User talk:Andranikpasha/Archive

ASALA
Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. Please consider joining WikiProject Armenia. I reverted your edit on ASALA article, because ASALA stoped operating in 1986. Any attacks claimed after that are unverifiable and can not be included in the article. --VartanM 18:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

-OK. but why you deleted all other changes too?
 * Barev; Du inch gidas Urartu mesen?. --Vonones 00:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Lol Vonones, Դու ինչ գիտես Ուրարտուի մասին? VartanM 02:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * A lot of:) Shat aghbyurner unem haykakan Urartui yev hay patmakan urish khntirneri veraberyal. Urartui masin karogh em ruseren medz nyut ugharkel (author is me), kam el karogh em portsel angleren targmanel. Yete konkret hartsum dzez aghbyurner en petk (sources), indz grek, kportsem ognel. Best wishes, User:Andranikpasha 11:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Lav ah aper, email unes? --Vonones 08:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Unem ahper! Seghmir "E-mail this user".--User:Andranikpasha 14:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Chi agnmem asumeh. "This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." --Vonones 10:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Pls try again. "E-mail this user"-n arten ashkhatum e..--User:Andranikpasha 23:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Not yet, you have to put your email, than check " Enable e-mail from other users" on the bottom. --Vonones 12:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * kneres ahper arden ughghetsi. Yete eli chi srtacvi, imats tur, e-mails estegh kgrem!Andranikpasha 15:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Agev :) --Vonones 15:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Shushimassacre.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Shushimassacre.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 22:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem!
Anytime. Btw I think we should move Medzn Mourad to Hampartsoum Boyadjian since that is his real name and it is quite commonly used. - Fedayee 23:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Youre right! I also think about it. In Armenian Medzn Mourad form is very popular but in English "Hampartsum Poyajian" is commonly used. So Ill change it! Thanks again!: Andranikpasha 12:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 23:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome 2
Great job so far, Andranikpasha, but please be careful with quotations, it might be better to rephrase them in many situations. Also, I personally dislike seeing blockquotes, possibly b/c of abusive usage of them here on Wikipedia, especially on the 'shaky ground' articles. I would appreciate it very much, if you could avoid them, when possible, and when it does not add much beauty. Wikipedia does not take a stance, and it is hard to not impose anything on the reader with blockquoting. Thanks. DenizTC 21:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I saw it:) But anyways somtimes its better to represent what the sources are asking and this practics is commonly used in Wiki. For example "The Time" is one of the most famous and respected journals in the world and it is interesting what they are writing about the topic (especially if it happens very rarely as in the case of ASALA). Andranikpasha 22:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Khojaly Massacre
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-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 for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. . Grandmaster 10:54, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Am I the iniciator? I have no any other purposes except that Im just tring to make that article more neutral- as I represented in the talk page that some of the text links are not reliable sources... so why you dont answer to my questions at the talk page? I hope its the better way to solve whats the better variant. Andranikpasha 11:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Pardon? - Francis Tyers · 17:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Parishan
I don't need to provide sources that Azeris and Azerbaijani/Transcaucasian Tatars refer to the same ethnic group. This issue is very well covered in the Azerbaijani people article.

Also, the word Turkish, which exists in the English language, does not mean Azeri. Parishan 08:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * As I asked I dont see a big problem to change it but better if with source asking Azeris lived in Shushi (about the name of Shushi see the references, for example- Kalli Raptis) in 1920 as in that time Azerbaijanis was a new official name and we had to be more careful. By the way, we can discuss it in the article's talk page to be available for other users too.Andranikpasha 08:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The usage of a new ethnonym does not mean the creation of a new ethnic group. Inuits are not a newly-born ethnic group just because until the 1970s they were referred to as Eskimo.
 * I was talking about official terminology used in documents, maps, etc. published at the time. In that term, you won't find a single reference to the city as Shushi. Parishan 09:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

see the article's talk page! Andranikpasha 09:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Please stop removing the tags from the article. I know you have references, but read the tag: the references don't mean that it must be removed. Parishan 10:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

see the articles talk page! provide more that 6 references (as I represented+ other quotations) asking Shusha Massacres or anything else and then add the tags, ok? Andranikpasha 10:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I alone provided 3 sources, where the Shusha events were classified as an Armenian rebellion put down by Azerbaijani forces. That is substantial enough for the neutrality tags to be there. Parishan 10:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

