Talk:Feappii

Discussion

Reiner Gavriel let's talk here. Can you prove that national identity of Ingushes didn't exist in 17th century? Also I could also say that the national identity of Chechens didn't exist during that time.

How can you say the same about the Chechens? The first mention of the Ingush ethnonym (Ghalghaj) was in the 16th century, while the term "Ingush" started only to be used to describe the people around 200 years later and even then it was not used for all people that identify themselves as Ingush today. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 02:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

The "Nokhchi" term is very young itself and first mention was in 18th century. The Torshkhoy who founded the Tärsh village are Ingush and never called themselves Chechen or anything else. In 17th century Ingush term was used for all Ingushes including fyappiy, don't lie please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor1234567123 (talk • contribs) 08:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

That is a lie, Nokhchi was first documented in 1310 by Georgians as "Nakhche" (which is the Highland pronunciation of Nokhchi). Ghalghaj was first mentioned as Kalkan in the 16th century and it was not used by everyone, it referred to only the people known today as Ghalghaj shahar (which is supported by Ingush folklore). Not to mention that most Russian sources from the 19th century refer to all Vainakhas as "Nakhchi", sources such as Berger, Dubrovin, and many others. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Good that you mentioned Ingush folklore, during 17th century the Ghalghai term was already used for Fyappiy, from book "Ингуши" written by Яковлев: "Галгай Хамхи был дружен с одним богатым феппинцем (из племени феппий, живущего ближе к Дарьяльскому ущелью), который посватался за сестру Хамхи, калеку от рожденья. Два года тянулись переговоры, так как галгай не хотели родниться с низшим, подвластным им племенем феппинцев. Наконец, старший в роде галгаев, Эги, согласился на брак, назначив большой „калым“. Калека-жена родила от феппинца двух мальчиков. Они понравились своему дяде Хамхи и тот взял их себе на воспитание. Одного он сделал пастухом, а другого оставил в своем доме. Однажды Хамхи заметил, что его воспитанник-мальчик сидит печален. Хамхи призвал свою любимую жену и спросил: „Что с мальчиком?“ „Не знаю“, отвечала она: „я спрашивала его, но не добилась ответа“. „Иди сейчас же к нему и узнай, что случилось, или я убью тебя!“ приказал Хамхи. Тогда мальчик рассказал женщине следующее: „Лалоевы убили брата моего отца и за его смерть хотят платить лишь 6 коров, как за феппинца“… Хамхи, узнав в чем дело, порадовался: „Настоящий выйдет из него человек. Я не ошибся, взяв его на воспитание“. Он собрал войско и объявил Лалоеву: „Плати за убийство 12 коров или будем биться“. Лалоев долго отказывался, говоря, что ведь убитый — не галгай, за которого следует платить 12 коров, а феппий, за которого издавна платилось только 6 коров. Наконец, под страхом нападения Лалоев должен был заплатить 12 коров, и произошло примирение. С тех-то пор, говорят ингуши, и стали ГАЛГАИ И ФЕППИНЦЫ НАЗЫВАТЬСЯ ОДИНАКОВО „ГАЛГАЯ МИ“, Т.-Е. ИНГУШАМИ". — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor1234567123 (talk • contribs) 21:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Where does it say it's from the 17th century? The story doesn't imply that the Vyappiy always called themselves Ghalghaj, it describes why they started calling themselves Ghalghaj and how the Ghalghaj saw the Vyappiy as inferior. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 21:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

But it does say that the Fyappiy started calling themselves Ghalghai in 15 century. If you ask how do I know this story happened in 15th century, it's because Lors of Bummat lived in 15th century (source: Amin Tesayev "ИСТОРИЧЕСКИЕ ЛИЧНОСТИ ЧЕЧНИ XI-XXI ВВ." page 111) and three brothers (Egi, Khamkhi, Targim) lived at same time, which means that the Fyappiy started calling themselves Fyappiy starting from 15th century because the story takes part in 15th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor1234567123 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Noone knows when Egi lived. It's ridiculous that you claim he lived in the 15th century when the folktales themselves don't even claim it. Fact is, the Vyappiy were forced to call themselves Ghalghaj and that the Ghalghaj saw them as inferior. Another fact is that the Vyappiy that live in Aukh today identify as Chechens and never identified themselves Ghalghaj, especially not as Ingush. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 21:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your own Chechen historian Amin Tesayev says that Egi lived in 15th century. So in conclusion the Fyappiy already called themselves Ghalghaj in the 17th centuries since the story I mentioned takes place in the 15th century. Could you prove that the Aukh Fyappiy never indetified themselves as Ghalghaj and indetified as Chechens always? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor1234567123 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

