User talk:Dacy69
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | user is busy inreal life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
|
Let's talk you there?Ararat arev06:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have a lot of references on my page and its not just that. Let's discuss this issue which I hear a lot these days.Ararat arev06:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To this day the Iranians refer to us as 'Armani' of the ancient name of our tribes. Also Armens or Armen from Haik's tribe during 2500 BC. The whole confusion is this, that when the Persian empire started we and the Persians defeated the Assyrian Babylonian empire and the Persians became the power at that time. Urartu is Ararat and its the same Armenian people. The wording of Armeni started to appear more from that point on again thats why so many people dont understand this. Another thing is the root word "Ur" is "Ar" same just different ways to say it. Semitic people say "Ur" like the Hebrews they even clarify that "Ur" is "Ar" or Ara.
--Urartu and its people is not identical to Armenians at all. Armenians belong to the group of Indo-European people while Urartu is of hurrit family from Caucasian group of Languages (See: Diakonov I.M., Starostin S.A. Hurro-Urartian as an Eastern Caucasian Languages. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft, R. Kitzinger, München, 1986.)--Dacy6903:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ancient sources have sometimes used "Armenia" and "Urartu" interchangeably to refer to the same country. For example, in the trilingual Behistun inscription, carved in 520 BC by the order of Darius the Great of Persia the country is referred to as Arminia in Old Persian, translated as Harminuia in Elamite and Urartu in Babylonian or Assyrian. You are basing on 800-600 BC Armenian kingdom? We are speaking of 2300 BC inscriptions of "Armani" from Akkadian incriptions. To this day Persians call us by "Armani" and as I said earlier the "Har"minni is the same as "Ar"minni. Haran was the capital of our Hurrian people. Hurri-Mitanni was the first kingdom later they built the stronghold in Armenia and Ararat (Urartu) started. Refer to Hebrew writings again since you didnt look at it that the city Ur is also Ara named after his name. Ar is Ur the various ways of saying from the Semitic peoples Ur we say Ar. It means the same thing light, life, sun.Ararat arev04:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also Hurri-Mitanni kings names are the very words we use today in Armenian. Hurri is the very word used today in Armenian language which means fire, or light. Hurri-Mitanni's kings as I said Tusratta means "ten chariots" Tus is ten in Armenian. Ardatama "most righteous" Arda is rigteous in Armenian. These are our kingdoms and ethnic people. These are all our tribes and language changes over the course of 1000's of years and from going to different lands. The "Kh" become "H" for example. The "Har" is "Ar" which I already told you Hurrian capital was Haran. Har-minni is Arminni or Armani. Hurrian is Aryan there is not difference in this. We say "Aryan" in our language we dont use the word "Indo-European".Ararat arev04:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We are speaking about different things. You are speaking about how ancient sources refered to Urartu and Armenia. I am talking about ethnic composition. The way how in Armenian language you refer to Urartu, its tribes, etc. is not academic source for ethnic composition of ancient Urartu. Definitely, "Indo-European" is a term widely used in the science of linguistics. A term "Aryan" now is refered to Indo-Iranian tribes. It was also used by Nazi Germany to claim the communality and superiority of some Indo-European tribes.--Dacy6904:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Ar"yan is from the root word "Ar" like Ararat aka Aratta. "Ar"menia , Armani, Arev, We have 10 pages of "Ar" in our dictionary which I told you it means Light, Life or Sun.(Personal attack removed) I told you Persians even today call themselves Aryaee we are Aryans that means from the Armenian Highlands. Urartu is the Semitic word for Ararat. The language and ethnicity is Armani the 2300 BC inscription I told you about you seem to ignore yes? Persians to this day call us Armani. I shouldnt have to repeat.Ararat arev04:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend these books and historians to read:
Vahan Kurkjian, "History of Armenia," Michigan, 1968
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/Places/Asia/Armenia/_Texts/KURARM/home.html
"The Hurri-Mitanni kingdom of Armenia kept close contact with its western neighbor, Hittite or Hatti land. Masses of population were often transplanted from one country to the other.
M.Chahin, "The Kingdom of Armenia," London, 2001
"The new kingdom of Urartu, which proved to be the stronghold of the Hurrian race."Ararat arev04:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You know that its not just the language and I told you language changes over the course of 1000's of years. When the Persian empire happened a social change happened around 500 BC. We are direct descendents of our Armen, Hay tribes. You are basing your words from false teachers who recently have been erasing our history since the tragic events also happened to our people. What is your nationality and what is your passion for erasing our long history which I told you is from the land of Ararat of the time of the flood and beyond.Ararat arev04:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You realize that our heritage and culture is older than you think? Read a little about our cultural dances.File:Armenian-Dance.jpg
The Armenian dance heritage has been one of the oldest, richest and most varied in the Near East. From the fifth to the third millennia B.C., in the higher regions of Armenia there are rock paintings of scenes of country dancing. These dances were probably accompanied by certain kinds of songs or musical instruments. In the fifth century Moses of Khoren (Movsés Khorenats'i) himself had heard of how "the old descendants of Aram (that is Armenians) make mention of these things (epic tales) in the ballads for the lyre and their songs and dances.
Music & Dance, By Robert Atayan, Hye Etch
Sipan Dance GroupArarat arev04:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said watch where you are going with this. I need some information about you are you having a passion for erasing our history? And what is this Dacy"69" number you have? Anything good from that?Ararat arev04:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I cited an academic source too. I am not ignorant. I can produce more on Urartu - some of them in Russian language, some in Hebrew. Read I. Diakonov. Urartu and surrounding peoples might had many relations - cultural and economic. It is not about their ethnic kinship. Yes, Iranian call themselfs Aryan. So what? I told that Aryan in modern academic term refered to Indo-IRANIAN tribes. You refer to 2300 BC inscription. It is inscription about Urartu and Ararat. Where is proof of ethnic composition.