2 of them are not reliable- de Vaal (not neutral)  and Hrono (whats this, a personal web-page, I can show you other such "sources"???). Pls lets discuss it in the articles talk page!!!!!Andranikpasha 10:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Reverts
Hi! Id like to note the last reverts of user Francis Tyers here and here. It seems to be an edit war without any serious explanations. Please could you have a look at that reverts? Thanks in advance! Andranikpasha 21:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, how're you going?
 * I've had a look- I think all that can be done under the circumstances has been done. At the moment, the article is protected, which is what I would have done- so that all arguments can be discussed on the talk page.
 * Cheers-  Cat tleG irl  talk 09:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! The only thing I suggest is to protect it in more neutral (I mean - no-partisan!) variant not in the variant which was criticized more than others! Just one example- they write in description "large number". How we can describe it? Is 300 a large number, is 600 or 6.000000. Its seems to be a very tragic pseudo-mathematics... Andranikpasha 09:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:Shu1930.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Shushi1930.jpg. The copy called Image:Shushi1930.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 21:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

so lovely
Ah Andranikpasha, ah. When you are on the verge of violating 3RR, when you are making an edit war (assuming I am edit warring, I wouldn't be doing it alone), when you are possibly the only one who openly is of your opinion on the subject, instead of stooping to think why this is the case, you just warn me with that message. Thanks, very selfless deed, indeed. By the way, you reverted three times, assuming that the anon is not you. If that anon is you, you will have broken WP:3RR, and that anon can be considered a sockpuppet of yours. Not a good thing to do. You are already asked to be checked for being a sockpuppet of a (former) featured editor somewhere. DenizTC 13:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, it is not unlikely that our reverter anon, User talk:69.77.169.2, is similar to User Talk:209.172.44.212, in several ways, one of them being an anonymous proxy. DenizTC 13:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The result is: "Andranikpasha contacted me in an email, and after looking through the edit histories, I've come to the conclusion that he is a good-faith editor, and I will assume with good faith that he is not a sock-puppet. While he and the confirmed sock-puppet Artaxiad have edited similar subjects, I see no "tag team" editing, nor shared POV. In fact, Andranikpasha seems to make very little additions to the text (therefore not inserting POV), instead finding sources and improving formatting. Also, his "mainspace" (article) edits go right up until today,[22] where Artaxiad's stop abruptly on April 9.[23] In conclusion, I have crossed Andranikpasha off the list as it is very clear that we have a case of mistaken identity." Andranikpasha 13:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2
Please remember the remedies in the above arbitration case - if you continue to edit war on any pages, you will be blocked from editing.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  10:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info but I cant understand have I rights to revert the unrelated information from the arrticle or no? For example my reverts for today. A user added previously discussed source related to Albania and Arcakh to prove something related to ...Arran and Karabakh. What must I do for a better way? PS - I didnt remember if even I deleted any relevant reliable information from an article. Is there such a fact??...Andranikpasha 10:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What you need to do is not revert war, however much you believe something is wrong, just walk away from it. The articles you are involved in editing cause massive conflicts, hence the two arbitration cases. The latest one gives any administrator the right to block a user causing disruption in these articles post a warning, that's what the above warning is serving as. Please, just move onto something else.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  10:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Im interested in the history of Armenia, why Ill pass to edit articles about anything else. Is the user Grandmaster or Baku87 have more rights to edit them even if they broke the Wiki rules. If they think their sources are relevant why to not ask for arbitration? Andranikpasha 10:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No-one has anymore rights than anyone else - everyone is equal. The arbitration committee have been asked previously and this is the resolution - either everyone gots on with it constructively or they get blocked.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  10:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Notice of editing restrictions
Notice: Under the terms of Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2, any editor who edits articles which relate to the region of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Iran and the ethnic and historical issues related to that area in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility may be placed under several editing restrictions, by notice on that editor's talk page. This notice is to inform you that based on your edits, you are hereby placed under the following restrictions:
 * 1) Revert limitation (formerly known as revert parole). You are limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism, and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
 * 2) Supervised editing (formerly known as probation). 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 one another concerning disputes which may arise.
 * 3) Civility supervision (formerly known as civility parole). If you make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, then you may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses.

