Talk:Sarkel

Untitled

There is an error here. The Don & Poltava aren't in the same spot as implied.

24.105.197.133

It was indeed an error. The city of Poltava, for instance, is located on the Vorskla River in eastern Ukraine. Sarkel was definitely located on the Don River in what is now southern Russia. I fixed this by removing the erroneous sentence about Poltava - what would be helpful would be the name of the current province/district where Sarkel resided. I would like to remind people to stop defacing entries about Khazars with speculations and errors. KAB, 19 July 2004

The article claims that the town's name is spelled Şarkil in "Turkic". What is "Turkic"? If it is Turkish or Tatar, these languages have no relation to the inhabitants of Sarkel. Better spell it in Old Russian. Furthermore, Vernadsky asserts that the name is Ugric (Magyar?) rather than Turkic. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

It can easily be Hungarian (Magyar): sár=mud, sárga=yellow, sark=corner, hey=place, sárgáll=looking yellow, -ey=made of/kind of..., but unfortunatelly the possibilities are numerous, hard to decide. 178.48.177.1 (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

White Fortress

Nae'blis asked for a citation for the translation White Tower on Talk:White Tower (which is for a disambiguation page). I moved that request here (for the translation White Fortress, more or less the same thing). If somebody cites this, fine; but if it's wrong (or if Fortress is OK but Tower is wrong or questionable), then you may want to remove the listing from White Tower. —Toby Bartels 23:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• See my proposed solution in White Tower. --Zlerman (talk) 13:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

File:Hermitage Sarkel 2001.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Hermitage Sarkel 2001.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Belt from Sarkel.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Belt from Sarkel.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Location of Sarkel.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Location of Sarkel.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Belaya Vezha

Why does this term link here? 139.139.67.70 (talk) 15:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Excavations 2009: wrong attribution of photos

The colour photographs showing pictures of an excavation in 2009 are NOT, as implied by their posting on this page, from Sarkel (which is also called Levoberezhnoe Tsimlyanskoe), but from the Khazar site on the opposite bank called Pravoberezhnoe Tsimlyanskoe. The 2009 excavation at the latter site was directed by V.S. Flyorov (Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow). In fact, the Russian captions of the photographs (which pop up with the high-resolution versions of the photographs) do say this, but they do not explain that this site is not Sarkel. A Russian colleague who was present during that 2009 excavation believes that the photographs are by Flyorov himself. I cannot check that, but it looks likely<ref1>. Whatever the copyright issues, the photographs should be removed because they do not relate to the subject of the article.

</ref1> V.S. Flyorov, 'Cities' and 'Castles' of the Khazarian kaganate: Archaeological reality (Moscow and Jerusalem 2011), part. p. 46 ill. 7. Klumpenburg (talk) 19:45, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Confusion about the location

This article confuses two separate and nearby locations. Like the previous contributor said, "Sarkel (which is also called Levoberezhnoe Tsimlyanskoe)" ... "Khazar site on the opposite bank called Pravoberezhnoe Tsimlyanskoe".

Sarkel was on left bank of the Don (or close to it), now under water.

Pravoberezhnoe Tsimlyanskoe gorodishche ("Right-bank Tsimlyanskoe settlement") still stands on the right bank of the Don.

In the Russian wiki, there are two articles about two sites, as it should be. Needs to be fixed. Y-barton (talk) 23:38, 5 December 2018 (UTC)