I am professionally trained historian. If you call me again enemy - I will complain about vandalism.--Dacy6904:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I gave you so much references and sources and there is more. Even with those you wont understand. Aryan is how we say in Armenian as Persians do. Do you understand? We say "Aryaee" for Aryan. We dont say Indo-European. There is no word like that in Armenian. The original root word is "Ar"yaee. Read all my references I gave you. I explained that the Hurri-Mitanni language is the same language of Armenian today. The Hurri-Aryan language is Armenian and Persians / Indian Aryans were tribes that went south around that time after 1200 BC.Ararat arev04:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Look then athttp://countrystudies.us/armenia/23.htmI cite: "According to ancient Armenian writers, their people descend from Noah's son Japheth. A branch of the Indo-Europeans, the Armenians are linked ethnically to the Phrygians, who migrated from Thrace in southeastern Europe into Asia Minor late in the second millennium B.C., and to the residents of the kingdom of Urartu, with whom the Armenians came into contact around 800 B.C. after arriving in Asia Minor from the West." Look also on Britannica:http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074433/UrartuOf course, these sources contradicts to your opinion. I am inclined to believe in Britannica and Library of Congress. I can cite more.--Dacy6904:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done.Khoikhoi03:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I warned Ararat to be more respectful. In the meantime, try not toedit war and mind thethree-revert rule, which states that no one can revert a page more than 3 times in 24 hours. I suggest that you make an effort to discuss changes atTalk:Armenia instead. Cheers,Khoikhoi05:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get why you keep on changing the language it has anything to do with this the Armenian alphabet was made much later. So theres no way of telling if Armenians spoke indo-European or hurrian there fore theres no reason for that.Nareklm 03:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Nareklm03:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't understand your English. What is your point?--Dacy6914:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(UTC)
Let me remain in my opinion. Please read other authors - I.Diakonov for example. The problem with some Armenians is that you are so ardent, brain washed by a sense of nationalism. What if Urartu is not your ancestors - how it impacts Armenia. For example - Russia should not be less proud if their first kings were Scandinavians. Britain was conquered by Normanns. So what? It became great empire, anyway. It does not matter at all for your ethnic pride if Urartu is not your direct ancestors. But it is big problem for the science of history - nationalists try to re-write and distort it. Habit of refereing to yourself as "the most ancient people" destroy the science. This problem exists now in Iran, Russia, Balkans, Caucasus. Everybody is competing for being the most ancient. I recommend to you to read your compatriot - Ronald Grigor Suny: for example, Looking Toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History or Populism, Nationalism, and Marxism: The Origins of Revolutionary Parties Among the Armenians of the Caucasus--Dacy6902:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look at Urartu discussion page. I have put my comments there.--Dacy6903:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm not nationalist at all maybe your a nationalist turk because you keep on claiming urartu aren't Armenians" hehe so funny... Armenians should recognize that even if they convince Turks and all the world that Urartu plus Elam, Mitanni, Sumer, Byzantum Ancient Egypt and Greece together were ancestors. Turks not going to give them part of the occupied by Turkey land. If they would do it they would do it even without Urartuan Theories. We know that Armenians live in this teritory since 500BC.. So why they distort the history? Not Logical—Precedingunsigned comment added byLiberatium (talk •contribs)05:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would encourage you to take a look around here and keep editing on more pages, so long as you have the time (wikipedia can become addictive and engrossing). You seem to have a level head on your shoulders, and we often need that more than anything else.
You mentioned in another page that you've got formal history training. Mind if I ask what field?Thanatosimii01:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have 5-year diploma in History. Then I have worked in the field of Ethnography and Social Antrophology. My expertise was Ethnic Genesis/Development (Eurasia, Middle East particularly). Now it is hobby. I got another two diplomas in Law, and Public Administration. I found your contribution to Wikipedia interesting. It is realy exciting project - the problem to find time to dedicate to it.--Dacy6901:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's always the problem. I'd have Ancient Egypt articles looking like the best written on earth if I had the time to dedicate to it.
As for Ultranationalism, It often goes unanswered because the majority of editors don't have the historical training to know what's obviously mainstream and what's obviously a secondary theory of non-scholars or pseudoscholars. This makes things difficult because when Ultranationalists argue, they rarely argue that their position is unaccepted but right, but rather they argue that their position is mainstream, and everyone knows that it's right except the few bigoted holdouts. This would seem to be the case with Ararat Arev's obvious paranoia that everyone who disagrees with him has a Turk sitting at his ear whispering lies to him.In this particular case, I believe that the best way to proceed is to lay forth which sources are right and which are wrong. Peer reviewed Journal articles hold the most weight of all sources, I have found in my time on wikipedia and in scholarship in general. Most scholarly books have reviews published in scholarly journals, and if the review is positive, then the book is generally safe to use. The prestige of the publisher also has a tertiary role. Speier's Introduction to Hurrian obviously discounts this "Hurrian is an Indo-european language" nonsense, and I suspect that I'll find the same in Roux's Ancient Iraq and in The Cambridge Ancient History. I've been meaning to fix up hurrian pages myself, so if I can amass enough sources for my own project that incedentally also disprove this position, I should be able to present a "This is mainstream" case well enough. If you want to combat this, that'd be somthing to try for yourself if you've got access to the big works on Hurrians. Gelb has a book, I believe, that I've never been able to get ahold of, but that would do it as well.
However, the second option works too. The big troublemaker right now outrightly ignores anything he doesn't like, and keeps repeating false data, pov slanted interpretations, and out of context quotes which he doesn't understand. This behavior is not permitted on wikipedia, and if he keeps it up there are avenues open for dispute resolution which will unquestionably fall on the side of those who have tried to interact with him rationally, as one can see I have done for a week or so now if you read either his or my talk page.
