User talk:Enerelt/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi, I know you've already been editing awhile, but I wanted to say:

Welcome!

Hello, Enerelt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Elonka 01:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you speak Mongolian? I was very excited when I saw you add this link.[1] Even though it may not be immediately useful to the article, your language skills could be very helpful to Wikipedia! If you do speak Mongolian, I recommend that you add this template to your userpage: {{user mn}}. To learn more about the language templates, see also the Babelfish project.

I do a lot of work on Mongolian subjects myself, though more of my work is related to the Ilkhanate. Have you read The Secret History of the Mongols?

For example, one place where you might be interested in helping, is at the article on Sorghaghtani Beki. We are debating at the talkpage, what is the best English spelling of her name. What is your opinion? --Elonka 02:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the information.  :) I think on spelling, what we should do is look to see how English-language historians spell her name, and then Wikipedia should do the same thing as what most historians are doing. I think this will be "Sorqaqtani" or "Sorghaghtani". My favorite is "Sorqaqtani."

What does it say in the Secret History about Sorqaqtani? How is she related to Wang Khan? Some places they say she is his daughter. Some places they say she is his niece. What do you think? --Elonka 02:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

there is a lot of doubtful and erroneous information around on wikipedia, and people keep on adding doubtful and erroneus stuff (like that Hoelun, not Alungoo, gave her kids the five arrows, that Oroqina was another name for Dokhuz Khatun, that Erdene Zuu is surrounded by 108 suvargas, etc etc. Actually, IMO misinformation is curently a bigger problem than lack of information, at least when it comes to Mongolian history. That is the reason why I got somewhat suspicious of unsourced statements (and sometimes sourced ones). It's not malice, just some kind of reflex, I hope you don't get mad over it.

Btw. I think valid citations should at least contain relevant page numbers, and possibly year and place of the edition you are using.

Regards, and keep up the good work, Yaan (talk) 17:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 05:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Enerelt, Thank you. I am glad you liked the article of al-Adil Kitbugha . Regards. Samsam22 (talk) 01:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the kind words you left on my talk page, I am still trying to research a bit more into him. I have had put your version "Choi tsevenpurev" up for deletion as the page already exsisted. Thanks, --Jimbo^[online] 12:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Enerelt, in the discussion page of Qutuz and the Battle of Ain Jalut there is a discussion going on about somethings. Maybe you like to give your opinion. Thanx and regards. Samsam22 (talk) 19:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi my friend! Black africans had been served in the armies of dynasties in Egypt since ancinet times. So I have a question to ask you. I wonder whether native africans were among mamluk army and involved the battles against Mongols. I guess they were served for mamluks because Baybars invaded deep into Africa. I think you probably know that. --Enerelt (talk) 09:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Enerelt, black Africans were present in Egypt not only in ancinet times but also in Islamic era. There were Nubians, Abbasssynians and others from East Africa who served in the armies during the Fatimid, Abbasid and Ayyubids eras. They were also present during the Mamluk era as slaves and freemen.In the army they served mostly as infantries. Baibars himself , without to suggest something, was described by the Egyptians and arabs who themselves are not light as a dark man. In the source-books of the Mamluk era historians black Africans were mentioned.19:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

I noticed you add a lot of interesting context to Mongol Empire-related articles, but could you please try to provide page numbers when you provide citations? That makes it much easier to verify claims, as one does not have to read the whole book for (maybe) one single sentence. Some suggestions can be found at WP:CITE#HOW and esp. WP:CITE#FULL. Regards, Yaan (talk) 10:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Сайн байна уу? Та Баабарпедма дээрх Enerelt мөн үү? Мөн бол Монгол Википедиад ирэхийг урьж байна! --Chinneeb_{my talk} 17:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I think what you should do with the picture is to add an Information and a license template. The Information template looks like this:

{{Information
| Description = 
| Source = 
| Date = 
| Author =
| Permission =
| other_versions = 
}}

,

the license template could look like this:

{{GFDL|cc-by-3.0}}

I guess you can just name the author (maybe under pseudonym) and write something like "Permission to upload to Wikipedia obtained". Just make sure your friend agrees with what you are doing. Regards, Yaan (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for uploading that image. I've decorated my articles with it :

• History of Mongolia
• Mongol Castle

and

• Karakorum

Cheers, Gantuya eng (talk) 08:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Bayarlalaa--Enerelt (talk) 09:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

This reads too close to a copyvio of Genghis Khan: Conqueror of the World, Leo de Hartog ([2]). Please rewerite. Thank you, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't know. Try asking at WP:RDH.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 03:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi friend, I'm very glad to hear from you too. First of all, I certainly agree with you that Yuan emperors became nominal suzerain after the death of Kaidu, thanks to the efforts of Duwa and others, which marked the end of wars between these khanates and the unity of the Mongol world. Though, there is a somewhat unclear issue which I will present here: the exact nature of this unity.

