User talk:The Phoenix

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

Don't forget to click the 'preview' button before you press save. This will prevent you spotting problems after you save a page and having to edit it again. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Angela 11:13, Oct 18, 2003 (UTC)

I dunno anything abt Bulgarian, but i know that in Czech a thing sort of like that is called a hacek, , pronounced HA-check (or i guess HA-czech. Hmm.). The C in hacek has one. That may help in your search. --Jerzy 21:16, 2003 Oct 20 (UTC)

Great work on Ottoman Empire. — Jor (Talk) 23:39, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ottoman Sultans

I notice you have undone the simple template that I have created for the Ottoman Sultans. I believed that the tables previously used were much too complicated and confusing, with some important words (such as "Preceded by" and "Osmanli dynasty") in almost unreadably small font, while other not-so-important information (such as the years of the predecessors and successors) appearing. Furthermore, why write the name of the individual in the table, when the same is apparent from the article title? In addition, a problem has arisen in that you have reinstated tables for some sultans but not others. So, I would ask you what your preference would be—using a simple template for all sultans, or using the more informative one for all of them. (As I have noted, I definitely prefer the latter format—it is used for almost all other monarchs, nobles and popes.) Certainly, it is not desirable to maintain the present inconsistency. -- Emsworth 18:31, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

You may be right, there is a lot of information crammed into a small space. I just thought that the old version looked somewhat unprofessional. The reason why I didn't change all of the sultans is that I was too lazy to do the job. My excuses for that. –The Phoenix 14:49, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sång till Skåne

Hey, Phoenix, can I ask you if the anonymous user who created the article Sång till Skåne was possibly you, having forgotten to log in (as we all do sometimes)? The reason I ask is that I saw you (Fenix) created a similar article on Swedish Wikipedia in July. Sång till Skåne has been listed on Votes for Deletion recently, and I was just thinking that if you're the originator, you might like to comment there. Well, if you're not the originator, the discussion might still be of interest. Best regards, Bishonen 15:42, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

No, I didn't create the english one. I'm not going to interfere with this discussion, but I think that the article should be kept as long as the "national anthem" stuff is deleted. Every landskap (historical province) has traditionally a song associated with just like every landskap has a special flower (landskapsblomma). —The Phoenix 16:16, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Glad to hear from you, Phoenix. Sure, I've no problem with the song, especially now it's been translated, though wikisource might be a better home for it. Bishonen 19:07, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Image needing tag

Hey there, could you please provide Image:Ottoman Coat of Arms.jpg with an appropriate copyright tag. If you took the picture yourself, you can license it under the GFDL by adding {{GFDL}} to the image description page. Regards, [[User:Solitude|Solitude\^talk]] 15:01, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know about that particular image (i.e. the computer version), but since the motif is from the 19th century I presume that the copyright have expired. Is there any special rules regarding such situations? Does the person who digitalized this image hold the copyright? Sincerely, The Phoenix 15:32, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Maps

Hi, Phoenix. I'm HuhSunquy, from Spanish Wikipedia. I'm working in Inca's Empire article and I wanna do a location map of it. I'm writing to you because I saw you made a map for Otoman Empire (Image:Ottoman_1683.png) so I'd be of grateful to you if you could teach me how did you do it. Thanks for your help. --HuhSunquy 02:34, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Huhsunquy! I am really sorry I haven't answered you until now. See my official apology on your Spanish talkpage. —The Phoenix 20:21, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Traffic Code

In Mus Province, you say The traffic code is 49. Could you explain what you mean by "traffic code" in this context? Thanks. Bovlb 06:51, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)

The information is from the list of Provinces of Turkey, where it is noted simply as the province's number. I don't really know where, but I know that I heard somewhere that they are the provincial codes used on vehicle's number plates. I agree that the expression "traffic code" might seem a little dull. Please, feel free to change it to whatever you see fit. —The Phoenix 20:21, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Map

OK. Don't worry. --Huhsunqu 20:15, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What was The Turkish religion before islam.

Are you a turk? Please do not delete my referances if you are not 4 sure.

No, I am not Turkish and I don't see why me being a Turk or not should limit me in editing Wikipedia. I know that some Turkic peoples were buddhists, but for most part, I think Turkic peoples were shamanistic before converting to Islam. Do you have any sources to back you up in that the ancestors of the Ottomans were buddhists? And "as most of the Asian cultures were" I think is inaccurate as that seems to forget Hinduism and Islam, as well as the shamanistic religions of Central Asia and Siberia. (And there is no such thing as the Turkish religion.) /The Phoenix 17:04, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I insulted you, I have no claims on limiting you in editing Wikipedia. Just protecting my stuff. --tommiks 23:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The main source is Orhon Tablets. For the relation of other belief systems, you have to consider the time range, and migration path of the turkic tribes. Ottomans were only one among the thirteen tribes coming from central asia, which there is no clue that they have moved as south as India. For the other concept, if you can talk about "The Navaho Religion" and give protection under USA constitution, because of using specific halucinagens. Why not talk the Turkish religion, given its own special understanding of the sun and earth, and they do not have the same mushrooms that Navaho's have. There is no single book that binds these forms of belief systems. I think this is very minor detail. I was surprized that you recognized. Most people just jump over this detail. --tommiks 23:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your apology is accepted. As for the Turkish religion, I meant the there was not one but several religions.