Dab is getting to the end of his patience, which has to be pretty big for someone who's been able to stand troublesome editors for as long as he has, and when he runs out I suspect that he'll take some action, such as RfC or Arbitration. As long as we do exemplory work, I suspect everything will turn out fine in the end.Thanatosimii03:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dacy, I suggest you got toWikipedia:Requests for mediation and follow the instructions there. I'd rather not mediate as I'm too busy at the moment. Cheers,Khoikhoi09:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're saying there that WP:RFC and WP:AN/I have been done when they haven't? Mistake?--Eupator23:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think we had comments of other people. Regarding administrator - I have asked his/her intervention. Actually, administrator blocked editing. We can still resort to it formally. But what is the point? Our views are completely opposite. I don't see ypour willingness to collaborate on some acceptable wording. You are against this insertion in that part of the article. I believe mediation is better. But make your choice - what you propose?--Dacy6900:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've fully protected the current version of the page. Full protection is by no means an endorsement of the current page's form, so don't get upset. I did not revert to your version or Grandmasterka's version only because I am not allowed to do so per Wikipedia policy. If I see obvious vandalism, I am allowed to revert to a better version before/after protecting the page.Nishkid6422:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for my comments - I overlooked your previous message. I will see what can be done to resolve this dispute with the opponents. From my previous experience it was not possible to refer to mediation.--Dacy6917:07, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 | ARequest for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage,Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Urartu. This message delivered byMediationBot, an automated bot account operated by theMediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, pleasecontact the Mediation Committee directly. |
Hi Dacy. You madea request for assistance in your dispute with other editors on theUrartu article. I am interested in helping to resolve the conflict. I have been editing on Wiki for a year, and I have experience of editorial conflicts. However, I should point out that this is my first case as anAdvocate. If you'd prefer to work with someone more experienced, let me or the AMA know. In the meantime I will make contact with the other editors you mention, and possibly a few other editors involved in the article to get a fuller picture of the issues.
What I'd like to suggest you do while I am researching is to take a few deep breathes, have anice cup of good strong tea, and relax. While new to the Wiki world, you have made some firm edits, supported by appropriate referencing. You are clearly someone knowledgeable in your field, and that is exactly the sort of editor we want on Wiki. People can be driven away by becoming frustrated during an edit conflict. We don't want that to happen to you.
Would you agree that you are currently involved in editing some contentious issues? Is this editing causing you some stress? Would you consider editing some less contentious articles for a while so that you can concentrate on this matter? If you prefer to continue your debate with the other editors, that is fine. However, my feeling is that it would assist you to take a little break.SilkTork10:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support. I am looking forward to working with you. Just for information - similar problem on page Urartu we have now on page Armenia - part "Antiquity". Nationalist users like Ararat rev (who vandalized my page - see above), Eupator (who insulted me - see page Talk:Paytakaran), TigrantheGreat and Nareklm in concerted efforts, remove citations and references. Yes, I am little frustrated that now Wikipedia, which is very excellent idea in its essense, turned to be used by nationalists and no more based on academic attitude, rather than political ones. I can also be subjective, but I am ready to work on NPOV, neutral wording and make text incusive and reflecting of various versions. Unfortunately, the opponents, I mentioned, are not. I suggested them mediation - they refused. I hope to work it out finally with your help and like-minded people, who appreciate the importance and impartiality of Wikipedia.--Dacy6915:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Narelklm, haven't you seen talk page in Urartu? It is not me who refused to work on common language.And please refrain from word like 'nonsense'. I know what words in vocabulary of people I mentioned, e.g. Eupator called my comments 'moronic". Once again, I warn - I will use PAIN for insults.--Dacy6922:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
.... the problem is not only in the content of dispute itself. It is also about behavior of users - their insults, reluctuance to accomodate various views.--Dacy6915:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bad temper is always unacceptable, but it has to be admitted can occur when people have different points of view on a subject and are not always talking them through fully before editing. Did you notice when the insults started? What had you done to cause the insults? Were the insults related to the editing of the Urartu article?
Would you like us to deal with the insults first or the editing of the article? Or do you feel the two are related and should be dealt with together? Can you show me examples of the insults?SilkTork01:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see the use of the word "moronic" in a comment Eupator made to you onTalk:Paytakaran. Are there any other examples of insults made by anyone?SilkTork01:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In general, 4 users, I mentioned are intolerant to opponent views. I had discussion with them on page Armenia, Urartu, Paytakaran and Yerevan. But it is better to focus on editing. If we reach appropriate editing they will feel anyway their wrongness in insulting opponents.--Dacy6914:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. Let's concentrate on editing--Dacy6919:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely, I start to believe that after editing we should focus on insults, too - and Eupator and others users behavior. He is accussing me of what exactly they are doing together. I mean his comments on your page. I will leave it for a while. Be back next week after the holiday. And on twin identity problem - I think it is easy to check my IPs - they should indicate Canadian origin, at least different from Adil or whoever.--Dacy6922:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Languages" were used in certain times. It doesnt mean Mitanni was of Akkadian ethincity. Same goes with Urartu's time. Its not about the ethnicity but the language that were used at those "times"
Akkadian was used in Mitanni's time.
"This letter is written in Akkadian, the diplomatic language of Mesopotamia at the time. It is addressed to Amenhotep III from Tushratta, king of Mitanni"
So Hurrian or Hurro-Urartian was used at Urartu's time. The "ethnogenesis" of our people is the same though.
You mean you see Mitanni as Akkadian ethnicity? Hmmm. No that doesnt sound right.
Another point is,Assyrians (direct descendents of Akkadians) to this day refer Armenians by their inscriptionArmeni written 4,500 years ago!Ararat arev16:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There were different languages spoken at those times, and there are different languages (and even multiple languages) spoke now. For example, before ww2, French was spoken by Armenians too. Doesnt mean Armenians were French. This is the same issue, Mitanni used Akkadian at that "time", doesnt mean Mitanni was Akkadian ethnicity. Same goes with Urartu's time, doesnt mean the language is the reason to say "Oh look see, thats not Armenians!". The language was used at that "time" and also Armenian was spoken as well, just like the examples I gave you of today.Ararat arev16:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am tired to say that it is not about language. I made my points. And, for Urartu dispute, please use Talk:Urartu.--Dacy6917:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know it isnt language alone, and I told you the other reasons. Did you read your page or not? Assyrians to this day refer to Armenians by their inscriptions written 4,500 years ago, written Armeni.