These are not facts at all, Galgai (Ingush) never considered Fyappi as inferior people, since according to the charter of the Ingush people, all Societies, all Surnames, and all Teips are equal to each other, more precisely, absolutely all Ingush are equal, if we exclude the false information of some incompetent Russian historians which some Chechen "historians" like to refer to. Records of the German traveler and historian Guldenstedt, studied the Caucasus and especially the Ingush, and witnessed the oath of the Ingush in 1770, he noted all the villages that signed the agreement, and among them were the Fyappins.And to deny the fact that Galgai is the ancestor of many Nakh societies is a very dubious statement. Ingush Orsthoy (talk) 11:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

So you cherrypick folklore that fits your narrative and ignore the rest, including sources that are stronger than yours? Here you claim that the term Ghalghaj is of Sumerian origin. I think that says enough. We are not discussing the ethnonym Ingush. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 18:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Where are your so-called pseudo-sources stronger than my sources? This is ridiculous, “Nakhchi” was called a society in Ichkeria, it never spread to Ingush societies, Ingush were attributed to Chechens only because of the ease of pronunciation of the word “Chechen”. Ingush Orsthoy (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

It's well established that the term "Nakhchi" was not only used by Chechens but also Ingush, that is thanks to sources throughout the 19th century. Where do you think "Vainakh" comes from? Are you even familiar with the history of that word? Reiner Gavriel (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Vainakh is an ethnonym coined by Yakovlev and Malsagov to unite the Ingush and Chechens. Regarding the “Nakhchi”, how could the Ingush call themselves that if the same Laudaev wrote that the Nazrans (Ingush) laughed at the flat Nakhchi people for calling themselves “cheese”, even the mountain Chechens refused to call themselves “Nakhchi” Ingush Orsthoy (talk) 20:06, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

And what was the ethnonym used prior to "Vainakh"? Historically accurate sources indicate very strongly that it was "Nakhchi". It is one theory but the biggest theory was that Nakhchi meant "nation", you can harp on it all you want. Laudaev theorized that cheese could be related to Nakhchi, he never said this is a fact. He did however say as a fact that Ingush referred to themselves as Nakhchi. He also said that mountain Chechens called themselves Nakhchi but that the term might have originated from the lowlands. There is a difference between theorizing something and writing down facts. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Fyappiy are an Ingush society

Reiner Gavriel Fyappin society is and was Ingush. There's many authorative sources about it. Nataev claims that it's Chechen and doesn't mention Ingush at all, he even claims Kostoevs as Chechens (which is ridiculous). Nataev is Chechen historian and is interested party in this matter, he shouldn't be used as authorative source, you should know that yourself. So why did you remove my 3 authorative sources and replace them with your Nataev: [1]? Fyappiy aren't society that are equally belonging to both Ingush and Chechens, the Chechen Fyappins in Aukh are offspring of Fyappin (Ingush) tayp Torshkhoy. No source claims that they are equally belonging to both nations. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:24, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

The Vyappiy are represent in both nations, so no, they are not just Ingush. Which three authorative sources have I replaced? "the Chechen Fyappins in Aukh are offspring of Fyappin (Ingush) tayp Torshkhoy" if they are an offspring of the Ingush Fyappin, why do they call themselves Chechens today? Reiner Gavriel (talk) 21:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Reiner Gavriel, this article is well documented and researched, and there is no discussion on this matter in the Russian Wikipedia [2], so why alter the information here? the Fyappi familiy towers settlements are located in Ingushetia and the society is based in western part of mountainous Ingushetia. More than 95% speak the Ingush language and consider themselves Ingush. A very small amount of the Fyappi clan migrated to Chechnya, which does not make the Fyappi society Chechen, even if several migrants considers themselves Chechen. I do not understand your logic. The very first researchers of the Caucasus mention the Fyappi as an Ingush clan [see Klaproth's Travels to the Caucasus], and almost every other researcher agrees. What is the point of attributing them to Chechens and using the Chechen version Vyappi for the article instead of the Ingush one - Fyappiy? Muqale (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

The Russian Wikipedia has been hijacked as you can see by the edit history, which includes you and WikiEditor1234567123 old (blocked) account. Yes, the tower settlements are located in todays Ingushetia, does that mean it is strictly an Ingush society? No, people of the society are represented in both nations, the Chechens and the Ingush. Researchers in the field agree on the matter that they belong to both nations. Strangely enough WikiEditor1234567123 had no problem with it either. Can you give me the page number on Klaproth claiming that? Reiner Gavriel (talk) 22:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Source to Klaproth: Tribu Ingouche de Wapi (Ingush tribe) [3]

