Zoeperkoe

References

Geography of Mesopotamia. Which point exactly do you think is so improbable as to demand it be referenced to stand. Adel (talk) 14:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I have to say, you've done good work on here. I'd hate to start scrutinizing it for shortcomings and waste your productive time in the process. Adel (talk) 14:37, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Networking

Hi Zoeperkoe, I know this is probably not the space for this, but I don't know of any other way to contact you. I've noticed your contributions to a number of articles of personal interest on Syria, Mesopotamia, dams on the Euphrates, etc. I am currently working on a dissertation about modern water management practices on the Tigris and Euphrates. Each time I wander back to Wikipedia for a forgotten date or place, I see your username and think, "I really need to talk to this person!" I am very interested in your work and would be delighted to connect. If you like, please drop me an email at my wikipedia account --Dale Allakbullak (talk) 19:45, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Good to see you back

Hello Zoeperkoe, good to see you back here. I have a feeling you might be interested in Tell Sabi Abyad; it's a huge site, and I'm afraid I have little access to literature on the subject (and it's a little bit beyond my basic understanding of archaeology). Yazan (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Sabi Abyad has already been approved actually and it's gonna run in DYK in an hour or so. A picture would be most appreciated, as it's been very difficult to find a free one.

I understand the RL occupations though. A wiki-break every once in a while is both necessary and helpful. I'm planning a few starts on artefacts and archaeology in ancient Ugarit, Mari and Ebla (rudimentary coverage of the important temples, palaces and artefacts found there, like this most beautiful Statue of Ebih-Il). I could use some help with sources for articles on Mari tablets, Ugarit tablets and Emar tablets (in the line of Ebla tablets). Time is so little and wikipedia is so lacking with ANE topics. :) Yazan (talk) 15:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I thought you should know

I mentioned an edit of yours at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Paul Bedson. Dougweller (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I indicated that I think you gave an accurate summary of Paul's past editing behavior and it is uncanny that many of the things I mentioned in the post that you quoted apparently still pop up in Paul's editing behavior.--Zoeperkoe (talk) 19:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Qal'at Khawabi location

Hello Zoeperkoe, I noticed you've done a lot of work on List of castles in Syria and was wondering if you could provide the coordinates for Khawabi, a medieval citadel in the Tartus District, in the subdistrict of al-Sawda. I'm having a lot of trouble finding an accurate location. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Zoeperkoe. You have new messages at Al Ameer son's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Al Ameer son (talk) 00:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Balikh River may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• at Tell Hammam al-Turkman were initiated under the direction of dr Maurits N. van Loon (1981-1986, University of Amsterdam.<ref>Van Loon M.N. (ed.) 1988, Hammam et-Turkman I. Report on

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kutha may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Kutha''', '''Cuthah''', or '''Cutha''' (Sumerian: '''Gudua''', modern '''Tell Ibrahim''' is an [[archaeological site]] in [[Babil

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:02, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Cochrane WIR, please apply now

Those interested in applying should complete the online application form by 'Friday January 17th. Interviews with short-listed candidates will be held via webinar in late January or early February. The successful candidate should be available to start work in February or March 2014. Cheers and thanks! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 22:28, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

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) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Reply to: "Your edits on Early Dynastic Period (Mesopotamia) (2)"

Aw come on, man. I basically created the article for the Early Dynastic Period (Mesopotamia) with this edit [1] back in March of 2015. Before that point the page was just a redirect page. I was the one who introduced the BC date system back then since the article was essentially a massive copy+paste job (and yes, I am aware now that I should always give credit to the people that I am copying+pasting from, which I will make sure to do when correcting myself over the next few hours as quickly and as efficiently as possible) and I intended to fix the article, but it's taken me longer than I thought it would have. I have already been warned about this before and so I intend, again, in correcting all of my mistakes as quickly and as efficiently as possible. If you prefer that I revert the article's date system from BCE back to BC, then I will do just that. I apologize for any convenience that this may have caused. — SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 21:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zoeperkoe. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Reply to: "Articles on Gutian rulers"

Admittedly, I did actually end up using Wikipedia itself as a source. I used the regnal years shown on the Gutian king list that appears on the article for the Gutian dynasty of Sumer. I apologize for that. If you feel that I should have those regnal years removed, then I will have them removed.

— SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 15:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately the Gutian period isn't one I have any specific knowledge in. I've stuck to the post-Ur III period until Mukin-Zeri, but the chronology of the early 2nd Millennium is still very vague with little consensus.BigEars42 (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Reply to: "Gutian dynasty of Sumer and Akkadian empire"

@Zoeperkoe: I think that it would better for the articles of both the Gutian language and Gutian people be merged into Gutian dynasty of Sumer. What do you think? — SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Reply to: "Early Dynastic period of Mesopotamia in your sandbox"

@Zoeperkoe: OK. But remember: I was the one who basically created the article for the Early Dynastic Period (Mesopotamia) with this edit [2] back in March of 2015. Before that point the page was just a redirect page. So I'm not exactly sure why some people seem to disagree with some of my edits on that page. For example: I've noticed that somebody has been reverting the article's dates from BCE to BC, even though I was the one who had initially introduced the BCE date system when I created the article (as I have a preference for BCE, but whatever.)

I also did notice that you seemed to have copied and pasted almost word-for-word from Google Translate's translation of the French version of this article (in particular their subsections for both "Neighbouring regions" and "Inlay".) I considered doing that myself (as I had noticed that the French version of the article seems to be the only one to have reached Featured Article status), but I am aware that Google Translate doesn't translate everything perfectly. The grammar and spelling for the "Neighbouring regions" subsection of the article seems awkward and wonky somehow, it doesn't really seem to fit with the rest of the article. It feels out of place. I was actually grabbing ideas from the translation of that page, which was why I added the "Geographical context" section and "Neighboring regions" subsection to the article back in October of 2016 with this edit here [3]. I was planning on copying, pasting, and then rewriting the translation of the French version's "Neighbouring regions" subsection so that it would fit better with the English version of the article. But I'd already been warned several times about copying and pasting content, so I was a bit slow in paraphrasing and reworking the material that was being copied. I may have gotten a lot more work done by now if I hadn't been blocked from editing Wikipedia for about four months.

Also: what good would undoing all of my edits do? Wouldn't that basically undo entire articles that I spent months on, such as the article for the: Old Assyrian Empire? I spent most of 2016 working on that article. I basically created that article back in January of 2016 with this edit here (without logging into my account) [4]. I created it because I was severely disappointed by the incredible lack of content there seemed to be on the Old Assyrian Empire compared to the Neo-Assyrian Empire. The Neo-Assyrian Empire article is over 6,000 words long. By comparison—the section for the "Old Assyrian Kingdom" on the article for Assyria back in December of 2015 [5] was just this sad little blurb about 2,000 words long. Not only that, but the article for Assyria was itself over 18,000 words long (152,463 bytes). And I've already been warned in the past about making articles "too long". On here Wikipedia:Article size, it states that once an article reaches > 100 kB, it should: "Almost certainly should be divided". So the article for Assyria back then was most definitely already far too large and so it needed to be divided, which is why I decided to create a separate article for the Old Assyrian Empire. I spent months scouring Wikipedia, looking for whatever information I could find in relation to that particular period. I managed to put together a fairly decent article over the months (I'd like to think.) Although it's certainly not perfectly, I think I've done an OK job with it so far. And, yes, I admit that a lot of it was copied and pasted from other articles. But I spent a great deal of time paraphrasing, rewriting, reworking, and summarizing a lot of that content. Hell, I even worked on rewriting a lot of the articles for Old Assyrian kings. I worked on the article for the Early Dynastic Period of Mesopotamia in very much the same way. And, yes, of course, I do eventually plan on adding new material that isn't already available on Wikipedia. But for now, I think these articles that I've been working on look OK. It's given other people something to work on in the meantime. — SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Reply to: "Recent edits"

• @Zoeperkoe: Could you at the very least have specified as to which parts, exactly, of my edit you didn't like? My edit wasn't all that significantly different from what the article looked like before. I wasn't even copying and pasting content from other articles within English Wikipedia. I decided to go the route of the French version of this article (as you suggested), by, for example, using bullet points as they did for their "Periodization" subsection rather than using that table that you'd rather be using for the English version of the article. But you decided to get rid of the bullet points altogether and go back to using your table instead without really specifying as to why you think the table looks better.