We have always been in our land. The Armenian Highlands.Ararat arev17:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, be proud. I support opinion of others.--Dacy6917:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have looked at the quote you posted on my talk page, and I have looked at[1], but I don't see in either source any statement that says Hurrit tribes moved into Urtatu. The sources say that "thelanguage of the Urartians .... is closely related to Hurrian" and that "reasonable historical hypotheses can be advanced for a Proto-Armenian component to this kingdom", but neither point directly to evidence or even theory for a Hurrit presence. Do you have any other sources that I could look at?SilkTork19:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my argument is not about language Hurrit, Armenians and whatever.
So, I argue that people of Urartu and Armenians are different. I.Diakonov in his study maintain that Urartu is of Hurrit language, which belongs to Caucasian group, while Armenians is of Indo-Europenean. The section of "Language dispute" in Urartu page is explicitly saying that. Eupator argue that it is enough. But the section of ethnic composition implies the bonds and continuity between Urartu and Armenia, which, I as well as a bunch of professional historians believe is not the case. Encyclopedia Britannica (and entires there written by highly regarded professionals) is saying that Armenians moved in area of then Urartu in 7-6 BC.Encyclopedia Britannica (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074433/Urartu) "The Urartians had a number of traits in common with the Hurrians, an earlier Middle Eastern people. Both nations spoke closely related languages and must have sprung from a common ancestor nation (perhaps 3000 BC or earlier). Although the Urartians owed much of their cultural heritage to the Hurrians, they were to a much greater degree indebted to the Assyrians... The Urartians were finally overcome by invading Armenians toward the end of the 7th century BC
We should explicitly say in the section of 'Ethnic composition" about these theories. The same apply to page Armenia, section "Antiquity". It is imperative to show that to users like Eupator, Ararat rev and Co., who insuletd me and ignored my proposal for common wording. It is also important for the spirit of Wikipedia. And finally, it is about history.
And Happy New Year!--Dacy6920:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Happy New Year! I'm looking closely at the evidence you present, and comparing it to theDebate over spoken language section in the Uratu article. It appears to me as an objective observer that the matter is covered clearly and evenly in that section. Would you agree?
The viewpoint you wish to present in the article appears to be a speculative and minority viewpoint. The evidence you are providing me indicates that the viewpoint is not widely held - though scholars are aware of it. Would you agree?
If you accept that the viewpoint is speculative (even with the support of some notable authorities), would you agree that it is appropriate that the viewpoint be shown to be speculative?
Would you agree that the article makes no attempt to suppress the viewpoint; that it has been given appropriate weight in what appears to be the place best suited to it?
I would personally agree that if the viewpoint was more widespread and accepted then there might be an argument for placing it in the Ethnic section. However, as it stands it appears to be mainly speculation - as shown by every source you have provided. The speculation springs from the evidence of the language rather than any other material, so it would appear appropriate that it is dealt with in the language section.
Finally, can you explain to me why you would want the claim to be foregrounded as fact in the Ethnic section?SilkTork19:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am making my points over and over again. That is OK for me. Dispute like that requires it.First Question – Why in section “Ethnic Composition”. It is written in the section that:“These similarities enabled Urartian and early Armenian kings to keep their territory intact and facilitated efforts made to expand their holdings.” From what written above in the section, it states the continuity between Urartu and Armenians. If we delete that phrase, then maybe I shouldn’t insist on my insertion. Moreover, language is not only tool which identify ethnic affiliation – I made my arguments about that already. There is material, anthropological, toponimical and other evidences.Now about your point that my argument is speculative. No, it is MAINSTREAM point. With no offence - but I would never dare to call Encyclopedia Britannica speculative. It clearly states that Armenians came in the region in 7-6 BC. If you have a library nearby, particularly university’s one, you can consult other encyclopedias or history books about Urartu – no evidence about their ethnic bonds with Armenians. Please write ‘Urartu’ or ‘History of Urartu’ in Google. Disregard pro-Armenian sites, and look if anything is written about Armenian presence in Urartu. And I don’t think renown scholars like I.Diakonov, Philip L. Kohl, Clare Fawcett are speculative. There is some assumption about Urartu-Armenia links by Gamkrelidze-Ivanov – quite speciualtive indeed. We can accommodate both theories – I don’t mind. And we should also think of the fact that Eupator and TigranTheGreat refused mediation on that dispute. What they are afraid of? Or just arrogance? --
If you are still unpersuaded, it is fine. I am not going to and can’t, of course, impose my opinion. You may think to ask opinion of other non-armenian non-azeri users who have expertise in the ancient history of the region , for example Thanatosimii and Dbachmann. Then, if you maintain your opinion, maybe I should move to Arbitration. I will accept its decision. Speaking frankly, I don’t think those Armenian users are negotiable. --
And I have another question. There is similar argument on page Armenia (where by the way some other neutral users supported me). Should separate application be filled for that matter or it can be considered together?
In case of your disengagement from Urartu question, may I ask you to deal with personall attacks? Euapator insulted me and Grandmaster but went unpunished. Nareklm and Ararat rev are following me and deleting my contributions with references. It is not only about Armenia and Urartu page. On page ‘Yerevan’ Eupator was deleting well-known fact which I gave with reference until it was protected. They will continue to do that unless they all are disciplined. I realize that they are watching my ‘contrib’ and by replacing each other, following my every steps. It is enough to look at their comments on my page just to have impression about their argumentations.--Dacy6923:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
1) We had agreed to concentrate on the editing rather than the insults. Have there been new instances of insults since that agreement? If there have, show me and I'll deal with it. If not, let's concentrate on what we agreed on.
2) Good academic qualities are needed for Wikipedia - and especially here in this editorial dispute. Editors make a point, and then prove their point by supplying evidence. You are asserting your point, but you are not providing me with the evidence. Now you are asking me to find the evidence for you.