Enforcement: Violations of limitations, supervision, or bans imposed by the remedies in this case may be enforced by brief blocks of up to a week in the event of repeat violations. After 5 blocks the maximum block period shall increase to one year.

Note: This notice is not effective unless given by an administrator and logged here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Postlethwaite (talk • contribs) 10:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

So pls show me even one unconstructively revert for me to understand where I was guilty. I read Grandmasters words that I edit the articles "in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility on revert parole and other limitations, established by the arbcom."! He added me to sockpuppets check-list and when he didnt succeed, now he wrote things without facts. I need even one fact of "an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility on revert parole and other limitations, established by the arbcom.", if its true! If it is true ok block me, if no- Id prefer to hear a sorry from he! Andranikpasha 10:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You're agressively edit warring without discussion, that's why you have been placed on the list.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  10:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

OK! A simple fact of an aggressive revert without discussion please!Andranikpasha 11:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You know what an edit war is, any more of it will result in a block.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  11:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

So is there a fact or no? im always keep the rules and Im correct so I dont see a reason to call my activity an editwar.Andranikpasha 11:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

? And are there a rule asking if even I didnt make any aggressive revert without discussion and didnt pass 3RR anyways my activities can be call an edit war?Andranikpasha 12:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Reply to email
Thanks for your email. I am aware that there are many senior editors trying to find solutions to the ongoing problems with edits in the areas you are active. I have no background knowledge of the area, and it would probably not help if I were to try and get involved.- gadfium 21:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I see that you've been indefinitely blocked. If you wish to appeal against this, add to this talk page.- gadfium  04:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Asalagerb.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Asalagerb.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 18:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

your images
Andranikpasha, I checked your images, they seem to be wrongly tagged. Also, as far as I know, we cannot have images that are even free for non-commercial use. I don't think we should be able to keep the ones that are free for say informational use. The following are the images uploaded by you: DenizTC 20:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:AndranikOzanian.jpg (instead of saying that it is also published on your geocities site, you should tell us where you got that photo. I don't think you were alive, at least not old enough to attend that event and take a photo in 1921)
 * Image:Arme80.jpg (Armen Grigoryan is a living person, a singer, so we should be able to find a free alternative)
 * Image:Asalagerb.jpg (it should be fine being a logo, but it is orphaned now, will be deleted if it stays so)
 * Image:Aznavour.jpg‎ (wrong tag again, and for informational use only. We should be able to find a free alternative)
 * Image:AznavourArm.jpg (same as above)
 * Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg (for informational and educational use only)
 * Image:Hunch20.jpg (can you prove that it is published before 1923?)
 * Image:Hunchak20.jpg (same as above)
 * Image:Knarazn.jpg‎ (wrong tag, aznavour was born in 1924, he seems to be about five years old in that picture, it is definitely not before 1923)
 * Image:Sedahoka.gif‎ (this one should be fine)
 * Image:Shu1930.jpg (wrong tag, the photo is from 30's, not before 1923, most likely not free)
 * Image:Shushimassacre.jpg (for informational purpose)

