User talk:Altun Ahmedov

Warning
This edit violated WP:BATTLE and WP:PERSONAL. Do not do it again. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sallarid dynasty. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 05:18, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

AA2
- LouisAragon (talk) 12:18, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Mannaeans, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 18:16, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:NPA
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for Personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. This is now the second time I have noticed you charging another editor with lying, 'Why you talk lies'. Please be aware of the rules about WP:No personal attacks. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Albanian Crosses


The article Albanian Crosses has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "This article is full of falsifications and revisionism, contradicting already existing mature wiki articles. Armenian inscribed Khachkars are represented as Albanian crosses using images of Armenian khachkars. The article is full of references to copies, not actual existing mature wiki articles, e.g. Gandzasar Monastery vs Ganjasar Monastery, Principality of Khachen vs Principality of the Albanian Khachin, Syunik (historic province) vs Albanian Sünik principality. House of Hasan-Jalalyan completely misinterpreted. The redirects to pages use fake link text. Everything that is Armenian is revisioned to Albanian. There is no historical evidence of existence of Albanian crosses whatsoever. Khachkar is UNESCO inscribed armenian cultural heritage https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/armenian-cross-stones-art-symbolism-and-craftsmanship-of-khachkars-00434"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Addictedtohistory (talk) 06:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

You've been reported for vandalism for the attempt of rewriting falsified/revisioned version of Khachkar article as Albanian CrossesAddictedtohistory (talk) 06:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Important
There are matters you need to address at the AN/I section you started ( Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ). Please respond as soon as you are able.  Tide  rolls  14:24, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please do not edit elsewhere without responding at AN/I. If you continue editing I will construe that to mean you have no response.  Tide  rolls  19:20, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Pushing the Azerbaijani narrative on history-related articles
Hey! What's up? As I've checked your activity, it seems that you're possibly unacquainted with the rules here. Most of the Baku-based sources, like Ziya Bunyadov, are not accepted here. These sources are not supported by notable Westerner historians, and are regarded as revisionism. Please, avoid using such sources in the future and take time to be civil against others. Sağol! --► Sincerely:  Sola Virum  15:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Albanian Crosses for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Albanian Crosses, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Albanian Crosses until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Albanian Crosses


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Albanian Crosses, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.
 * It is an "attack page". (See section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
 * It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
 * It appears to be about something made up, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hovhannes Karapetyan 02:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked
Continuing to edit without responding to multiple requests for evidence to support your allegations of blockable behavior against other editors has convinced me you will not stop. This belief is reinforced by your continued personal attacks accusing others of vandalism in your edit summaries. If you think you have been blocked in error, copy and paste below and replacing Your reason here with your appeal. Please read the guide to appealing blocks before you request unblock.  Tide  rolls •