Another statement to confirm: [4] Muqale (talk) 22:50, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Klaproth actually says something different in the original, not translated book; "An seinen oberen Gegenden ist der Mizdshegische Distrikt, der von den Georgiern Dzurdzuketi genannt wird, und unter denselben liegt ihr eigentliches Khisteti. In beiden liegen von oben nach unten folgende Dörfer, deren Bewohner sich selbst Fapi oder Wapi nennen" (Reise in den Kaukasus und nach Georgien, p. 553). Your other source not only calls them Wapi but also "most westernly of all Mitsdjeghi", which is a name for Chechens. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Mitsdjeghi is a tatar name Klaproth used for all Ingush and Chechens. Also, you are lying about the translation being wrong. In german it says the exact same thing as my link, here's another direct link to Klaproth's book Klaproth mispronounced several names, it doesn't change the fact that back then just as today the Fyappi are an Ingush society/clan. Can you name at least one notable Chechen who is of the Fyappi clan?

The following are all of the Fyappi society, and all of them are Ingush:

• Vassan-Girey Dzhabagiyev — Ingush educator, social thinker, major political and public figure, agricultural economist, sociologist, publicist.
• Yunus-bek Yevkurov — politician, former Head of Ingushetia.
• Mikhail Gutseriev — high-profile Ingush businessman.
• Issa Kodzoev — Ingush writer, poet, teacher.
• Dzhemaldin Yandiev — Ingush poet, member of the Union of Writers of the USSR.
• Tamara Yandieva — Ingush artist, singer.
• Ruslan Mamilov — Ingush artist, director, sculptor.
• Amur Amerkhanov — Ingush artist, director, singer.
• Nurdin Kodzoev — Ingush historian.
• Timur Matiev — Ingush historian, Ph.D., Head of the Department of History of the Ingush State University.
• Bersnako Gazikov — Ingush historian, archivist.
• Zarifa Sautieva — Ingush activist.
• Mukharbek Didigov — Ingush politician, statesman, engineer.
• Ahmed Kotiev — Ingush boxer, Minister of Physical Culture and Sports of the Republic of Ingushetia.
• Nazyr Mankiev — Ingush wrestler, 2008 Olympic gold medalist.

Muqale (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Mitsdjeghi is the Kumyk name for Chechens, deriving from the Michikhi region in Eastern Chechnya. Calling them as such is the same as calling them Chechens. That is not original, not translated book, it's a translation by Frederic Shoberl and apparently not a direct translation either. Here you can find the direct book by Klaproth. Mispronouncing F and W? This is you assuming stuff in your own favor. It's clear that he is trying to pronounce it Vyapiy, which would be written Wäpi in German. Your list is completely irrelevant to this matter, I am not discussing with you about that. The Vyappiy also exist among the Chechens, that is a fact. The rest simply does not matter because it has nothing to do with our discussion. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

You can mention there are Fyappiy representatives in Chechnya, settlers, migrants, whatever word you prefer. But it does not make them a Chechen society just because some of them live in Chechnya. Many Chechen refugees after the Chechen war settled in Ingushetia, it would not make sense to label them Ingush because of their current habitat. The origin of Fyappy society is based in Ingushetia where the people speak Ingush and pronounce it Fyappiy. PLain and obvious. Muqale (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reiner Gavriel, let's ignore the fact that you cannot even name 1 notable Fyappi who is Chechen, like the list of names I gave. Let’s dissect your reply by looking at this original book in german you deem to be “disproving the translated sources” I provided.

• First point: Klaproth himself wrote that he used the (tatar) name Mizdjegi (not Michigish) for all the Ingush and Chechen tribes, because he believes the terms Kists should apply to the tribes living in western part of mountainous Ingushetia (Kisteti). He specifically states this on page 832 of the online book you referred to. (Michigish is another term from the Kumyk language that specifically refers to and area in eastern Chechnya)
• Now for the page you specificially referred to (395 of the online source). Here’s what it exactly says at that page in German: “...deren Bewohner sich selfst Fapi oder Wapi nennen.” referring to the villagers of the area of Makal-don (Armkhi) and on the right side of the Terek river who “call themselves Fapi or Wapi”. So despite many other mispronunciations of Julius Klaproth on this page he actually even provided the Ingush selfname of the tribe - Fäpi (Fyappiy)

• This the part of that same source you provided that actually makes every one of your accusations and arguments look really stupid and unsubstantiated: on the second half of page 831 and first part of 832 of this online book its literally says in German: “Bei den Georgianern heisen nämlich, seit sehr alten Zeiten, die oberen Gegenden des Flusse Kumbalei, an dem die Inguschen wohnen, Dsurdsukethi, und sollen vom Dsurdsuk’os ihren Namen erhalten haben. Darauf folgt an demselfden Flussen der Distrikt Khistethi, zu dem auch der Inguschische stamm Wapi, am Makal-don des Terek gehort, und die unteren Gegenden dis dahin, wo der Kumbalei aus dem Gebirge tritt, werden von ihnen Schuaschi Dshariechi gennant.”

