 6 years, I know better than to be arbitrary with my edits. I didn't just decide out of the blue to redirect Adele to the singer. According to Wikipedia:Disambiguation, "Although an ambiguous term may refer to more than one topic, it is sometimes the case that one of these topics is highly likely—much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined—to be the subject being sought when a reader enters that ambiguous term in the Search box. If there is such a topic, then it is called the primary topic for that term. If a primary topic exists, the ambiguous term should be the title of, or redirect to, the article on that topic." In other words, when people come to Wikipedia and search for "Adele", it's probably a safe bet that they didn't come here to search the history of the given name; the singer, being on the level of success she is right now, is the primary topic for the search term. See basic terms like "Elvis", "Bono" (given names) or "Shakespeare" a surname etc— these lead directly to the page that people will most likely be searching for. What I did was correct and I'll revert it to the way I set it. Orane (talk) 01:16, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

You first should of sought discussion with a pole to see if the rest of Wikipedia wanted the singer's page at "Adele". And she isn't the primary topic anyway, there are countless very well known Adeles on Wikipedia. John Cengiz talk 02:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia says Be Bold and make changes. This place isn't a bureaucracy. It's not a must that I go through a million red tape to make a simple change to anything. Orane (talk) 02:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

And how many famous Adele's do you know. Orane (talk)

Your requested move: Adele (name) → Adele

I noticed your move request. Since there is disagreement this should not be entered as an uncontroversial request. Please follow the instructions at WP:Requested moves#Requesting a single page move to open a move discussion at Talk:Adele (name). This will automatically create an entry under 'contested moves.' Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Discuss but don't edit war please

  • You assumed from the first edit, that this is an edit war, and you're opinion is right - when it's not, you made some changes to the article and want them all to stay - wow. This one can't, I've already explained in detail why. Start a poll on Osamas talk page John Cengiz talk 14:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

It's always for ME to prove to you, isn't it? Just click on the link to "Arabic name" on the hatnote you made, or read the name section on Osama's page. "bin Laden" is only the surname in Western context, so the hatnote doesn't make sense. Why is it, that this hatnote only came about now, seems like you're the only one confused as to what people's given names are, can't read the "Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden" bit or read the name section. John Cengiz talk 14:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Hanif

Salam bro. Sorry for using the same words, but the edit you called here "awful errors" is really awful. We're on a English Wikipedia, so we need to use English names. Also, your changes actually took most of the names to an incorrect wikipage. Regarding Allah, please see the Islamic Manual of Style. Thanks for showing me something I missed before: the Ibrahim page is pathetic, I'll work on taking its content to Ibrahim (disambiguation) then redirect it to Islamic_view_of_Abraham. Take care. ~ AdvertAdam talk 06:15, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, please don't click "this is a minor edit" when it's not minor, per Help:Minor ~ AdvertAdam talk 06:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
The references to the names were wrong, Hanif is an Islamic term so you wouldn't use whitebred names like "Jacob" in this article. And Ibrahim's main use is not to redirect to somewhere, it must be a dab page of some sort. John Cengiz talk 06:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hanif is an article to explain the Islamic view of the term. This is not WikiIslam to present Arabic/Quranic transliteration. Please follow the Islamic consensus "Grammatical Standardization", as editors spent a lot of effort to get to that standard. In your opinion then, we need to change all Islamic articles to your point! Pleas read and stick to the policies :).
Abraham is for the general view of "Abraham", while Ibrahim should be for the Islamic view of Abraham (which already has its article). Ibrahim now is nonsense and has one sentence about him. ~ AdvertAdam talk 07:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Quote from Hanif page: "This is a minor list of those who submitted their whole selves to God in the way of Ibrahim:"
You're not going to have "Muhammad" and "Ali" described on the list with "Jacob" or "Ishmael". Most Islamic articles adhere to this, this is the one I noticed. John Cengiz talk 07:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Errors happen :(, but I guess you mostly fall-in small articles made by editors that're un-aware of these policies. You can see Islamic views on Abraham, Islamic views on Mary, Jesus in Islam. I'll go add on WikiProject Islam a note to take care about the suggested MOS. I'm not sure if you're still insisting on your edit, as I'm not willing to enter an edit-war :p
Hehe, that list is a joke! The least I can do is to remove Muhammad, as he's considered within the prophets. I'm definately gonna remove the twelve tribes of Israel too. ~ AdvertAdam talk 07:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello, JohnCengiz77. You have new messages at Polysynaptic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Warnings 02 July 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced and irrelevant content to articles, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Serdar Tasci, you may be blocked from editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.78.226.138 (talk) 20:06, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you add unsourced page content or templates to Wikipedia, as you did at Serdar Tasci, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.78.226.138 (talk) 20:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Serdar Tasci. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:48, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

And I'm about to revoke your rollback rights as you misused them during the edit warring. Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

HELP, unlawfully blocked.

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).

JohnCengiz77 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The IP 24.78.226.138 has persistently over the last month edited out the Turkish spelling with diacritics and pronunciation of Serdar Tasci which was in the article even before I first edited it, over 1 year ago. This is important to the article as Serdar Tasci used to be at "Serdar Taşçı", even the German article is at "Serdar Taşçı" - I decided to add the pronunciation of "Tasci" in German just because he lives in Germany and it may have some value.

I have had patience with this vandal, I am only rolling back vandalism to the article and only rollback vandalism, it is rather unfair that a good user, is left blocked AND with no rollback feature because of some disrupting user with nothing better to do than remove content from articles - he doesn't like the look of. Check out most of 24.78.226.138 contributions. This is not an edit war because I am only un-doing vandalism, this is just obvious, it's a staple to the article.

An edit war would be if I continued deleting a stupid hatnote that used to be on Osama bin Laden's page, if I deleted his name in Arabic it would be vandalism. John Cengiz talk 00:40, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

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.

Archive 1Archive 2
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JohnCengiz77/Archive_1&oldid=1143540689"