Further, what is the point of replacing the table with the template of modern countries? The Ottoman Empire never had a calling code or anything like that. I don't understand the point of replacing the table at all. There seems to be no use in doing so. For what reason? /The Phoenix 13:58, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I guess constantly I am stepping on your shoes. I just wanted to improve your data by using a better framework. Infobox gave a place to hold a flag and so many other comman ifo. I'm reading financial structure at the last years of the empire. There were economical values that can be used within that frameork, given most of the dept transfered to Turkey!!! When it comes to TLD if there is no response, it should not print those boxes. I 'm happy that you are very detailed oriented and can catch these mistakes. By the way "that is completely horrible" is a litle bit over reaction, hope you can see that too. The last time it checked we were working on a country, even if it was dissolved right???? --tommiks 15:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did not checked the history, I make sure that I do not delete any of your edits. But the page needs a little structure to accomodate new additions without stepping on other edits. Ottoman law is a huge section. I did not understand why you did not move it before me to the main page. Also the governing structure of the Imperial and provinces were not clearly labelled even though they were mentioned. All these concepts are very important to explain what happaned during the turn of the century. There were states that changed without major battles during the WWI.--tommiks 15:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After simple organization, I will work on culture of the Empire, add some info under the Sultans and their life. leave the rest of the document to your hands. Thanks for given attention to this page.--tommiks 15:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can agree that I maybe overreacted a little, but I don't understand why you changed to the template for modern countries instead of just changing the table, adding the stuff that you wanted to add, but leaving such things as Internet TLD out.

Also please remember that Wikipedia is a collaboration. We should be collaborating, not making distinctions of which edits are mine and which are yours. /The Phoenix 17:29, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. I will bring the table back. Give me couple of seconds. --tommiks 18:28, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the main page history section, it is very detailed. This is reflected under the page "History of the Ottoman Empire". There is nothing left to put into that page, except the links to periods. I think It is better to move these third level links under the main page and keep the history of the empire not changed. That will make the links in the Timeline conceptually work better. Not: I'm not deleting any information, just making it easier to reach from the main (organizer) page--tommiks 18:28, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure what you mean, but I suppose it'll work out in the end. /The Phoenix 18:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page.

What do do you think about it? Hope you like it. I made some textual changes to make the story flow. It needs more work, though. --tommiks 23:38, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It probably needs some more work, yes, but on the whole, I think it looks good. /The Phoenix 10:10, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you like this form of the Ottoman Empire page. Just wanted to ask. --tommiks 23:43, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Translation!?

Can you help translate this for me to swedish? Many thanks in advance!

About half of the economically active population is employed in agriculture. Arable land amounts to only one-fourth of the total land area, yet the country meets nearly all its food needs from domestic production. In the mid-1970s, moreover, Albania became selfsufficient in bread grains. Main crops are wheat, corn (maize), sugar beets, cotton, sunflower seeds, tobacco, potatoes, and fruits. Major livestock are sheep, goats, cattle, and pigs.

--Armour 14:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Osmanli

Hey. I proposed a page move for Osmanli. I want to ask you for your opinion, as you seem to take interest in the topic. Thanks. Ben ^T/_C 15:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dropping by. I agree and I have answered thus on the talk page. /The Phoenix 15:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for input

Kmf164 and I are looking for some feedback on a particular external link at hybrid vehicle. We'd appreciate your feedback. (See the second "External Links" heading.) uriah923^(talk) 23:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to Subdivisions of the Ottoman Empire

I notice you have edited Subdivisions of the Ottoman Empire in the past. One problem mentioned in the article is that "such a large empire inevitably sees many changes over several centuries, any listing is either a freeze in time or, as below (still incomplete), a compromise concerning overlaps and other alterations." In an attempt to systematize the listing, I made a chart based mainly on Donald Edgar Pitcher’s An Historical Geography of the Ottoman Empire (1972) that is a list of provinces in 1609 (near the height of the Empire’s power). The chart includes Turkish names, dates of foundation, current location, and other notes. I followed this with a list of provinces that disappeared before 1609 and provinces that appeared after 1609. Finally, to reflect the administrative reforms of 1864 and the decline of the Empire, I have a list of provinces in 1877.

This information would remove little of the information currently in the article but would be a reorganization of the article that would change its appearance (e.g., end the Christian/Muslim division of provinces). Because information on this topic is scarce and sometimes contradictory, I wanted to run this by you before posting the changes. Please give comment or objection at User talk:LuiKhuntek or the article's talkpage. Thanks.

LuiKhuntek 21:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered at user talk:LuiKhuntek. /The Phoenix 09:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input on Subdivisions of the Ottoman Empire at User talk:LuiKhuntek. I also used Imber's The Ottoman Empire as a source to corroborate. The problem with a systematic master list of Ottoman subdivisions is that there were so many changes over the years and there sometimes conflicting accounts of names and dates, even in the original sources (see Pitcher’s An Historical Geography of the Ottoman Empire for details). Because of this, the "snapshot in time" method may be a good starting point. I will post something in a few days.

LuiKhuntek 04:15, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Tokapi Throne Room.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tokapi Throne Room.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 21:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Names of the kagans

Hi The Phoenix,

It seems on 30 march 2004 you had organized the article Göktürks in English Wikipedia. Among other things, you have added the names of the kagans. Good work, thanks. However, I observe that the sources don't agree on the names of the kagans after Bilge Khan's death. (This is probably because of the medieval custom of changing names after being the kagan.) So can you please give me the references to the name of the kagans Yollug, Icen and Etimis ? (Yollug is also known as the creator of Bilge Khan's stele in Khöshöö Tsaidam Monuments) . Thanks and happy editting.Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The Phoenix. You have new messages at Talk:Mehmed I.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Ghaznavid

Hello, The Phoenix,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Ghaznavid should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghaznavid .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Lib arts premed96 (talk) 01:38, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]