Talk:Al-Malikiyah

message: Once again, is there any sources which talks about the large Aramaen/Syriac population of Al-Malikiyah? If not then change it
Majority of Syriacs in Syria call themselves Assyrian, this  is seen with the assyrian political parties, festivals etc. Just look at the Assyrian New Years festivals and witness how many assyrian flag are there and how many people attend!!
please without a source i want it to be changed from Syriac to Assyrian (which is an actual ethnicity - not a religious denomination)  —Preceding -- Malik Danno (talk) 20:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Issue is aready discussed. Most common name should be used. Syriacs or Aramean-Syriacs should be used in Syria and Turkey, and Assyrians or Chaldean Assyrians should be used in Iraq and Iran. And no, majority of the Syriacs call them selves for Syriacs. THose you are talking about is eastern Syriacs (Assyrians) and are a minority. AramaeanSyriac (talk) 21:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aramaen-Syriac? 

message: Adding the so-called rojava template and categories in towns and villages under military occupation by YPG militias militia does not change that official status. This is an on-going military conflict and any interim control (YPG, ISIS, FSA) does not mean a change in the political status of the village/town. I am moving to remove these categories (rojava, cantons, IS, etc). Comments are welcome. Thanks. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 01:04, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Rojava denotes a de facto existing distinct framework of civil governance in distinct parts of Northern Syria, there are 5 Million Google hits for it including all major English language media, and this is what the entire Rojava article on the Wikipedia is about. You may personally dislike anything about this sentence, or the well-sourced elaboration of facts in the Rojava article and in other articles, but your dislike is no valid reason to delete related material from the Wikipedia. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 21:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  So called rojava 

message: I propose moving this article to Derîk. This is the Kurdish name of this Kurdish-majority town, and as Kurdish has equal standing with Arabic in the AANES, it doesn't make sense to use the Arabic name for a settlement where Arabs are a minority. This is the policy we follow for the article on Kobanî, where the official name under the regime was the Arabic Ayn al-Arab. Konli17 (talk) 05:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The Ottoman name for Ayn al-Arab was Arab pinar. The change to Kobani was purely political. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 18:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

text: well, nice you enter the discussion Amr Ibn Al Kulthoum. Al Malikya was an Arab army officer and is therefore remembered with the name. Do you support the Arabization policies denying the Kurdish/Assyrian past and presence? I don't. And in California (Los Angeles, San Francisco), nor Nevada (Las Vegas) and Florida (all Spanish words and names), they don't deny the Spanish/Mexican past. So your argument seems a little weak. But let's discuss.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:00, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether you like it or not, it's not up to WP (or yourself) in this case, to decide which name to use! There is an official name and we have to stick with it. If a future government of Syria decides to revert back to the Syriac name (Derik), then I am all for it. You may want to read this French article about how Kurds came to this area from Turkey during the French occupation of Syria. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

text: These arguments have been made, and rejected, at Talk:Kobanî#Requested_move_19_December_2019. Konli17 (talk) 09:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nope, it was just full of IP socks.Shadow4dark (talk) 17:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If that's true, why aren't you having it changed to its Arabic name? Konli17 (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you should change diyarbakir to Amed?Shadow4dark (talk) 19:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't answer my question. You seem very determined to have this Kurdish-majority town in Syria use its Arabic name, but I've seen no effort on your part to have a larger Kurdish-majority city in the same country do the same. Why not? Konli17 (talk) 01:53, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple it is Syrian Arab Republic Not Greater Kurdistan.Shadow4dark (talk) 05:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean Kobani? Konli17 (talk) 11:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

text: The name Derik is the one that it had before the arabization campaign by Assad. Al Malikiyah is a name deriving of an important arab army officer. I don't think Wikipedia will want to follow the ethnic cleansing campaign by a president also known as a hereditary dictator. Derik is also the name the current Administration is giving it, which is the name the local population is giving it. Syria has no control over Derik at all.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Konli, I suggest you go back and study some history. The name al-Malikiyah was adopted in 1957, long before Hafez Assad succeeded to power in 1970. Your argument just failed! Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 18:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

text: These arguments have been made, and rejected, at Talk:Kobanî#Requested_move_19_December_2019. Konli17 (talk) 23:59, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is strong consensus it should be not moved. Shadow4dark (talk) 00:11, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's why Kobanî isn't called Ayn al Arab. What I'm looking for is a consistent use of policies that have already been decided upon for larger articles/settlements. Konli17 (talk) 00:22, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

text: First this isn't how you propose something to move, second, this is ridiculous. Beshogur (talk) 07:39, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: At Talk:Kobanî#Requested_move_19_December_2019, the main criterion seemed to be use in English language sources. If this is the policy, it ought to be a relatively simple matter to see whether the Kurdish or Arabic name is used more in English language sources. What's the usual way to test this? Konli17 (talk) 12:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't do moves if it has NPOV issues, see this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2019_Turkish_offensive_into_north-eastern_Syria/Archive_4#Requested_move_2_December_2019 Shadow4dark (talk) 12:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Happily this proposed move more closely resembles this one: Talk:Kobanî#Requested_move_19_December_2019. Konli17 (talk) 12:33, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: At Talk:Kobanî#Requested_move_19_December_2019, the main criterion was use in English language sources. If this is the policy, it ought to be a relatively simple matter to see whether the Kurdish or Arabic name is used more in English language sources. Is there any good reason this criterion ought not to apply here? Konli17 (talk) 13:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

text: Anyone? Konli17 (talk) 15:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: NO, kobani gained WP:COMMONNAME due isis kurd war and is inrelevant here. Shadow4dark (talk) 01:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite the opposite, Derik has also become this town's common name in English language sources over the course of the war, so it's very relevant. Konli17 (talk) 11:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

text: Apparently, WP:COMMONNAME is by far the most used policy justification in move discussions. Unless anyone can show why it ought not apply here, then it seems that all that's left for us to do is compare search engine results. Konli17 (talk) 16:41, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move 

message: The name Dayrik is Syriac not Kurdish. I can get a reference for this. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Its origin is irrelevant, it's the name the town is known best in English-language sources, which you moved it away from. Konli17 (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dayrik name is Syriac not Kurdish