You even completely removed the paragraphs describing both of the ED IIIa and ED IIIb subperiods. And the current revision doesn't even go into any detail describing the ED IIIb whatsoever.

You've also told me that it's OK to copy and paste from Google Translate's translation of the French version of this article, but it's not OK to copy and paste from within other articles of English Wikipedia.

I'm looking at Google Translate's translation of the French version of this article right now and I'm still finding it very difficult to make sense out of much it. Much of it is still left poorly translated, if even translated at all.

I've also noticed while attempting to make sense of Google Translate's translation of the French version of this article how similar the words are to the words used in other articles throughout English Wikipedia. For example: the translation for the French version's "Writing and its uses" section uses some words remarkably similar to the English article for Cuneiform script. So I have to look over on the article for Cuneiform script to help me develop a sense of context to make sense as to what, exactly, I'm supposed to be looking at over the French version of the article for the Early Dynastic Period of Mesopotamia. — SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 19:37, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste move from Middle chronology to Middle Chronology

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Middle chronology a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Middle Chronology. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Your revert of an IP at Tell al-Rimah - thanks

It's not surprising that the IP's edits didn't match the sources, it was an EddieDrood sock, an editor known for falsifying references and making up terminology not present in references. See also the talk page here. Doug Weller talk 14:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Edit Hyperlapse

Hi Zoeperkoe,

Thank you , now I understand. I will try to get more reliable sources, "(...) What you need here is someone else saying about Dan Eckert that he first used the term hyperlapse.(...)" Okay! Although Dan Eckert was the first one who named a video motion timelapse video "hyperlapse", I understand, that generally it´s not obvious, wether someone changes the name of a video afterwards.

Best regards, --spacetimetraveler —Preceding undated comment added 11:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Spacetimetraveler:, Thanks for responding! It could well be that he first used the term to describe a hyperlapse as we understand it today. It's just that there doesn't seem to be a reliable source to prove it - and for Wikipedia, a link to a video named hyperlapse is unfortunately not enough. If there had been an interview with Dan Eckert in a well-known photography magazine or something like that, in which he stated that he invented the term or the technique, that would be different. But we just might have to accept the fact that the origin of the term remains unknown (on Wikipedia at least).

And this is the same reason that I put a "citation needed" on the stuff about b-Zoomi. His hyperlapse videos did get a lot of views, but Wikipedia needs some other magazine or newspaper or news item to state that he made hyperlapse popular. It is probably true what you wrote about him, but without a good reliable source, it unfortunately still doesn't belong on Wikipedia. For example, if you would want to write about recent developments in hyperlapse, it would be quite easy to find articles stating that people like Rob Whitworth have taken the concept of hyperlapse to a whole new level, and those articles could then be used as a source in Wikipedia. Best, --Zoeperkoe (talk) 11:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Zoeperkoe,

Thank you for your constructive answers. I added some more sources. Especially the interview where bzoomi talks with the inventor of lrtimelapse. In this interview, bzoomi claims, that "(...) as far as (he) knows, it was Dan Eckert,(...)" who first named a video "hyper-lapse". Dan Eckert did not tagg it with the term by the way, which is interesting and instructive. No doubt, there have been lots of further developments since that time, which we should include as soon as possible by the way, but it is obvious also, that since the term was given birth, filmakers and other entities "jumped" on it and by doing so, the term became more and more significant. And by that, this article became more and more embattled. The more it became a common word, the more people later claimed to be the inventor of the term. I hope you will agree with the edit , because: As long nobody will or can proof the opposite, it is written , that Dan Eckert was the inventor of the term. Does this make sense to you? First was the term, and then everything else followed, not vica versa.

Best regards, --spacetimetraveler

Hi Zoeperkoe,

I added some sentences on "development" Could you please look over and add some more?

Thanks in advance Best regards, --spacetimetraveler

Hi there, I've done a lot of rewriting on the article, and added sources where I could find them. I've deleted all the stuff for which I couldn't find sources (the section on Reggio, for example), and deleted a lot of technical stuff, as I think it didn't make the article more readable for the casual reader. It's a lot shorter now, but at least everything that's in there is now supported by an external, more or less reliable source. I'm interested to hear what you think of it! Best, --Zoeperkoe (talk) 12:57, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Zoeperkoe,

Thank You! Well done, indeed! The whole article became more and more "too long" You structured it well. I read all of your changes. Maybe readding some small lines, but not too much!