Fair use disputed for Image:Sedahoka.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Sedahoka.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That image is from 1887, so it almost certainly is in the public domain. El_C 04:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Mentorship in effect
Hi. With the consent of the blocking admin you are hereby unblocked, subject to mentorship. All prior restrictions remain in effect. Best of luck. El_C 04:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Welcome back Andranik, remember that besides my mentorship you are also under supervised editing and are limited to 1 revert per week. Also if you edit any article in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility you may and most likely will be blocked again. VartanM 04:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to the Users and Admins who support my unblocking! Kind regards, Andranikpasha 10:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Andranik I replaced your welcome template. I think this one gives a lot more information. If you have time just go over the policies, they will help you better understand how wikipedia works --VartanM 17:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Andranikpasha 19:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Andranik I forgot to tell you, per Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 arbcom remedies you were placed under revert limitation

Revert limitation (formerly known as revert parole). You are limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism, and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.

Which means you can only revert an article only once a week and you must justify your revert in the talkpage. Ie. why you reverted and how your version is better then the one before. And please read the --VartanM 16:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * About the userboxe, I'll see What I can do. VartanM 03:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!Andranikpasha 10:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Barev
Barev Andranik, take a look at my comments on 

See if I am coming across to you, cause eupator seems to be confused.--Moosh88 21:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Barev! Dzer hastseov indz namak grek, I can send you some useful sources on the topic (in Russian).Andranikpasha 22:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Aznavour.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Aznavour.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VegitaU 15:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:Aznavour.jpg
An image that you uploaded, Image:Aznavour.jpg, has been listed at because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 16:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Armenia Name section corrections
Can you please take a look here, Moosh88 had put the right info, and Dbachmann removed it. It should say the earliest mention by Greeks, not earliest ever mentioned of Armenia, and by the way that Greek historian didnt say Armenia, in that exact form. In fact nobody in those ancient days said exactly in the form we say "Armenia" now. So, if you look in the Talk:Armenia page, you see that Dbachmmann himself had put those earlier records before the Greeks mention in their forms of our name. So those much older records are referring to the land, and same with the Persian "Armina", referring to the "land" of Armenia. So those earlier records Armani, and Ermenen, that if you look in the Talk page, Dbachmann said we can put it, and he himself had put it, if you notice his earlier edits in the Armenia page. So all these records that are not in the "exact" Armenia <-- form, were referring to the "land", as we have earlier than 500 BC, way earlier than 500 BC. 216.175.98.253 23:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Shushimassacre.jpg
Hi, could you please provide an exact source for Image:Shushimassacre.jpg. I have tagged it to be deleted in 7 days if a verifiable source has not been provided. John Vandenberg 07:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC) also Image:Shu1930.jpg needs verifiable source information. John Vandenberg 07:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. Andranikpasha 20:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Armenia, Subartu and Sumer
Hello Andranikpasha. I was not exactly sure what your suggestion was on my talk page, were you seeking to have the article moved to another location? If so, please post your request to Requested moves. If you had something else in mind, please let me know. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi! Yes, I asked for the moving of the separate part related to the book. but as I see now there is a proposal for the deletion of the whole article cuz of low notability, so maybe its better to wait a little before discussions will end to make a decision about moving. Thank you! Andranikpasha 07:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Fringe Report
Hello, Andranik. Your recent edits on "Armani" have been reported on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard by Eupator. I don't know what the page is for, I don't know why they were reported, I don't know what's going on there, but I thought you deserve a notice in case if you want to present your side. It will be useful if you are brief in your response, avoid making accusations (even if your opponents do so), and stick to specific sources, rules and policies.

I still think the view has no place on the Armenia article, since at this point it doesn't seem to be a significant view (doesn't mean it's fringe). But it's your fight, so good luck:) --TigranTheGreat 17:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Anyways I prefer this way, than to receive personal abuses here! Andranikpasha 20:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Warning
"Dowsett surely means the geogr. Albania (sorry, the word of "Caucasian" is an obvious OR)."