Wich translates to english as: “Since very old times, the Georgians have called the upper parts of the river Kumbalei, on which the Ingush live — Dsurdsukethi (Dzurdzuketi), who are said to have received their name from Dsurdsuk'os. This is followed by the district of Khistethi on the same rivers, to which the Ingush tribe of Wapi also belongs, on the Makal-don of the Terek, and the lower regions to where the Kumbalei emerges from the mountains are called Shuaschi Dshariechi by them (Georgians).”

As you can see this is exactly what it said in the French translation of the book I initially send. And your source one again confirms that the Fyappiy are placed in the vicinity of Dzheyrakh and Armkhi (ossetian: Makaldon). which is located in Ingushetia, and they are specifically called Ingush, not Chechen.

So this means you are knowingly reverting correct edits, and adding incorrect information to this article. You continuesly refuse to seek consensus and did not engage in a constructive discussion on the Administrator's Notice Board on this topic, which administrator Rosguill proposed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muqale (talk • contribs) 07:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

1. Mizdjegi clearly is different way to write, as I said the name is of Kumyk origin and derives from the river Michik in Eastern Chechnya. Calling the Ingush part of Mizdjegi is the same as calling them part of Chechnya. Klaproth believing that the term should only be applied to those tribes is completely irrelevant when most researchers agree on the term Kisteti and it's historical useage, that being for all Nakh peoples in the Northern Caucasus and not specifically the Vyappiy/Fyappiy.
2. I don't understand why you write Fapi bold but not Wapi? He calls them by the Ingush pronounciation Fapi and the Chechen Wapi, which most likely is closer to the native (see their territory Vabo (interesting that WikiEditor1234567123 decided to change the name of the article about their territory Vabo to Fyappiy Mohk just as we have this discussion), historical names such as Vappua). He calls them Fapi and Wapi, using the latter even more times. How can you maintain the idea that it is a mispronunciation of his?
3. I would appreciate it if you kept this conversation civil and not throw around words such a stupid. Thank you. How does him calling them an Ingush tribe contradict me? Where do I claim that they are not Ingush? I am saying that the society exists among Chechens as well. Numerous Chechen Vyappiy live in Grozny, Aukh and in the Jordanian diaspora. All of them identify as Chechens. You are talking past the point of this discussion I have not reverted any correct edits. I have added that the Vyappiy are also part of the Chechen nation and therefore not just solely an Ingush society. This is as I said before, a fact. Besides that, the information in the history section is unrelated to the article. I have checked the sources and the Vyappiy are not mentioned even once. This is simply WikiEditor1234567123 pushing for the narrative that Kistetia equals Vyappiy.

Reiner Gavriel (talk) 18:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reiner Gavriel Funny, just yesterday in another article related to the Ingush people you reverted edits stating that the Fyappiy are not Ingush at all see here, now here you are saying they are "Chechen as well as Ingush". This is becoming ridiculous. You are obviously vandalising Ingush related articles for no valid reason other than your own amusement I presume. Fyappi are an Ingush society. The name Vyappiy Vabua or Vabo are foreign pronounciations and if mentioned should only come in secundary order, not primary--Muqale (talk) 18:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Nowhere did I claim that "Fyappiy are not Ingush at all", what is this accusation now? In the context of the Bats it's simply wrong to claim they are "descended from the Ingushes" due to the nature of the Vyappiy themselves, them being part of Chechens and Ingush. When I created this article I clearly stated"teip of the Chechens and Ingush", which WikiEditor1234567123 had no problem with back then when he replaced the word teip with society, but also putting the word Ingush in front of Chechen for some reason. "Vyappiy Vabua or Vabo are foreign pronounciations" according to you. Again, refrain from accusing me of "vandalising" for my "own amusement". I want to share knowledge about this part of the world that is dear to my heart and keep articles neutral and fair while keeping away nationalist views based on fiction, pushed by editors who are clearly engaged in pushing a nationalistic agenda. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 18:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