I am only not totally agreeing when you completely deleted the part about Behzumi´s Berlin Hyperlapse, especially the citation of the TV Report from 2012 . As it was particular "Berlin Hyperlapse" which gave the term "Hyperlapse" an initial worldwide publicity and influenced the whole genre sustainably because of its exemplary nature and role model function. Additionally, until that release , this "moving timelapse technique" was more common under the term "motion timelapse" so "Berlin Hyperlapse" stamped and popularized or "coined" the term "hyperlapse" long before the then followed publications of all kinds. As it is also quoted in one of your suggested references:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/04/03/pacer_the_first_hyperlapse_shot_in_montreal_by_guy_roland_in_1995.html "During the late 1980s and early 1990s, filmmaker Guy Roland pioneered the technique on Super 8 mm film, and made a 1991 short film called Pace in Montreal, Quebec. But his 1995 follow-up Pacer (above) is lauded as the first true hyperlapse, though this term wasn’t coined until 2012. Roland shot the film on a Bolex 16 mm camera, but the original negative is gone."

and here in one of my previously added references:

https://www.rocketstock.com/blog/how-to-make-a-hyperlapse/ "The term gained popularity with the release of Berlin Hyper-Lapse from Shahab Gabriel Behzumi. Behzumi focused on featuring iconic landmarks like the Brandenburg Gate. Using a city’s landmark helped create an identity for the video. If you are shooting a hyperlapse, be sure to include some type of iconic feature in your film. Berlin Hyper-Lapse influenced filmmakers all over the world to travel around their own cities. It spawned a whole series of walk-through films, like Time of Rio from MOOV. This hyperlapse also includes video footage throughout it as well."

Could you please readd this though?

All kind regards Spacetimetraveler (talk) 10:16, 15 August 2017 (UTC)Spacetimetarveler

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Zoeperkoe. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Enlil and Anunnaki

Hello! I think you are still an active editor, since your edit history shows you have made a substantial number of edits this month. I saw your name in a conversation from seven years ago at Talk:Sumerian literature and, looking at your edit history, I see you edit articles about ancient Mesopotamia. I have worked on several articles about ancient Sumerian deities. (I recently brought the article Inanna up to "Good Article" status.) I nominated the articles Enlil and Anunnaki for "Good Article" status back in August and September of 2017 respectively, but they are both still awaiting review. I was wondering if you would be able and willing to review them, since you seem to have knowledge on the subject. I have also made this same appeal to BigEars42, who was also involved in the same conversation, and who, judging from his edit history, seems to have a more specific interest in Mesopotamian religion than you do. Unfortunately, I am fairly certain that he is no longer an active editor, since he only made eleven edits last year. --Katolophyromai (talk) 03:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Katolophyromai: Hi there! Thanks for your message! Every now and then, I edit ancient Mesopotamian articles, but I actually don't really know a lot about religion - I'm more into archaeology, history and geography. I'm also not an English native speaker. But I know that there's a huge backlog in GA reviews (I've been there myself), so if you think that I could provide useful feedback, I might take one up for review. --Zoeperkoe (talk) 12:25, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I do not think there are any experts on Mesopotamian religion currently on Wikipedia, so you may end up being the closest thing I can find. I will see if I can find someone else who is willing to do it. I know of another user who knows quite a bit about ancient Egyptian religion, but very little about Mesopotamian religion, who has expressed a potential willingness to help. If I cannot find anyone within a week, I will come back and ask you again. As for your English, judging from your reply here and your other work that I have seen elsewhere, it seems to be more than adequate, so you may be underestimating your abilities. --Katolophyromai (talk) 20:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Katolophyromai: Sounds good to me. I actually had a look at the articles. Enlil is quite short, I might take that one up if no one else volunteers. I'll see if I can find some time in the next 1-3 weeks. As for the other one, it contains quite a bit of weird alien stuff that I'm not familiar with (although you seem to have treated that pretty well), and that I never exactly know how to deal with on WP, so I'm not sure if I want to review that one. Best, --Zoeperkoe (talk) 08:06, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I would be fine with you reviewing the article Enlil if you think you are up to it. Regarding the Anunnaki article, I actually did not want to talk about the whole "ancient aliens" nonsense, but, unfortunately, I felt I had to because that is the main thing the Anunnaki are known for today. If you search for "Anunnaki" in Google, the Wikipedia article and the article from the University of Pennsylvania Museum are the only articles dealing with the ancient deities; all the other articles (of which there are many) are about the ancient astronaut hypothesis. Also, the article Anunnaki receives significantly higher page views than any of the other Sumerian deity articles; put together, all of these factors indicate that, when people visit that page, they are looking for answers about the ancient astronaut speculations. In fact, if you go back through the edit history, the article was originally only about the ancient astronauts until someone came along and realized there was an actual set of deities with that name. Anyway, that is my defense for why I included the last section talking about it. --Katolophyromai (talk) 10:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I will try to find someone else to review the article Anunnaki. --Katolophyromai (talk) 10:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Portal:Tells (archaeology)