Andranikpasha, that is utter hogwash. If you disrupt this debate once more by claiming Dowsett's use of "Albania" refers to the Republic of Albania, as opposed to the intended Caucasian Albania, you're going to end up blocked for disruption. I'm sure that you are completely aware of what Dowsett meant and that you are completely aware you are being disruptive, which is why you will not get another warning that stonewalling and misrepresentation of sources is unacceptable. Please contribute constructively, and only constructively, from now on. Picaroon (t) 02:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Picaroon, just look up the map to not ask about... disruption! The geographic Albania is in Caucasus, right in the place of Caucasian Albania, which was a former independent country, not a name for geographical region. And please look up again the talk: Atabek, not me (I asked I dont beleave) claims that geographic Albania is... in the Balkans... I prefer if you leave an answer! Andranikpasha 07:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikisource
Hi, in regards to this, please use Wikisource whenever a source is public domain. That article is already on Wikisource. See The New York Times/Nurses stuck to post. John Vandenberg (talk) 04:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the info! Andranikpasha (talk) 10:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for wikifing the Smbat Sahaziz article and Congratulations on your new barnstar and new userpage. You can place if you don't want the table of content. --VartanM (talk) 03:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much, VartanM! All the best, Andranikpasha (talk) 08:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom
Thank you for your comments. By the way, Grandmaster has mentioned your name on the Request for Arbitration page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=prev&oldid=177652910 I thought it's only fair for you to know. --TigranTheGreat (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, TigranTheGreat! Andranikpasha (talk) 18:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Revert parole
Per the remedies contained in Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2, I'm limiting you to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, you are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. This will apply for six months, and is due to your recent edit-warring across multiple pages. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 16:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that the other remedies of supervised editing and civility supervision do not apply to you. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 16:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Andranik, seems like there is whole lot of backroom anti-Armenian dealings going on and its getting irritating. I'm ending our mentorship. I believe I was successful in teaching you how wikipedia works. And you are quite good at it. VartanM (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Note
These edits do constitute a violation of your revert parole (partial reverts still count, see Three-revert rule and Help:Reverting). Since the violation is fairly stale (and anyway you'd only just been placed on revert parole), there's no point in blocking, but please refrain from such reverts in the future, and remember that partial reverts are still reverts. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 14:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! But the revert by Parishan wasnt even discussed, what about it? For a long time Im suggesting to discuss what they're going to add, not Grandmaster, nor Parishan, nor Atabek replied!

And about the link provided by you:) Can you make a comment if this note by User:Grandmaster: "I think the history of disruptive activity of Andranikpasha across various Wikimedia projects, including vandalism in English wiki, should be reviewed by the admins." here is a violation of Wiki policies or not? Andranikpasha (talk) 14:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Everything you say, sooner or later will be used against you. Lar has all the tools necessary to do his job. VartanM (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Surely! Andranikpasha (talk) 22:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Nobody's out to get you. In fact I hope that you end up being a productive user and bygones are bygones. But avoiding admitting what is extremely obvious is not a good approach. I think it would be best if you made a clean break, said "yes, in the beginning of my wiki career I made some mistakes, and yes I did those disruptive things you said I did, using multiple IDs and the IPs, but now I want to change and I want people to evaluate me for what I do now, not 3 or 6 months ago". If you said that, you'd change a fair few people's minds about you, including mine. On the other hand if you stick to denying things you will have a hard time convincing people because the evidence is so blatant. Yes it's possible it wasn't you but it's highly improbable. What do you say? ++Lar: t/c 23:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Under which policies are you suggesting that. If you want to evaluate him look at his contributions. What happened before he joined the en.wiki is completely irrelevant to User:Andranikpasha. If this wasn't clear, I'm strongly urging him not to say a word, since it will be used against him, sooner or later. If not by Lar, then some other members who bothered to compile the evidence. VartanM (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * "Nobody's out to get you" this and this say otherwise. VartanM (talk) 00:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Also this is turning out to be ridiculous; Grandmasters obsession to have Andranikpasha banned from here, from the very first day Anrdranikpasha registered and contributed here remains unnoticed. The checkusers request and evidences gathered turn this episode to plain harassment, from Grandmasters part who didn’t dare to post his evidences himself. What you are requesting is beyond the authority attributed to you for something which happened elsewhere on Wikipedia months ago. Andranikpasha is contributing positively here, and no he is not vandalizing, nor anything was reported on meta. Should this suffice? Should it suffice to say that he was only recently included in the list of users with edit limitations? It is funny that when Fedayee brought Ehud Lesar's case, it backslashed against him, something which was current and now. If you want to help stop possible disruption, since you are checkuser you could run a checkuser between User:Ehud Lesar and User:Elsanaturk.VartanM (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