They saw the reason for my blocking in a personal attack on someone. But I do not agree with that. Because I said that a user named Addictedtohistory called me a saboteur and vandalized the important parts of the article Albanian crosses and gave very small grounds for it. The authorities told me that they did not see anyone there calling me a "propagandist" and asked me when the word was used, and said that if I could not prove it, sanctions would be imposed on me. I replied a little later (1 day later) to prove it, and I already saw that I was blocked. The user I wrote above called my article a dream and is doing nothing but typical Armenian propaganda. Altun Ahmedov (talk) 07:36, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Albanian_Crosses Altun Ahmedov (talk) 07:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Please see the link above and read what the user Addictedtohistory wrote on 22:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC). He called the article Anti-Armenian purposeful and imaginary. Today, some users vandalize important parts of the article. I ask you to consider these issues and see who deserves to be blocked. Altun Ahmedov (talk) 07:46, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * So you're saying you had 12 hours to explain your actions but opted to edit elsewhere while making further accusations without substantiation? When you finally decide to respond you take the opportunity to repeat your attacks, again supplying no evidence to support your position? Have I expressed the situation accurately?  Tide  rolls  11:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Please be very constructive and fair in this matter. I appealed to Wikipedia for vandalism and subversive use of the article I wrote. I was blocked (but I gave a reason) because I did not give any reason for it. Now I show the link and the time and date of that user's post  22:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC) Please read Addictedtohistory's post at this link and at this date and time. In general, the article I wrote is deleted in a very unreasonable way, and I can't interfere in it, and the administrators are indifferent to it. Please see also:  I know I bothered you a lot, but it seems that the managers really did not understand this issue. The links above and the comments written by that user are my proof. Altun Ahmedov (talk) 05:39, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It occurs to me that you may still not understand how you have violated Wikipedia policy. Have you read No personal attacks?  It was noted in the discussion of your first block and I assumed that you would want to familiarize yourself with the policy that you had violated.  That's what one would normally do so as to avoid future problems.  If you have not, please do.  Please pay close attention where the policy discusses where editors are encouraged to comment on content and refrain commenting on editors.  Another editor commenting on your work is not vandalism nor is it a personal attack.  When you call editors liars, wrongly accuse others of vandalism and make allegations about editors violating policy that are not supported by evidence, that is casting aspersions.  Repeatedly casting aspersions is considered a violation of the policy.  The links you are posting as evidence are not clear.  They do not point to specific actions by any individual that show policy violations.  You are continually referring to content issues in this thread.  The article and its content have nothing to do with your block.  As administrators we are concerned with behavior for the most part.  Many, many editors, including myself, have made mistakes with regard to policy and convention.  Hopefully, we learn from those mistakes and so not repeat them.  That's where problems arise; one does not learn and keeps repeating behavior that is not in the best interest of the project.  Please reflect on your actions with this in mind and see if there is any way that you can come to understand what problems may be present.  If you have specific questions I will attempt to answer them.  Tide  rolls  13:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, let's say I made a mistake. But I have 2 questions for you. 1. When will I be unblocked ?! 2. Are the Armenians and Persians not to blame for spoiling my article? They delete parts of the article unnecessarily, and I think this is vandalism. Will no one warn them? I know they do it because I am Turkish or Azerbaijani. They spread Armenian propaganda. I did not say this to them because I knew that if I did so, there would be sanctions against me, and it happened already. I did not expect that. What can I do now to prevent that article from being deleted? Please help me. They have already deleted 80 percent of the article. There I wrote an article using respectable references, which was a selected article in the Azerbaijani Wikipedia Azerbaijan, and they want to spread their false propaganda (Armenians). 3. Did you personally block me? PLEASE RELEASE ME FROM THE BLOCK AS SOON AS POSSIBLE Altun Ahmedov (talk) 15:08, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll start with number 3. Yes.  #1. You will be unblocked when you can convince an administrator that you understand the issues that resulted in your block and provide some type of plan for going forward in compliance.  That doesn't mean just type you understand and won't do it again.  Your appeal will have to have some detail. #2. That is a content issue.  I can tell you that concentrating on content issues in your appeal will probably hurt more than help. Once you are unblocked, bring this issue to my attention again and I will explain more about addressing the situation.   Tide  rolls  16:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

OK. Can you explain my mistake to me again now ?! I'm trying to understand my mistake. Please explain my mistake again. Altun Ahmedov (talk) 16:55, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I read the link you sent above and the basic principles of Wikipedia Altun Ahmedov (talk) 16:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Any explanation would just be repeating what I and others have already posted. It might be more effective for you to explain how what I've written is unclear.  The policy is relatively straightforward and I think I've been concise with my posts.  What's not clear?  Tide  rolls  17:27, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ;( I already see that you will be against me in this case. What should I do now? I am permanently blocked? They want to delete this article and its content has been changed. If you look at the identities of users who want to delete this article, you will see that most of them are Armenians. They do it just because I am Azerbaijani. I do not want to do any harm to the Armenians. They really unjustifiably delete the article and their evidence has nothing to do with that article. By the way, where are you? Which country? Do you know about the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan?Altun Ahmedov (talk) 07:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

There are two issues for me: First, they delete my article unnecessarily. Second, my blocking. You seem to be pro-Armenian or Armenian Because I have never seen such injustice anywhere. If you have decided to keep this issue as it is, please tell me where else to go. I see that you do not approach this issue responsibly.Altun Ahmedov (talk) 08:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I've explained the process for appeal in my first post in this section. I'm relatively certain this will be my last message to you.  If you have concerns that I have not addressed heretofore I will respond.  Otherwise, my best wishes to you and your family. You may also use the administrator help template. Copy and paste this  == Question for administrator ==


 * below and replace "Your question" with your problem.  Tide  rolls  14:13, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note for any reviewing admin. If you have any questions after reading this talk page feel free to ping me, email me or leave a message on my user talk.  Tide  rolls  14:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I was not unblocked, what should I do now?  I thought as you said and decided that there was no reason to argue here.  I really made a mistake.  But now I want to be unblocked.  What can I do?!Altun Ahmedov (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You seem to be pro-Armenian or Armenian Because I have never seen such injustice anywhere. Without you explicitly providing proof for this, this is yet another aspersion you have cast after being told not to do so, and will only serve to further harm your chances of getting unblocked. Unless you can prove otherwise, you are the one solely responsible for your behaviour that led to your block, and any unblock request will need to address that. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me &#124; Contributions). 23:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

TheDragonFire300 Don't bother me, no one asked you anything. I already know that I am permanently blocked Altun Ahmedov (talk) 18:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)