As we are writing articles about history, it's better to be as factually accurate and view-balanced as possible. I'm also trying to get deeper and deeper into this topic. Though the period of peace or unity finally came since the end of Temur Khan's rule, we cannot immediately conclude that the Mongols world had been restored to a single empire as before. Unity does not necessarily mean they precisely had restored to one country, but can also be of other forms, e.g. vassal states under a nominal suzerain. As you already said, Yuan emperors had no true power other than in Yuan itself. You also mentioned "since then, Ilkhans, Kipchak Khans and Chagataids had sent tributes". Yes, I'm aware of this. I think it is a form of nominal suzerainty instead of sovereignty. The difference between the two is that the former (nominal suzerainty) implies they are two different political entities, but one is nominally subordinate to the other (e.g. a vassal state, like Annam); the later (sovereignty) implies one is a part of the other, as least nominally. From this point, it appears that post-1304 "Mongol Empire" was still not really a single state, but a term referring to set of Mongol-ruled political entities or states, within which one (i.e. the Yuan) was considered the nominal suzerain of others.

Note that paying tributes to some political entity don't necessarily make it a part of that country; instead, it is often a form of traditional tributary relations or a form of nominal subordination of one state to another. This happened quite often in East Asian history. For example, Korea and Vietnam had paid tributes to Chinese dynasties for hundreds of years, but they were only nominal vassals of China, not part of China; Chagatai Khanate (Mughalistan) and Timurid dynasty (which had controlled all of the territories of the Ilkhanate since the end of the Yuan) also paid tributes to the Ming Dynasty after the fall of the Yuan Dynasty, but they were not of the same country either (note that the Ming considered the Yuan as a legitimate dynasty of China; when Ming was founded, it demanded its western countries to pay tributes according to the Yuan example). Thus, we need to be more cautious about this issue.

I'm also always happy to read your message. Cheers! --207.112.124.205 (talk) 05:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I cannot find this particular information about Kankali Turks either, sorry. But I'll let you know if I find them. Best regards.--207.112.124.205 (talk) 20:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

is there a wikiproject mongol?ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 16:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, maybe you've figured it out by now, but "merging" articles doesn't mean to write the same text in both places. In fact, such content duplication should be carefully avoided, as it results in a maintenance nightmare. The correct procedure is to turn the less common name into a redirect. I've fixed the problem for Nigudar->Negudar and Nikudari->Qara'unas now. If you remember any other situations where you duplicated articles, please try to fix them as well (or tell me, so I'll do it). Thanks! --Latebird (talk) 09:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi EnereIt, thanks for your work on categorizing the Mongol articles. One thing to be aware of though. When you add a category with a pipe symbol and space, like [[Category:Borjigin| ]], it sorts the article in the category under "space" instead of the first letter of the article title. So if you look at the current category: Category:Borjigin, many of the articles are piled up at the beginning instead of under the correct letters. The way to fix this is to go back and remove the "| " from the category tags on each article, so instead of [[Category:Borjigin| ]], it's [[Category:Borjigin]]. Just wanted to let you know, --Elonka 01:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I’m 207.112.124.205. I'm surely glad to help. I have read some books (mainly Chinese ones) about him, and happy to see the article to get expanded.--207.112.39.134 (talk) 03:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Enerelt, can you tell this person to register an account^

