Talk:Urartu
From Academic Kids
What exactly is the "Proto-Iberian world"? --Yak 22:14, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)
I have tried to expand this page based on info from WWW. I cannot tell whether the paragraph on linguistic affiliation makes sense. Anyway, further details should go to the Urartian language page.
Jorge Stolfi 04:32, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
What is meant by "Urartu is Ibero-Caucasian"?
As far as I know, Ibero-Caucasian is just a theory that the three or four language families that are presently spoken only in the Caucasus (South, Northwest, Northeast, North-central) have a common origin. However, at present there seems to be no linguistic evidence that all four families are related; not even the most ardent "lumpers" have claimed a connection between South and North Caucasian. In fact it seems that some people claim to see a connection between NW Caucasian and Indo-European, back to 10,000 years — and they are having trouble showing it. So the connection between N and S Caucasian, if it exists, must therefore be even more remote than that.
So if there is significant affinity between Urartian and any of those four Caucasian families, it can be with at most one of them, and this article should say which one. The "Ibero-Caucasian" or "Proto-Caucasian" theory is best left as a speculative section in the Caucasian languages page, until someone manages to convince enough linguists that it is real.
All the best,
Jorge Stolfi 05:08, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Urartuan is a later form of Hurrian. The Hurro-Urartuan languages were then found to have a similarity with Lezgian/Avar/Dagastani which is usually called North East Caucasian. However it was regognised as wrong to classify Hurro-Urartuan as North-East Caucasian so the new term Alarodian was introduced.
Later this family was found to be related to Vaynakh/Nakh languages sometimes called North-Central Caucasian.
Meanwhile on the western slopes of the mountains Circassian (West Caucasian) was found to be related to Hattic. Again it is strange to classify Hattic as Northwest caucasian when the "Hattians" were nowhere near NWC. Hetto-Iberian was proposed first but the extension of the term Alarodian to include the new Hatto-Circassian family was also suggested on the basis of certain similarities.
Finally the term Hetto-Iberian was applied for all 5 language groups. Georgian linguists objected to being excluded from the Hetto-Iberian family since they claim transcaucasian Iberia as a Georgian kingdom not Circassian. They proposed a new much larger super family called Proto-Iberian which also included Basque, Etruscan and Pelasgs. However the existence of such a super family is not very well attested at all as of present.
Unfortunately a little Georgian politics has affected all such related pages and has to be filtered out carefully so as not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.Zestauferov 12:12, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
nations
is nothing too far-fetched for nationalist disputes?? Anyway, don't say "Modern Armenians are the descendants of the Urartuians.", say, "according to Arthur Peabody in Armenians — why they rock (de Gruyter, 1982), ethnic Armenians are descended from the Urartian population". Replacing my made up one with a genuine reference, of course. dab (ᛏ) 18:53, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Protected
Rovoam has gone beyond the pale and is reverting simply to make some kind of point [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADante_Alighieri&diff=13502855&oldid=13485426). Because he is virtually unblockable and rather obsessive, I have protected this article and quite a few others. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 18:12, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
- fine, but since he is as persistent as his nemesis, will this mean all Turkey-related articles will remain protected indefinitely? This is not a solution. Arbcom him, ban him, rollback him, he has left the arena of fair-although-biased editing and may be treated as a vandal. dab (ᛏ) 19:19, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
- Dab, I absolutely agree with you on the point that Rovoam should be banned from editing Wikipedia and his account should be closed indefinitely. In fact, I was arguing about this for long time now. However, this would not be the solution. I said before and I repeat it here too: the only way to deal with this person is for other editors to unite and withstand al his spurious edits and vandalisms. Only after seeing the determination of Wikipedia editors will he realize the whole senselessness of his actions and will retreat.
- On the other hand, realistically, the process of banning this "user" from Wikipedia would require decision by ArbCom, i.e. a long and slow process. Therefore, I think, Tony's protection of these pages was the only right option at the moment.
- p.s. Just for records: here's the list of pages protected by Tony, which underwent Rovoam's vandalisms: this page, Caucasian Albania, Artsakh, Arran (Azerbaijan), Azerbaijan, Safavids, Turkey. --Tabib 19:50, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Generally, I would agree with dab that he needs a good arbcomming. This will probably happen. However he probably can't be physically banned, he's too obsessive and has too many IP numbers. I agree with Tabib that a show of unity against his determined abuse would show him that his bread has landed butter-side down. He must be pretty demoralized already; we just have to keep on until he realises he can never win. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 22:28, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
- I can't believe we've had to protect the article of an obscure nation that's been gone for close to three millennia. This feels like a new low. Isomorphic 05:03, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
- By the way, Rovoam's revert on Kura-Araxes culture was ridiculous; he removed a whole group of edits, only a tiny bit of which was even by Tabib. Most of what he reverted was by me and a third user. He's being spiteful and stupid. Isomorphic 05:32, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
- I can't believe we've had to protect the article of an obscure nation that's been gone for close to three millennia. This feels like a new low. Isomorphic 05:03, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
I ask for unprotection of this article. There was nothing like an edit war going on, and I don't mind reverting nationalist biases every couple of days. If we keep it protected, how shall it improve? Tabib, I will revert anti-Turkish and pro-Turkish bias alike, I don't care about Turks or Armenians, in relation with this article. The whole thing is just ridiculous. dab (ᛏ) 05:46, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
- Unprotected as requested. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 05:54, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Dab, you're right. I would gladly distance myself from reverts, if I know that someone is there to watch out this person. I thank you all for your principled positions.--Tabib 06:59, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
Rovoam (72.25.94.178 and 67.4.226.19) edits
I have reverted edits by a well-known troll and vandal User:Rovoam to last version by User:Isomorphic on 00:47 May 17.