All the material you have shown me so far is speculation based on "Reasonable historical hypotheses" from linguistic sources. This speculation is already shown in the article.
You'll need to direct me to the sites you say I should search for, or copy out the text from the books you say I should hunt for. If one of my students handed in an essay with the comment "If you have a library nearby, particularly university’s one, you can consult other encyclopedias or history books", I would be rather surprised!SilkTork11:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)---[reply]
You are not expert in that region, therefore you ask me provide evidence for well-known fact, and I am trying to do that. Normans conquered/settled in England in 1066 – accepted by mainstream scholars. What evidence we need to show that they were absent there before. Almost the same you are asking me with Armenians. No reputative source mention Armenian presence in Urartu before 7-6 BC. Ask other users I mentioned. I quoted 1. Britannica 2. I.Diakonov, S.Starostin 3. Philip Kohl, Clare Fawcett. Should I do it again. Majority of scholars maintain that opinion. One of the comprehensive books about Urartu was written by B.Piotrovskiy (Boris B. Piotrovsky, The Ancient Civilization of Urartu, Cowles Book Co., Inc., New York, NY, 1969; B.B. Piotrovskii, Urartu--The Kingdom of Van and its Art, Frederick A. Praeger, New York, NY 1967) In his article published in 1971 in ‘Newsletter of USSR Academy of Sciences’ (No. 3) Piotrovsky slashed theories about Urartu-Armenian similarities. I have quote in Russian which I can translate in English. (Hypothetically, Georgians or Chechens or any other Caucasian language people would have more rights to claim their linkage with Urartu – but it is not a subject matter now). Look at:“It is generally agreed that the Urartians arose from the Hurrians” and “After the disappearance of Urartu as a political entity, the Armenians dominated the ancient highlands, absorbing portions of the previous Urartian culture in the process.” [[2]]Or this from Metropolitan Museum [[3]] – nothing about Armenians.Even some Armenians, except, surely, nationalists, accept that. Look at page of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia: “In the 6th century B.C.E., Armenians settled in the kingdom of Urartu (the Assyrian name for Ararat), which was in decline” [[4]]--Dacy6922:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is good. Thank you. That quote, "It is generally agreed that the Urartians arose from the Hurrians", comes from Piotrovskii? It certainly is valuable supporting evidence.
I am not fully aware of the politics surrounding this issue - why are some of the other editors so keen on suppressing this information?SilkTork08:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unfotunately, after the collapse of the USSR, Yugoslavia and other developments, history was hijacked by nationalists, and distorted and falsified - it is relevant to all post-Soviet states with no exception.--Dacy6916:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I am getting the picture now. This is a known dispute. So much so that it is known as the "Piotrovskii problem"? It looks to me like it would be appropriate to make mention of alternative views in both the language and the ethnic sections. Neither view need dominate, as long as the general reader was aware that there are alternative views held. Would that be agreeable? Would it now be worthwhile moving this discussion to the talk page and seeking agreement of the editors?SilkTork20:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree - at least, two versions should be mentioned in Ethnic section as well.--Dacy6920:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One more request. Is it any way to settle my identity issue finally. I've seen on page Urartu:Talk the same accusation over and over again.--Dacy6921:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Sorry, I've been off site a bit recently with a heavy cold. I'm now going to make a comment on the Urartu talk page.SilkTork12:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Arequest for mediation has been filed with theMediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request atWikipedia:Requests for mediation/Paytakaran, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer toWikipedia:Mediation.There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.Khoikhoi20:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - Unless you feel there is more I can do I now feel the case is closed. I will continue to monitor the article and the way other editors respond to you. In the meantime you may wish to go toWikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/December 2006/dacy69 and complete the form.SilkTork21:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank - I really appreciate your help.--Dacy6904:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
| ARequest for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage,Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Paytakaran. This message delivered byMediationBot, an automated bot account operated by theMediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, pleasecontact the Mediation Committee directly. |
Dacy, thank you for your concern. The Kirovabad Pogrom article shall remain for now. I'll think about what it's status should be. Sincerely,Clevelander00:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First, I am not adding, I am just discussing. Second, I adhere to my credo - I haven't never said that the Peace Conference map is Bible's truth - it is just one version, which can be supplemented. And by the way about maps - on Armenia-related historical pages you can find a lot of quite questionable maps. We should somehow look at them - whether they are NPOV or Armenian POV. For now, I am leaving this dispute.--Dacy6922:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As requested by Clevelander and Narek, I have deleted the article, along withKirovabad Pogrom. Cheers,Khoikhoi05:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is just a warning if you didn't know
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing inNagorno-Karabakh War. If you continue, you may beblocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that thethree-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked foredit warring, even if they do not technically violate thethree-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.04:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This message is irrelavant. I did only 2 editings. I have 1 more. My editing included removal of joke which is absolutely irrelavant to this page. I warn you last time - stop spying me.--Dacy6905:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep rules for yourself. I know them.--Dacy6905:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I found it irrelevant and annoying. If you have some friendly attitude - which you and other you like minded people don't have - you would follow Clevelander's interaction - we have sorted out two dispute in friendly manner. don;t want continue that. bye--Dacy6905:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
do if you want.--Dacy6920:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have much of an onpinion about the quote, but I think it's important that you make a comment about it onthe talk page. Mentionwhy you think it should be removed, etc.