The list that was in the portal was a transclusion of the list in the tell article. When you split the list off to another page, you inadvertently broke the portal.

No worries, I've inserted the new routing information (sourcepage and section).

The new portals generally do not have independent content - most all of it is transcluded from somewhere else. Similar to this (see the wikicode):

{{#section-h:List of tells|Tells}}

That way, the content of portals always match the source of the material. So when the List of tells is updated, so is the portal.

Nice job splitting off that section to its own page. It makes an excellent stand-alone list. Keep up the good work.    — The Transhumanist   11:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

List of tells moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of tells, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 14:36, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Zoeperkoe. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nuzi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tell. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Your reverts

I'm having a bit of a problem understanding your reverts here. For example: you recently reverted my edit for the article on Larak (Sumer). This included removing large portions to the sources (as you also did with Susuda). You're disregarding how the owners of ETCSL and AMGG would like to be used as sources on their pages such as:

• https://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/edition2/credits.php
• http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/amgg/creditscopyright/index.html

I think your problem here is that it somehow makes the article "unreadable"; but, the sources aren't in themselves actually part of the main body of the article. And I'm only giving credit to the ETCSL and AMGG as they would like to be credited.--SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 12:17, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Actually, while you're correct that they suggest a way to be credited, your references are still way more complex than what they indicate. However, this is not the only problem. For example, in the Larak article, you suddenly come up with indications of size and population. Since the city hasn't been identified archaeologically, this is all pure speculation. If you look at the sources that you say you used, it is clear that those, again, are not the best sources available. Just because someone somewhere on the internet says something doesn't mean it's true... I hope that helps! Zoeperkoe (talk) 12:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

	Season's Greetings
	Hi Zoeperkoe! Wishing you a Happy Holiday Season, and a beautiful and productive New Year! पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 13:23, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@पाटलिपुत्र: Thanks पाटलिपुत्र! I appreciate it! And let's hope that our next wiki-encounter will be less about quarreling and more about cooperating! Zoeperkoe (talk) 15:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

It's OK, nobody's quarelling. We're just good-intentioned people trying to find the best way to sort things out! :) Best! पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 15:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with the Ziggurat copyio

Which only leaves this edit[6] as possible copyvio. Source here. I'm tempted to either block the editor or article space block them, too much copvio and the warning had no effect. Doug Weller talk 10:03, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

It's the same book as the ziggurat stuff. The page that's mentioned is not accessible in Google Books, but it seems probable that it's just another translation. Zoeperkoe (talk) 11:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Ubaid period

I see that you've been working on rewriting the article for the Ubaid period for over a year. I'm sure you've noticed that I have, too, but I was waiting to see what you had in mind because you seemed to be doing a better job at rewriting it without copying and pasting like I was. What do you think about what I have so far? Anything in particular worth adding to the article or should I wait for you? SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 21:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean? Are you suggesting that you want to copy stuff from my sandbox into the Ubaid period article? Zoeperkoe (talk) 14:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

No I'd been planning a near-total overhaul of the article but I noticed that you began working on a much better rewrite. I didn't want to waste much more time on my revision, so I decided to work on something else while waiting for you to finish yours. I was waiting to see whether or not there was anything in my revision worth adding onto yours. Sorry I've been feeling very sleepy and tired lately so I'm not even sure if any of that made sense. I just sorta' felt like I was in the mood to revise the entire article to give me something to do for an energy boost. SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk) 15:13, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Not really. You're free to do whatever you want to the Ubaid period article (of course), but, based on previous articles you've tried to rewrite, my suggestion would be not to do it. When I have a look at the myriad of sandboxes you've created, it doesn't look like you've learned much from the advice that different people have given you in the past. But again, that is just my opinion. Zoeperkoe (talk) 15:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Edits to Ur, Uruk etc.