The reason why I reverted his edits is because they were spurious.
He first removed a NPOV sentence I have authored and instead, introduced his sentence [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urartu&diff=13909350&oldid=13906882), which was earlier removed by User:Isomorphic stating "rm POV statement; there is no historical consensus for this" [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urartu&diff=13906882&oldid=13811458).
After that his edits were softened a bit by Isomorphic [4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urartu&diff=13914092&oldid=13906899). And then, this person has introduced again the NPOV sentence, written by me which he himself has removed. Thus he tried to present himself as if his edits were valuable to Wikipedia [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urartu&diff=13925901&oldid=13914092).
I believe all users should deal with this person very carefully, because he is rather obsessed and is very good at manipulating with public through various malicious tricks.
In my message above I have named the pages that suffered from Rovoam's vandalisms and were vprotected. Just recently, this person started also to vandalize Nakhichevan and Karabakh and I'm afraid if he persists, these pages will have to be protected as well. --Tabib 12:48, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
enough with the Armenians! just revert them without comment. I would like to see one reference making the claim, and we'll cite that, no problem. Cite sources, Rovoam, don't edit-war. dab (ᛏ) 15:12, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
stubborn reverting
this is silly. Should we ask for protection of the article until anon either cites a source, or grows tired? dab (ᛏ) 08:27, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
- Dab, unfortunately, one has to understand the motives behind his actions. This person is a fanatic and extreme nationalist. But at this moment, in my personal viewpoint, the reverts, vandalism and spurious edits he is doing is not realy for propagating some idea, it is just the expression of his anger and hatred and willing to take revenge from me for whatever reasons he has in mind. He thinks that by vandalizing various Azerbaijan and Turkey related pages, which I have ever contributed even insignificantly, he will get me down.
- I believe, this person will not stop for quite some time, he will be testing the reaction of various editors, will try to confuse them, deceive them, anger them; he will continue blatant and sneaky vandalisms (not obvious at a glance), maybe even will try to justify his actions by his wish to "teach [me] a lesson of tolerance" (?!) ([6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATabib&diff=13987394&oldid=13987327)). I am absolutely convinced, the only way to stop this person, is to stand united against him and revert all his edits, without consideration. In the long run I also believe ArbCom should also review its decision on him and completely ban this person from editing Wikipedia. He's been under revert limitation and personal attack parole, but since then he's been systematically violating revert limitation and also on numerous occasions waged personal attacks, and I am not talking about vandalism yet and replacing user pages with other pages from Wikipedia dedicated to various human organs..--Tabib 13:37, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
- I thought he was banned? It's just that he is difficult to block, but he has no business editing Wikipedia, obviously, with such an attitude. See WP:AN/I#Rovoam_and_vandalism, it seems people are considering contacting his ISP and/or the authorities now. Maybe some "real life" pressure will make him go away (sheesh. think how easy it would be just to put up your own webpage, with no one interfering). dab (ᛏ) 13:58, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
protection
ok, I agree with the protection at this point. This was getting a little bit too annoying. I also agree that we are reaching a new low, protecting articles on ancient cultures because of political pov vandalism. dab (ᛏ) 07:16, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Since article is protected, can you post this map into article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Urartu.jpg
- Or, alternatively, I would suggest this map, originally from an Armenian source (but the author of the map is a Western scholar, Hewsen). It is even more correct and clear.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Urartu-Biainili.jpg --Tabib 15:05, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
It's been three weeks; unprotecting. --Golbez 04:53, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
map
I suppose Image:Urartu-Biainili.jpg is fine for the moment, but its copyright status is dubious, we'd need a full reference where it was published, and it needs to be redrawn, preferably in colour, as a GFDL image (see Wikipedia:Maps for that). dab (ᛏ) 12:07, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Initially, I have posted this map during discussions in Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh [7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#Urartu_and_Armenia:_clarifications_and_elaborations). The map is taken from an Armenian web-site http://www.hyeetch.nareg.com.au/armenians/history_p1.html (scroll down a bit and you'll see a link to map). As you can see in the lower right corner the map has two annotations. First, it has the sign of the web-page ("HyeEtch"), which may imply that the web-site reserves the copyright for this image. But just above this sign there is also a writing "Robert Hewsen", which makes me think that this map is actually scanned from a book by a Western scholar and placed in that web-page. Nevertheless, the actual copyright of that very image may be the web-site. Therefore, I concur with Dab on his point that perhaps some of our editors could prepare exact copy of this map for exclusive use in Wikipedia. --Tabib 09:51, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