• Reiner Gavriel why mention me so many times? I did actually have problem but didn't want to go in argument in that time. Fyappiy aren't a teip either as you wrote when you made the page, they have many teips and surnames, notably the Toarshkhoy from who the Chechen Fyappins come from. Chechen Fyappins are very unsignificant and are offspring of the main Fyappin society who are Ingush, this is nowhere disputed, your only sources are Chechen sources (Chechen and Ingush sources are interested parties and shouldn't be used as neutral and authorative sources in the matter of ethnic belonging of a tribe or clan) which don't even back up your claims and claim the Fyappins as Chechen only. You also deleted the information about Fyappins being called Kists which is very important, and no where am I attributing the term Kists to Fyappins only, please don't put words into my mouth. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

  Why would I not mention you when you removed any mention of Chechens in this article without seeking the conversation on the talk page? The teip system of the Chechens differs from the Ingush one, among Ingush teips the nyaq often becomes the teip while the nyaqash among Chechen teips remain nyaqash of the teip itself. No matter how you try to spin it, phrase it and whatsoever, Vyappins being also part of the Chechen nation is fact, there is no need to discuss this. Basically all parts of Chechnya and Ingushetia were called Kistetia at some point by some researchers. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 20:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

• I should show you the amount of times you had removed authorative sources like here:here, here, here, here, here. Just because offspring of the main Fyappin society migrated to Aukh and started calling themselves Chechen, doesn't make the main Fyappin society (which originated in Ingushetia and was based there) Chechen and Ingush, this is what you're either not understanding or just refusing to admit. You also can't bring authorative source of the society being Chechen and Ingush, which should have closed this dispute immediately. There should be mention of ethnonym Kists as that is very important — the Fyappiy were called many times as Kists/Nearby Kists and their region Kistetia. You claimed that I attributed the ethnoynm Kists only to Fyappiy which isn't true and you're attributing things to me that I don't do. It's already time to call admins to settle this dispute as you haven't even been able to provide authorative sources to back up that Fyappiy is Chechen and Ingush society. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

  Apparently I have to repeat myself. The sources were not removed, they were moved down due to me adding something in between (note; I readded Chechen and Ingush society, which you removed without seeking consensus). The information regarding Kisteti was removed due to it being unrelated to the Vyappiy. All those sources talk about the Kists. Regarding the edit on the Bats people article, why do you not mention your previous edits? You removed several theories on their origin, replaced the term "Nakh migrants" with "Ingushes". The Vyappiy among the Chechens are mentioned by Jaimoukha, Aydaev and so on. Even you admitted the existence of them several times already. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 23:11, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

• I think it's me who has to repeat many times, you removed the authorative sources, nothing was "moved" (here here here here here). The information regarding Kists is very important and not unrelated, as been mentioned by me — the Fyappins were called Kists/Nearby Kists and this is important to point out, I'm not claiming the whole ethnonym as Fyappin as you claimed I did. You claimed that Fyappins were Ingushfied but failed to bring me authorative source which would back that up and instead ignored my request. You should finally bring me authorative source which says that the "Fyappiy are Chechen and Ingush society" and that "the society belongs to both nations equally".

First of all I didn't even find the mention of Fyappins in Jaimoukha's book and second of all, if there was such mention: Jaimoukha is very dubious as been pointed out by your fellow colleagues (Goddard2000 for example) — he wrote that Sassanids fought Vainakh but didn't scite any source for that and other fiction that he wrote in his book. Aydaev is Chechen historian and as been mentioned by me so many times: Interested parties like Ingush and Chechen aren't neutral and authorative in the matter of ethnical belonging of a tribe or clan (this is the reason I didn't bring Ingush sources). Just because some Fyappins from Ingush Fyappin teip Toarshkhoy migrated to Aukh and started to call themselves Chechen, this doesn't make the Fyappiy society which was located and based in mountainous Ingushetia Chechen. Regarding Bats people, I thought I was clear that those theories are very weak and have no basis in reality, the theory was based on opinion of a single historian that Batsbi may be related with Tsov family that ruled over kingdom of Sophene in Urartu, seriously, this sounds like a fantasy. Authorative caucasologists like Volkova have proven that Batsbi came from region "Vabua" and the Batsbi say this themselves, there's no need to mention fantasies about Batsbi links with Urartu. I don't appreciate you adding your own opinion between the referenced text that doesn't even mention of Chechens and removing Volkova source.