I noticed that you reverted my editions for Uruk and Ur, but I'm not entirely sure why. For Uruk; I added the names of a few rulers that weren't previously there but could be found on the same source in which a few of the rulers (not named on the Sumerian King List) already in the table could be found. That same source even names the periods in which the rulers may have lived in. For Ur; I added the names of the kings from the second dynasty which appear nowhere else on Wikipedia.2603:8000:C33E:E2BD:54C3:B403:82A9:7CE2 (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikidata image

I have a vague memory that you are a wikidata type. When I added an ancient site infobox template to Alişar Hüyük wikidata (I think) coughed up a map hairball at the top which since the template already has a map is ungood. Is there a way to stop that or do I need to a) learn how to poke a wikidata entry to rm the image or b) reprogram the ancient site temple to add an option? Thanks.Ploversegg (talk) 23:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah. It seems to automatically pull images from Wikidata if the field image in the template is left blank, AND if there are any images available from Wikimedia Commons (which is linked to Wikidata via Commons categories). If you want to suppress this behaviour, add {{none}} as text in the image field in the article you're editing. I've done this for Alisar so that you can see how it works. To be honest (but I know we disagree here ;) ) I think that the future here is to store this information in Wikidata and then retrieve it back to Wikipedia (and I've done this already for a number of sites), but feel free to ignore my silly ideas ;) Best! Zoeperkoe (talk) 06:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Correction to my previous statement: it does not pull from Commons, it pulls from the Wikidata item if, on Wikidata, the property P18 is filled. In the Alisar hoyuk case, this was a map. I've corrected this now to an image of the actual site. (which wasn't even in the article yet). I've re-edited the template to remove the none template and it now displays the image from Wikidata. You can probably even get the caption from Wikidata (which I added there as well) to display in the infobox as well. And the great thing is that any other language version of Wikipedia can use this information in the same way ;) Look at the previous version in the history if you want to restore the "no image" or add a link to an image in the usual way if you don't want to use WD at all. Zoeperkoe (talk) 07:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Woah, the interaction with wikidata is much more complicated than I expected. Will make a note to look into this at some point. Thanks again for the assistance. PS Alisar Huyuk looks perfect now. :-) I'm doing a slow walk thru articles I've created. Some of them were nice, some could have been better, and some (like Tell el-Hammam) seem to have gone off the rails.Ploversegg (talk) 14:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it can get complicated. Put simply: if the image in the infobox is empty, and there's an image (P18) on Wikidata, this image will be displayed on Wikipedia. However, this P18 image is often pulled automatically from other Wikipedias until an editor comes along and changes it to something else. And in many cases, this image is a map, because images of sites are still rare on Commons. On Wikidata, this is incorrect, because a locator map (an image of a map displaying the location of something) has its own property. So usually, when on Wikidata I come across a map in P18, I fix that. Feel free to ask for any other assistance regarding Wikidata! Zoeperkoe (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ubaid period, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page H3.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Add a Fact survey and thank you

Thank you for testing out the Add A Fact browser extension! This extension was developed as an experiment by the Future Audiences team at the Wikimedia Foundation to learn about new ways of contributing to Wikipedia from outside of our website/apps.

We are planning to wrap up this experiment this December, sunsetting the extension and publishing our findings on-wiki. We’d like to invite you to take part in an exit survey to tell us more about your experience of trying out the extension, and to share any ideas you have about how to support new ways of contributing to Wikipedia. The survey is anonymous (see the survey privacy statement) and should take about 10–15 minutes to complete.

You can take the Goole Forms survey here.

Kind regards, MPinchuk (WMF)

17:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)