As for Eupator, I'd really rather not get involved in another wiki conflict right now. Wikipedia has about 1000 admins—hopefully you can ask another one of them for help. The 3RR warning Narek gave you is standard when people get in edit wars. I don't think heintended to harass you or anything like that.Khoikhoi08:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think he might be somewhat correct in this case. "It is generally assumed"does seem to violateWikipedia:Avoid weasel words, which is a guideline for Wikipedia. The following questions can be used to determine some instances of weasel words:
However, I have reverted him for now. What I recommend that you do is statewho specifically assumes that the Urartians arose from the Hurrians. Do the majority of Urartologists really hold this view?Khoikhoi23:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've protected the article due to edit warring.Khoikhoi02:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all your work onAlbanian-Udi, I did not realize anyone else would be interested inthat topic. I'm always a fan of obscure groups and obscure history. Take it easy--Kathanar17:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a short comment there.Khoikhoi08:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked you and Nareklm for 24 hours because you need to cool down and rethink your attitude. This block is not a punishment, it's an attempt to get your attention. Allow me to offer som unsolicited advice. This is not a template pasted to your talk page, so I'd appreciate if you thought about what I have to say. Your petty bickering with Nareklm is not productive, and your are making way to many reverts. This is a problem because hostile attitudes andbattleground mentalities hinder proper collaborative editing and progress. In particular, when you get into a dispute with another editor, even one you think is pushing a POV abhorrent to you, take your time in writing comments, and don't let yourself get worked up. Sometimes you will even have to deal with unreasonable people; we all have. We need to do this tactfully. Consider that perhaps the other editor perceives you in the same way. Rather than doing things like reporting them to administrators for blocks, or trying to prove their misconduct; imagine how you would feel if someone "reported" you for alleged misbehavior: you wouldn't like it. It would escalate the conflict. Instead, remain cordial and don't engage in petty behavior outside ofdispute resolution (discussion/mediation). If simple discussion isn't working, or you notice that it's getting heated quickly, disengage from the conflict and seek outside opinions and mediation, and be willing to make a serious attempt at compromise. I'm concerned that your recent behavior - excessive reverts and sniping - are in the opposite of this collaborative,WP:AGF community spirit. Hopefully you'll make use of this short time off to familiarize yourself with the variousdispute resolution precesses, and hopefully to draw up amediation request to resolve the conflict amicably. Thanks.Dmcdevit·t04:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like someone else already warned him.Khoikhoi12:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See the talk page.Vartanm23:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have not broke 3rr rule. On page Armenians I did different editings. It was not the same. On page Iranian Azerbaijan I proposed mediation and stoped reverting after 2 edits. Moreover, users who removed my edits and refrences on above-mentioned pages and were in fact at edit war went unpunished.
I found Dmcdevit attitude to me unfair and not impartial. I was insulted several times and no action was taken against those editors. On page Iranian Azerbaijan my opponent threatened with edit revenge. Dmcdevit did not take any action upon that but blocked me. First time he blocked me unfair - I complained to him about Fadix insult and got blocked for dispute with Nareklm (?!) who was and is removing references w/o discussions .--Dacy6917:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I did one edit on 17 and 19 February and 2 on 20 Feb and left my comments on edit summary. I am not sure that it might be termed as 'highly disruptive' edit warring. Ok, even if I was wrong, my opponents was only warned, not blocked. Ths is a clearly double standards. But as I undertsand in Wiki one admin covers another. It is a little hope to disrupt indeed that circle.--Dacy6919:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have opened an arbitration case regarding the current editing dispute you've been involved in. Please make a statement atWikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Armenia-Azerbaijan concerning the conflict with the other parties listed. Thanks.Dmcdevit·t10:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How I am supposed to make comments if you blocked me?
Fixed.Khoikhoi04:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened:Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page,Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page,Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,Thatcher13118:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a note on his talk page. If he violates 3RR, please let me know. Also, I don't think he's a sockpuppet, just a new user. When I was a new user, I was a POV-pusher as well, but the adminsassumed good faith with me and taught me the rules. We should probably treat him the same way. I'm sure he didn't remove the semi-protection tag on purpose.Khoikhoi10:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
TheArbitration Committee has adopted a temporary injunction in the case ofWikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan, in which you have been named as a party. The injunction provides:Until the conclusion of this case, all parties are restricted to one content revert per article per day, and each content revert must be accompanied by a justification on the relevant talk page. Violators may be blocked for up to 24 hours. The case remains open for the submission of evidence or proposals. This notice is given by a Clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee.Newyorkbrad00:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem if you want more welcomes don't be afraid to askB-)Artaxiad10:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Qazakh#Compromise?Khoikhoi22:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm an AMA advocate, saw your request and I'm willing to help you. But, first, I must tell you that I have no idea on Azerbaijani history and my help would be more on no-personal attacks policy. If you feel that you need someone with that topical background, honestly tell me and I'll take a step down. Reply me either on mytalk page or viaemail user tool, whatever you prefer. --Neigel von Teighen 17:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)... P.D.: And if you can, please, could you clarify me the situation a bit more? --Neigel von Teighen17:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seethis and note that Vartanm has been added to the case. -Penwhale |Blast the Penwhale04:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a note on his talk page requesting him to explain his edits usingedit summaries. Hope that helps.Khoikhoi05:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See my private discussion withUser:Grandmaster. We have agreed to keep it as a redirect (on the condition that no such article is recreated) and I have withdrawn my deletion nomination. Kindest regards,Aivazovsky20:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You blanked the entire workshop[9]. I hope this was an accident.Thatcher13102:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, maybe it would be better we followed process on this one. Try readingTemplate:Editprotected, and add the template to the talk page. Thanks,Khoikhoi03:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Please seeTalk:Khachkar destruction#This_article. -Richard Cavell04:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
TellUser:Khoikhoi about this. I think that it would be best if the article was just deleted. --Aivazovsky00:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, check out the Nakhichevan article for my proposed compromise version to the Julfa-khachkar paragraph under the Disputes section. I worked it out with Grandmaster on his talk page and I have presented it on the Nakhichevan discussion page for approval. I hope for the soonest possible solution that both sides can agree on. --Aivazovsky00:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The arbitration case involving you has closed. The Arbitration Committee has placed you on standard revert parole for a year. This means that you may revertonly once per articleper week except to revert obvious vandalism. Furthermore, you must explain your reasonings for content reverts on the associated talk page.
You may review the full decision atWikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan.