If you can't bring me the authorative source which says that "Fyappiy are Chechen and Ingush society" and that the "society belongs to both nations equally" I have many times asked you for, then there's no more to discuss, with all due respect but it's looks to me that you're beating around the bush. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 15:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

• Hello Rosguill, could you please take a look at this discussion and give your opinion. Thank you. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 08:54, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

  I think that in the above discussion the provided sources show support for the claim that F/Vyappiy are an Ingush society; meanwhile, the source cited in the early revisions of the article, К ВОПРОСУ ОБ ЭТНОСОЦИАЛЬНОЙ СТРУКТУРЕ ЧЕЧНИ supports the claim that Vyappiy are a subgroup of Chechens. I don't have any insight into the relative authoritativeness of sources, although I will note that 19th sources such as Klaproth are generally considered weaker than recent scholarship. I think that the inferences that "Mizdjegi=Chechen" or "f vs. v indicates Ingush vs. Chechen (or a mispronunciation)" are veering into original research and should not be explored unless we have additional quality sources explicitly making those connections.

  I think that at this point if either side can assemble a set of sources that support their perspective this question is probably ripe enough to be put to an WP:RFC. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

  I'm glad that you paid attention to the source named "К ВОПРОСУ ОБ ЭТНОСОЦИАЛЬНОЙ СТРУКТУРЕ ЧЕЧНИ". The thing is that Fyappiy are mentioned as only Chechens in that book which goes against Reiner's claim (his claim is that its both Chechen and Ingush society). It's good to mention that the author (Nataev) is Chechen and interested parties like Chechen and Ingush in the matter of ethnical belonging of a tribe or clan aren't neutral and authorative (this is the reason I didn't use Ingush sources when providing sources about the society being Ingush). There's no authorative source which says that Fyappiy is Chechen and Ingush society and that it belongs to both nations equally, I think it already should have been the end the of this dispute which has continued for way too long. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

  Reiner Gavriel I think I found the solution for this dispute. The Fyappins are Ingush society located and based in Ingushetia while the Vyappins left the society long time ago and separated from Torshkhoy, settling in Aukh and giving start to the Chechen taip Vyappiy. What I think we should do is, make separate articles for the Society Fyappiy and the taip Vyappiy. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 16:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

  I have waited for a week so I will separate the articles and start editing. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 15:41, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

You have destroyed Krupnov, Volkova and Zhdanov sources. Nataev, Chechen historian, even claimed Kostoevs and didn't say that Fyappins are equally belonging to both nations. Interested parties like Chechen and Ingush in matter of ethnicity aren't authorative, so that's I only mentioned neutral and authorative sources. I don't think that you understand that Fyappin society is big and isn't some small teip, it isn't equally Chechen and Ingush. As I said, the Chechen Fyappins are offspring of Ingush teip Torshkhoy, they claim that their ancestors came from village Tärsh that's located in region Vabo and this was proven by DNA tests. The reason that they identify as Chechens could be because they got assimilated. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:35, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

None of those sources were removed. You are jumping around the word "equally", that is completely irrelevant. It is fact that the Vyappiy are part of both nations, such as the Arshtins. The Vyappiy living in Aukh consider themselves Chechens, that is all that matters. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 22:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Reiner Gavriel what can't you understand? The Chechen Fyappins are very small minority compared to the other majority Ingush Fyappins that have many surnames and taips. This isn't equally belonging to both, it doesn't make Fyappin society Chechen. When you first made the page, you wrote that Vyappiy are Teip which makes me immediately think that your knowledge on Fyappiy is small. You have no authorative sources backing you up and you destroyed Krupnov, Volkova and Zhdanov sources here and replaced with Chechen source:[5][6]. The admins should look out into you as you destroy authorative sources and call everything biased that doesn't fit your narrative. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 07:17, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@WikiEditor1234567123, after user Reiner Gavriel multiple reverts claiming his version is the only correct one, I have looked at this user's contributions on many Ingush articles, he appers to be of Chechen origin, which would explan the nationalist edits. I don't see the point, nor do I have the time to in engage in edit wars with Reiner Gavriel. Perhaps an administrator should look into this matter. --Muqale (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Indeed the administrators should look into this matter. Reiner has been destroying authorative sources and replacing with non-authorative Nataev, who's Chechen. As I have many times told him, interested parties like Chechen and Ingush in the matter of ethnicity shouldn't be used as authorative and neutral source. Nataev doesn't even mention that Fyappiy are Ingush too, he just blindly claims it and Kostoevs too. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 07:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Why has the Chechen part of this article been removed? I would like to make a complaint or report against Wikieditor1234567123, this guy has been removing every single mention of the Chechen Vyappi teip. You can see him do it here and then he has twice tried to remove the Vyappi teip from the Chechen teip list first, second Rosguill. This looks like a blatant nationalistic POV pushing he has been engaging in non stop. Wikieditor1234567123 is straight up trying to erase Chechen Vyappi history and then he has the audacity to nominate this article as a "Good article". Landkomtur (talk) 10:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