It seems we have a shared IP address, and I'm getting his messages. --207.112.124.205 (talk) 09:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sain uu Enerelt! "Asuud"-in tuhai oguuleld, chi neg mongol haanii orond oor neg mongol haan tavchij ene bol minor edit gej temdeglesen baina. Yer ni bi tuuhiig tiim sain meddeggui, ter hoyor haanii aliin zasah hugacaanii uyeer tedner hamgiin huchtei baisan gej bi ogt medehgui dee. Harin iim zuiliin tuhai chamaas oor mayagaar bodoh bolomj ug ni baigaa baihaa. Yer ni ene ug ni aldaa baisan bol shuud uzej boloh aldaa baisan bish. Tiim uchraas ene chini minor edit bish, jinhene edit baisan gej bi helmeer baina. Bas ingej temdegleh yostoi gej bodno. Mendchilsen G Purevdorj (talk) 10:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:Berke-Arikboke coin.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Latebird (talk) 09:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you now tried to add "GFDL-self" to the image description page. Before I help yuo fix the formatting, I'd like to make sure that I really understand your intention correctly. Does that mean that you took the photograph yourself? The source "Bulghar Album 2019D 260223083644" you have given suggests something different, but isn't very clear either. --Latebird (talk) 20:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Copied from here, to keep the conversation in one piece.

Hi! I am sorry I didn't took the photo. It is from the website picasaweb.google.com[3]. Cheers, --Enerelt (talk) 01:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

In such a case, you can't use "GFDL-self". All the "X-self" templates are only for works that you created yourself. In this specific case its even worse: You can't use any of the licenses accepted by Wikipedia at all, because the source says unconditionally: "© All rights reserved". In other words, uploading it here violates the copyright of the photographer, so it will have to be deleted again. Actually, I wouldn't even count on the uploads to picasa to be legal, as we have no indication that the uploader there really is the author. The way they are formatted, they look like scanned from a book or catalog. The real author is probably a professional photographer (or a museum employee), who is unlikely to publish them like this, anonymously and without any further comment. --Latebird (talk) 09:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for Image:Berke-Arikboke coin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Berke-Arikboke coin.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! And again I apologize for the delayed account registration.--Choulin (talk) 07:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Black spirit banner of the Mongols.jpg. I noticed that that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Latebird (talk) 13:20, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I had finished the midterm test yesterday, and hopefully will have more access to the university libraries. According to the sources I have already read, the conflicts between Yuan and Burma occurred since 1270s, and did not come to an end until the early 1300s. The conflict in 1300 began with a Burmese official called Asange that killed the king of Burma as well as over a hundred messengers from the Yuan Dynasty. Thus, Temur decided to send army to punish him. Nevertheless, the Yuan army from Yunnan Xing Zhongshusheng met significant resistance. In the next year, Asange decided to bride the Yuan generals, which was successful and the Yuan army retreated to China soon. Later, Asange sent his younger brother to the Yuan court to ask for pardon, and Temur agreed to stop the Burmese campaign. Burma had kept a stable tributary relationship with the Yuan ever since. The Vietnamese had accepted this relationship earlier, but I have not yet found an evidence to suggest a direct involvement of the Vietnamese in the Burmese campaign in 1300.--Choulin (talk) 20:01, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

By the way, Rossabi's book and the Cambridge History of China (vol6) mentions that 大都/Dadu/Daidu was the name of the Yuan capital to be known by both the Chinese and the Mongols, not Khanbalikh, which was a Turkic name for the city.--Choulin (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've seen that you listed baabarpedia as a source reference in articles once or twice. This is a problem because baabarpedia is a volunteer contributed project just like Wikipedia, which makes it an unreliable source. In other words, if it is the only reference, then the respective article is really unsourced. Of course, that's even more the case if you have written the article there yourself... For example: you might want to name the original source listed there in the article here as well. --Latebird (talk) 09:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC) PS: Are you familiar with the Mongolian Wikipedia?

I think I listed Baabarpedia as a reference only once.--Enerelt (talk) 10:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Twice, actually, but Örüg Temür Khan also has some other sources listed, so it's a smaller problem there. Anyway, I'm not telling you this to point out specific infractions, but rather to illustrate the general problem of reliable vs. unreliable sources. Wikipedia will never have too many good sources! --Latebird (talk) 23:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I've replaced the link in Sartuul with the reference to Weatherford from the baabarpedia version. It's probably a good idea if you remove the other one as well. Things that you've written yourself don't really count as a "reference" (unless printed by a highly reputable publisher).

Btw: If I post here, then I keep this page on my watch list, so you don't need to go to my talk page to get my attention. It's much easier to follow a discussion if it is all together in one place. --Latebird (talk) 09:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I've done. --Enerelt (talk) 10:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)