For the Arbitration Committee,-Penwhale |Blast him /Follow his steps01:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is an articleArmenian national movement it has a section about Armenian activities in Russia. You may want to develop your summary in this page. --OttomanReference19:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not trying to distract you. I'm showing a way to solve some of the issues on the par you presented. You have to understand that it is a skill to contain arguments in your sentences. You have to walk this without stepping into conflicts that you do not want to engage. The best way to do is leave those conflicts in separate articles and give a link to it. Let me show what I mean. Your first paragraf "By 1828-29 Russian fully conquered the South Caucasus as a result of its war with Iran. Russian authorities developed policy of incorporating those territories in compliance with Russian administrative division, particularly area populated by Moslems. (Firuzeh Mostahsari. On the Religious Frontier. Tsarist Russia and Islam in the Caucasus, 2006, chapter 1,2) Further Russian resettled many Armenians in the Caucasus ( I am not going to dwell in this issue which might be a cause of dispute. Armenians say that migration was insignificant. Let's even assume that) Russian favored them as a reliable element. "Armenians were granted many exemptions and privileges, and admitted into the ranks of the Russian army and public service, while commercial colonies of them were established in all the chief towns of the Empire. Peter’s successors followed a similar policy, and the immigration of Armenians continued and increased." includes arguments that has some issues. 1) "particularly area populated by Moslems." 2) "Russian favored them". The other side thinks that Armenians were not favored. You can not avoid an argument about these issues if you bring this into ARF page. However, they are really not belong to ARF page. They need their own page. If you want to tell the fact that ARF with the Armenians are coming into already (for centuries) established Muslim social structure and disturbing already established social norms. You need a page (aricle) which will tell us from Armenian-Tatars-Azeri-etc perspective. Assume that you did that (contained these issues on another page) You can say in ARF pageARF killed the governer, business man and for the reasons point to the page you explain the context of the period. I'm trying to help you. That is all.--OttomanReference20:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:Dacy69 says what page exactly I should create It does not matter. Choose a period, an event, or even a personality. Make sure that you are comfortable with the content. It is easy begin from beginning as it will not have a previous history to make it complicated or use a "book". The author of the book should have worked to develop the content in a meaningful way. Choose a chapter or section, and summarize it. Then fill the gaps from other sources. If they oppose your edits, they will be opposing a single event. History of ARF is complex entity. It is easy to exchange ideas if you use a single event. I'm sure with trial and error you will acquire the skills. After you developed the basic history, you will come and add your position to ARF's page with the links to supporting pages. Summary: Begin from simple events. Create a chronology to link these events.. seeChronology of the Turkish War of Independence. Good luck Thanks.OttomanReference22:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You recently submitted a request for checkuser. Aclerk has moved your request toWikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Non-compliant temporarily; this does not mean the request has necessarily been accepted or rejected, as clerks are generally concerned with maintenance and upkeep, not making decisions on the merit of any given request. Please codeletter, and then follow the instructions in the box at the top ofWikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Non-compliant. Thank you for your co-operation.Cbrown1023talk14:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC),checkuser clerk[reply]
 | On23 May,2007,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleHasan bey Zardabi, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page. |
--Smee05:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed that you revertedArmenian-Tatar massacres. You are on revert parole per an ArbCom decision, and I would like to remind you that you should not revert any articles (even your one time per week) without discussing it on the talk page. In this case you did not take it to the talk page, but rather invited the other editor to do so. I declined a block request atWP:AN3, but I don't know how any other admin might respond. I strongly suggest you be more careful in the future. --SelketTalk16:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have violated your parole by exceeding one revert per week. You have therefore been blocked for 72h in accordance with theparole enforcement policy.Signaturebrendel23:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please, input your opinion[10]. Thanks.Atabek01:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
| On12 June,2007,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleQabala Radar, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page. |
--howcheng{chat}16:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this is a message froman automated bot. A tag has been placed onImage:Southazerbaijan-cartoonprotest.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it bespeedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted becauseImage:Southazerbaijan-cartoonprotest.jpg is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).
If youcreated this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license{{GFDL-self}} to license it under theGFDL, or{{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under theCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use{{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If youdid not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags fromthis list if you believe one of thosefair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder andrequest that they make the media available under afree license.
If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions atWP:WMD.This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominateImage:Southazerbaijan-cartoonprotest.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a messageon the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask atWikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 203:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I was just wondering how you determined the copy right status of this image:[11] The reason I ask is that previously you indicated that only non-commercial or educational use of the image was allowed, but now you suddenly changed it to say that it was for free use under GNU.Hajji Piruz04:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Site has disclaimer "Some rights of this page's plain text stuffs are reserved for the author" which does not apply to images. If necessary I will enquiry further what rules apply for using images from such sites.--Dacy6915:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please seeWikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.
Thank you.Francis Tyers·07:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dacy, you realy should not violate your Arbcom paroleAlex Bakharev02:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Armenia Azerbaijan arbcom is once against being opened and you are an involved party:[13].Hajji Piruz18:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dacythis revert is a violation of your parole. Please revert yourself, or I would have to block youAlex Bakharev06:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, welcome to Wikipedia, where anything that contradicts the a certain nationalist POV is enforced by 3RR stacking. You should learn not to contradict The Truth of ethnic superiority over the Azeri cockroaches and Arab lizard-eaters ;o) Seriously, don't worry about it - you cannot win against a group of POV-pushers.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz00:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Use your own talk pages or the talk page of the article in question. --tariqabjotu15:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened:Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page,Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page,Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -Penwhale |Blast him /Follow his steps16:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding what you asked, I cannot exactly tell you where to put it unless I know which diffs you're talking about. -Penwhale |Blast him /Follow his steps17:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Example you gave me might be considered disruptive editing (for that editor), and as such, you should provide links in theevidence page. -Penwhale |Blast him /Follow his steps19:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is up to the judgment of the arbitrators, so I can't tell you. -Penwhale |Blast him /Follow his steps20:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have to block you for the violation of your revert parole onBrenda Shaffer. The duration of the block is 24h. Please be more careful next time. Arbcom is ArbcomAlex Bakharev01:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The case in which you were involved in was closed. According to the records, you wereplaced on revert parole (now called revert limitations), and as such, you are affected bythis remedy, which places you on supervised editing. You may be banned by any administrator from editing any or all articles which relate to the region of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Iran and the ethnic and historical issues related to that area should you fail to maintain a reasonable degree of civility in your interactions with another editor concerning disputes which may arise.