I removed the section "Aukh Fyappiy" because I was thinking of making a separate article, as I made it clear with the quote: "This will need it's own article". For now didn't have the time to do it. Regarding the teip list, I completely forgot I had removed it, I apologize. I most likely removed it in haste because I thought the Fyappiy (society) were mentioned as Chechen. Similarly I recently, in a haste, accidentally reverted user Muqale's edit, when I thought he added a biased source (here reverted back when I realized I made a mistake). Either way, I wouldn't remove the teip from the list because I thought it wasn't also Chechen, when in the earlier existed section "Aukh Fyappiy" I made it clear that it's a Chechen-Ingush teip. Furthermore this removal happened in March-April, 4–5 months ago, I don't think it's fair to pull up edits from very far ago. People make mistakes and change. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 13:39, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Where was the consensus on removing every single mention of Chechen Vyappis? I do not see it here in the talk page, since when can you just remove anything that doesn't align with your nationalistic POV on your own whim? Are you the sole decision maker here? You can't just remove parts about Chechens and decide that "it needs a separate article" without coming to consensus, this is by Wikipedia rules. This is obviously a contentious topic and you asked nobody in here. You have removed the teip from the list 2 (!) times, if it was one time I would understood but you did it twice despite other editors undoing your edit the first time. What I find troubling is that you use secondary sources that say the Vyappi are both Chechen and Ingush like here when it benefits the nationalistic POV you are trying to create, while removing every trace of Chechens in the article itself. You are clearly participating in a one sided POV nationalistic pushing while using the good faith of the moderators.

You have been changing around the names of Chechens and Ingush around in every single article you contributed to list Ingush first, when it's alphabetically incorrect to list it that way, nor it's correct to list it by the population sizes. You already have a history of removing Chechens from various articles and you got warned for it. A quick look at your history paints a clear picture of what you are trying to achieve.

There has to be actions against this type of behavior, it is unacceptable on a "neutral" encyclopedia.

Rosguill Landkomtur (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Acknowledging that I've seen these pings; if you want administrative action taken, please make a case at WP:AE. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Funny how you say that the source claims it as Chechen and Ingush when the source mentions Fyappiy by the terms Nakhs and Checheno-Ingush, which are essentially conditional terms used to denote Chechens, Ingush and Bats. Likewise the term Slav is used to denote Russians, Ukrainians and Beloruses. Does this mean that for example mean certain Belorus communities become also Russian and Ukrainian? Of course not. Same can be said about this secondary source. Even if it did actually mention the Fyappiy society as Chechen and Ingush, this doesn't make a difference because this is a very very small minority view point (see WP:UNDUE). I literally didn't see a problem with separating the two terms--Fyappin society and teip Vyappiy (which originated from the former as indicated by it's name)--because after this there wouldn't be any confusion. I will repeat myself, don't confuse the two--Fyappin society (fully Ingush) and Vyappiy teip (Chechen and Ingush). Seriously, I don't see how you claim this was a way to remove every mention of Chechen. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 16:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Yk what, I realized that if this section is barely a section (too small), it can't be a proper article. Therefore I added it back (with little bit more text, small improvements and what not). In future incase I find more sources about Vyappiy, I will try to make an article for them, but will first discuss with other users about that. Though your claims that I tried to supposedly remove it because I wanted to remove everything Chechen in the article is not true. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:19, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 1 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

---

Vyappiy → Fyappiy – Most if not all Russian and English sources refer to this society as Fyappiy, Feappi, Feppins or Fappins. Very few old sources refer to it with a V but modern day sources all refer to it with a F, not V, it's a big difference. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree that the article should retain the name Fyappiy, which is how the natives pronounce it. The Fyappiy are an Ingush (Ingushetia) society who speak the Ingush language: see Consonants section < Fricatives (Labial) < ф f [f]. The version Vyappiy comes from some neighboring nations who do not have the consonant 'f' (phoneme) in their language. So it would be more correct to use Fyappiy, since this society is or will be referenced in other articles, so therefore should properly be named Fyappiy.--Muqale (talk) 15:34, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fyappiy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 17:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm starting this review now. I do note substantial controversy on the talk page, but that was 11 months ago so I'm assuming that's all be resolved. I also see that this has had extensive reworking since it was nominated on July 1st. The article history has been stable for about the past 5-6 weeks, so I think we're good as far as stability (i.e. item 4 of WP:QF) goes. RoySmith (talk) 17:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello @RoySmith! Thanks for starting the review. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Btw, I would like to note that the history section (especially the "Modern" part) looks bit like unfinished because I could hardly find any sources which talked about the further history of the society. I tried to write as much as I could find from reliable sources. I hope you understand. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Lead

• You should give some indication in the first sentence where we're talking about. It's not until the 2nd paragraph that I came to a place name I recognized (Georgia). Our Ingushetia article says "North Caucasus of Eurasia"; that might work. Adding a locator map to the infobox would also be useful.
  • I'm not sure I understand. In the first paragraph, it's indicated that Fyappins inhabit Ingushetia. Why should I write that Fyappins inhabited North Caucasus of Eurasia? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC).

