Talk:Chaldeans/Archive 1

message: This article is being discussed as part of a wider miniproject. Please see Syriacs/miniproject.
I think that 203.206.248.30 was right in their edit. Although many Assyrians and Chaldeans would say otherwise, both names used in this context are only a few centuries old. To say that Assyro-Chaldeans were all Chaldeans or Assyrians before part of the church united with Rome is an exercise in splitting hairs. --Gareth Hughes 15:10, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough.  As this article had apparently suffered from vandalism, I thought it safer to revert an unexplained edit by an anon. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 17:17, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Merged.  I took out the cleanup-date marking (and commented on the Wikipedia:Cleanup#September_3.2C_2005), but left it as an Iraq-stub, because the article remains quite short.  Some fact checking and citation wouldn't hurt, but I don't have an encyclopedia. --Mgreenbe 14:37, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Definitely the latter.  The two articles need to be merged, and Chaldeans should be a redirect to Assyro-Chaldeans.  I should have done it when I merged the article the first time; I'll do it later today.  --Mgreenbe 14:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure Chaldeans should redirect to Assyro-Chaldeans, rather than Assyro-Chaldeans and Chaldo-Assyrians redirecting to Chaldeans? Nurg 10:07, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Redirects would be a very bad thing. Even though these articles cover similar ground, the nuances are different. Because a person will call themself one and not the other (and for very good reason), it would be offensive to redirect one ethnic label to another. --Gareth Hughes 11:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

message: Any particular reason "Chaldeo-Assyrian" was removed from the article?  According to this Google search, the term is used, and by more than a single author or organization.  While I'm happy with the article overall, I must say, the use of edit summaries is woefully, painfully, lacking.  Tomertalk 23:28, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Your response fails to answer the question I posed.  First, that it's "rarely used" was addressed in the deleted text.  Second, you're clearly not going with references, since clearly, 220 references are available according to the google search link I presented that indicate that the alternative does, in fact, exist.  Third, your personal affiliation is irrelevant.  Fourth, your claim that you are Assyrian/Chaldæan/Syriac is irrelevant, (although interesting) inasmuch as it casts all of your edits to the article into question, as it opens up the possibility/probability that your edits are in violation of Wikipedia's prohibition against "original research".  Fifth, and finally, basing your deletion upon your personal view of what is "most appropriate" is a violation of Wikipedia's prohibition against Point-of-View editing.  Pending an appropriate response to my challenge to your deletion, I'm going to add the disputed text back into the article.  Tomertalk 11:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chaldeo-Assyrian 

message: Sargonious, I think it's unfair to have a map of the location of ONE Assyrian/Syriac/Chaldean villages in Iraq, while there are many others. Just because you are from there doesn't mean everyone is. It's appropriate for the article about that village, but that's all. --Khoikhoi 01:51, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "It's a suburb of ancient Nineveh". So? I'm sure it's not the only suburb of ancient Nineveh. And calm down with the personal attacks - it just makes you look bad. --Khoikhoi 15:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: That means hill of the rocks. The rocks implied are the ruins of Nineveh. That's the significance of the village and that the majority of Chaldeans in metro-Detroit comes there. And before you start slamming me for having a Detroit bias, metro-Detroit is home to worlds largest CHALDEAN population in diaspora.
:So what? Not all the Chaldeans live in Detroit. It would be better to have a map of ALL the Chaldean villages. --Khoikhoi 00:36, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Khoikhoi, I am really starting to get bothered by you telling us OUR history. The village's name for 3000 years been named Tel Keppe. But during the 1980s arabnization campaign by Saddam, he changed the name into arabic; Tel Kaif. But now that Saddam has been kicked out of power, the government is slowly reversing everything he did. And they reversed Tel Kaif already. So what is the problem here man? Chaldean 01:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll tell you the problem: the map belongs in the Tel Kaif article, not here. And since when did I try to tell you your history? --Khoikhoi 01:23, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  First of all I thought the title said Tel Keppe or Tel Kaif. And I thought you were trying to use the word Tel Keif instead of the Tel Keppe. I dont know what map you are talking about. But can you please change "Tel Kaif" to Tel Keppe, since the government did so already? Chaldean 01:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll take your word and move the page to Tel Keppe, and here's the map by the way: :Image:Telkaif.jpg. --Khoikhoi 01:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, their is nothing wrong with it being in both pages. Unless their is a rule. I apologize for my earlier wrongly anger Chaldean 02:07, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a rule, I just don't see why we should have a map of one Chaldean village when there are many others. --Khoikhoi 02:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Point taken. And I hope whoever started this topic should understand now. Chaldean 02:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be User:Sargonious. --Khoikhoi 02:22, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Now can we talk about this "Syriac Genoside" phrase? Can you please explain how did you come up with this term? Before you reply, I want you to keep in mind that this genoside occured primarly in two places: Urmaya and Hakkari providence. To be honest with you, I have never in my life ever heard of this phrase, not any of my relatives in Iraq either. It has always been the "Ashuri mota" - Assyrian Genoside in our language. Chaldean 02:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tel Keippeh Tel Kaif 

message: I am 100% chaldean, and only chaldean, and i know that we chaldeans directly descend from the ancient chaldeans! If you want proof go to http://kaldu.org/3_chaldean_culture/index.htm or http://www.chaldeansonline.net/chald.html for more information. Please stop spreading your assyrian racism to chaldeans by changing the website. There is also a minority of assyrians and mouslawis that are members of the chaldean catholic church, as well as the CHALDEAN majority.
What in God's name are you talking about? I am Chaldean and I made this article what it is today. Look at it before I had my input on it. And I'm the one who put the link to the Chaldeans online link. Bassa min aya khmarutha. And no you're not 100% Chaldean or Assyrian. You don't know what your anscestors were doing 2000 years ago. I suggest you reread Father Sarhad's article before you say you're only Chaldean. King Legit
: Ah yes, some of my Chaldean brothers are a little confused because they were born and raised in Detroit, with no knowledge what so ever. To the person that started this, and posted this website http://www.chaldeansonline.net/chald.html - I would like to quote you on the website you provided: "On September 7, 1445, Pope Eugene IV accepted the conversion of the Chaldean community in Cyprus into Catholicism, and from then on the word "Chaldean" became the official term used to identify Chaldean Catholics by the Roman Church. Today, the Archbishop of Iraq's Chaldean Catholics goes by the official name of "The Patriarch of Babylon over the Chaldeans". - again this is from the website you provided. Chaldean 02:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We do descend from ancient chaldeans!!!