You may view the full decision at the case pagehere.
For the Arbitration Committee,
-Penwhale |Blast him /Follow his steps00:08, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have beenblocked for violating your revert parole inWikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan, by making the following two edits:[14],[15]. If you wish to request review of this decision, you mayemail me or place {{unblock|reason here}} on this page. The duration of the block is 24 hours.SeraphimbladeTalk to me04:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dacy69, I've blocked you for 24 hours for a violation ofyour revert parole. Specifically, the following reversion[16] contains insufficient talk page discussion[17]. Please discuss reversions. Making an assertion that something is OR without an explanation why that is the case does not qualify under these circumstances. You may request review of this decision byemailing me or using {{unblock|reason here}} on this page.--Chaser -T05:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please also note that under theenforcement provision of that case, after the fifth block (which is this one), themaximum block time extends to one year. Please be more cautious in the future.--Chaser -T05:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Y | Your request to be unblocked has beengranted for the following reason(s): Request handled by: ---J.S(T/C/WRE)18:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply] |
if you look at the pattern of many edits and rv - there a lot of them which restrict to 1-2 sentence of explanation. I made edit and left the comment. You claim that it is insuficient discussion is just your bias. You definitely taken one side approach. Moreover rules say that parole allows rv with comment on talkpage - it does not saying about its length. I am long time contributor to Wiki and created and edited many pages, incuding several DYKs. For last 2-3 months I am targeted by Armenian users on the ethnic ground. I have been insulted, reported these cases but no action was taken. But every report from Armenian contributors gets positive consideration by some admins. Unfortunately admins like Chaser and Alex Bakharev take one-sided approach. Returning to this block - it is, in my opinion, not justified. I have not objected to previous blocks but this one is clearly biased. --Dacy6915:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't do a mass revert (your probation notwithstanding) without discussing first. --Golbez (talk)16:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
you have blocked me for removing a tag (Wikiproject Artsakh) which was found inappropriate by admins. so, in my opinion, my block also should be revoked. as i see now this project was redirected, which confirms its irrelevancy. --Dacy69 (talk)19:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
please see discussion above--Dacy69 (talk)04:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Azerbaboon seems to be on the same subject, I therefore didn't list your RFCU. Don't hesitate to contact me if you feel I did something wrong ;). --lucasbfrtalk,checkuser clerk,17:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Confirmed as beingUser:Azerbaboon, I don't think we can go further :). --lucasbfrtalk12:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,Image:Hadija_gaibova.jpg, has been listed atWikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see thediscussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.Nv8200ptalk00:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dacy69(block log •active blocks •global blocks •contribs •deleted contribs •filter log •creation log •change block settings •unblock •checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am a long time contributor to Wiki. Without any prior notification, warning and discussion admin Moreshi put indefinite block. I am aware that I was involved previously in Arbitration case. So were those users who complained about me and launched "ethnic war" against me since time of my first contribution. I won several disputes with them. Moreshi reasoned that for the past several months I have not contributed to Wiki except few reverting. Just in October I have created a new page. It is true - I made few reverts but I left my arguments on talkpage. This edits are not worth indefinite block and, at least, I have a right for discussion
Decline reason:
A single event is usually not work an indefinate block, but you can hardly call 13 prior blocks "no warning" or "a single event". You should be well aware of what sorts of actions will get you blocked. Since this unblock request only contains wild conspiracy accusations and does not address the reason for the block, and especially since it does not seem to give any assurances that you intend to stop violating your ArbCom sanctions, I see no reason to unblock at this time. —Jayron32.talk.contribs21:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, pleaseread theguide to appealing blocks first, then use the{{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Dacy69(block log •active blocks •global blocks •contribs •deleted contribs •filter log •creation log •change block settings •unblock •checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Well, first of all, I had 8 block before (not 13), and last block was only, if I am not mistaken in 2007. I understand that even 8 is a big number. Secondly, my last few months contributions even were not so many, nevertheless I have created a new page in October. So, it was not all about reverts. Thirdly, at presentI am not under any arbitration sanctions, and thus I NEVER VIOLATED 1 RV per week and I always put my arguments on talkpage. So it is not clear for what particular reason I am blocked, and at least, I should have been properly warned. If it is about my revert on pageNakhichevan khanate, thenuser:MarshallBagramyan made 4 rvs on the same article,yet he was placed on 1 rv per week parole, and I am blocked indef, despite the fact I have reverted only once and explained on talk page. Of course, I'll try to abide rules in the future. I have created many new entries (including non-disputable ones) in Wiki, and this blocks nullifies it because one admin was in hurry to impose block without reviewing the case
Decline reason:
Enough is enough. Please find a different interest away from wikipedia. --Anthony.bradbury"talk"19:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, pleaseread theguide to appealing blocks first, then use the{{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Thank you for uploadingFile:Manaf Suleymanov.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so thecopyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have createdin your upload log.Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia'scriteria for speedy deletion,F4. If the image iscopyrighted andnon-free,the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:14, 20 May 2011 (UTC) perspeedy deletion criterionF7. If the file is already gone, you can still make arequest for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. You may wish to read the Wikipedia'simage use policy. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L)14:14, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The fileFile:Hasan zardabi.jpg has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may bedeleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andfiles for discussion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to thepage history of each individual file for details. Thanks,FastilyBot (talk)01:00, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
![[11]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fImage%3aSouthazerbaijan-cartoonprotest.jpg){kind=link}