  Prior to reading this article, I had never heard of Ingushetia, let alone know where it is. I just asked my wife, she had never heard of it either. I realize this is only a sample size of 2, but at 0-for-2, my guess is this needs more context to help the reader understand where it is. RoySmith (talk) 23:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  Glad that you both have now heard of it. I clarified in the lead that Ingushetia is located in Caucasus, is this good? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 00:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

• Please see MOS:LEAD for how the lead section should be organized. In particular, it says, Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article. That is not the case here. For example, I don't see any mention of how the Dzherakh, Khamkhins, Nazranians, or Gudomakarians bordered on the Fyappins; the later three aren't mentioned at all.
  • Fixed. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC).
• You mention Georgia, Tusheti. Isn't Tusheti a part of Georgia, so it should be written in the other order?
  • Fixed. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC).
• I'm not sure what you mean by "approximately during the 16th-17th centuries". Does that mean the migration started earlier or ended later, and if so, is it possible to be more specific: "During the 15th-17th centuries" or whatever is supported by the source?
  • Approximately as in either in 16th century or 17th century. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC).
• "Kingdom of Kartli" isn't mentioned in the body (although it is implied by "declaring their act of oath for Kartli" under Contacts with Georia".
  • It is mentioned. Kingdom of Kartli is same as Kartli. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC).
• The Caucasian War was from 1817-1864 (at least according to our article on it). It's odd that this would be described as happening during the "18–19th centuries".
  • Fixed. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC).
• Voeynno-Ossetinskiy Okrug, Ingushskiy Okrug, Vladikavkazsky Okrug, Sunzhensky Otdel and lastly the Nazranovskiy Okrug. most of these are not mentioned in the body.
  • They're mentioned, check "Within the Russian Empire" in the section "History" of the article. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC).
• In the infobox, you've got "See Demographics". The purpose of the infobox is to summarize the most important facts, and it's often presented to the reader as a stand-alone summary, so providing a link to click-through to a section of the article doesn't work well. You should list the most recent population figure right in the infobox, along with the year it applies to.
  • Fixed. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC).

(I'll probably pick this up in a couple of days)

I've read through this a couple of times yesterday and today. I'm afraid I'm going to have to close this as a failed nomination. There's a number of issues, but the biggest one is that English grammar and diction isn't up to the standard required by point 1a ("Well-written") of WP:GACR. I take it from the userboxes on your user page that English is not your first language. Unfortunately, there's too many places in the text where there's words missing, or an odd choice of word, or awkward sentence construction for me to be able to say this meets the "well-written" criteria. My recommendation is to list this at WP:GOCE to get some help improving the writing, then come back and renominate it for another review.

I'm not going to do a detailed review of the rest of this, but here's a couple of things that stand out:

• The "History" section is broken up into a lot of short sub-sections. Some of these (for example, "Contact with Georgia" and "Contacts with Russia", "Within the Russian Empire") are just 2-3 sentences. This may not strictly be a violation of GACR, but it makes for a choppy presention. It would read better as one combined section, or perhaps two ("Modern" and everything leading up to that).

• The "Composition" section is essentially one large table or list. GACR discourages over-use of lists, preferring the information to be presented in prose form. Likewise, the "Notable people" section is presented as a list. Maybe the thing to do there is to pick a smaller sampling of the most important entries and present them in prose for, going into a little more detail for each one. RoySmith (talk) 23:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 12 March 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. No opposition or comments since inception and no comment since it was relisted. Closing. Best, (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans 12:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

---

Fyappiy → Feappii – WP:COMMONNAME: the only anglicized form of the ethnonym Fyappiy is found in the works of Johanna Nichols (Ghalghaai-ingalsii, Ingalsii-ghalghaai Lughat, 2004; The Origin of the Chechen and Ingush, 2004; Ingush Grammar, 2011, etc.), and that is Feappii. WikiEditor^123… 20:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Natg 19 (talk) 17:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.