VartanM, your comments are not helpful and if anything, are making the situation look worse for Andranikpasha, at least to me. I'm asking him the question, not you. He can answer or not as he likes. If he chooses to answer "yes, that bad stuff in the past was me" then my voice will be saying "consider what he's doing now and that he's putting the past behind him". If he chooses to answer "no, it wasn't me", or doesn't answer, then my voice will be saying "the evidence suggested that in the past he did these things and he doesn't want to come clean". That's all I am, a voice. I'm not talking about policies or anyone else, ok? Just MY perception of Andranikpasha and what positions I choose to take. Because I know what the evidence strongly suggests and no amount of bare faced denial or silence is going to change my mind. ++Lar: t/c 02:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. "Perception" - isn't that the sort of word word that tends to accompany other words, words like bigotry, stereotyping, kangaroo-courts, rough-justice, etc. I hope you will decide the "positions you choose to take" based on actual evidence, and not on something as flimsy as "perception". If all you have is a "perception", an opinion based on a feeling, then it would be much better to take no position at all. Meowy 18:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Since you are admitting that this is for you, then you can email him and ask him in private. Whether he answers yes or no here is irrelevant, either way it will be used against him, not by you, you aren’t involved in the case. So I suggest doing this privately since your request is beyond policy enforcement. I don’t know about his past contributions outside English Wikipedia, since from the beginning there were attempts by a member to have him banned, because of Andranikpasha's contributions on Shushi massacre article (some members would want it deleted, while it is clearly notable) I am attempting to stop something which will potentially be used again to harass him even further. VartanM (talk) 03:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merry Christmas!! Andranikpasha (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I just came by to recipricate your greetings to me, and say Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you. Meowy 18:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you!! Andranikpasha (talk) 13:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked
24 hours for violation of revert parole, please see. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 10:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * User emailed me about an unblock, but it sure looks like a revert to me and arb restriction does apply. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 23:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Although the words were modified, I agree with the assessment that it was a revert. - Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 14:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello from RuWP
Heloo! Remember me? --hayk (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I dont. Why should I? Is this info about you? I prefer if you hide such info and to not "self-advertise" here! Andranikpasha (talk) 18:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi!
Thanks for your contribution! Please consider editting some of our most recently created articles. :) -- Francis Tyers · 18:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * thanks! and pls avoid of unexplained pro-azeri editwarrings. read the Wiki rules at first.Andranikpasha (talk) 18:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked for violation of parole
You have been blocked for 3 days for violating your parole, as per Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 for edits made to Hayasa-Azzi. The edits you reverted were not clearly vandalism and constitute a content dispute. A log of this has been made on the above page, and your parole has been extended for another 6 months. --Haemo (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Er, he was reverting an IP sock of someone who has already had his/her block extended to one month for sockpuppetry, and who has also been warned about rv'ing that article. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Who was the sock puppet, may I ask? Meowy 21:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The IP address, 144.* is a sockpuppet. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * A sockpuppet of which specific user? (Since not everyone with a 144. address is a sock-puppet - there must be thousands of ip addresses and hundreds of thousands of internet users beginning with 144!) Meowy 21:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * See: Requests for checkuser/Case/Sumerophile. The ip=Sumerophile.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 22:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter; unless they were banned the ArbCom ruling holds. Bad behavior by one person does not excuse the same by another &mdash; the whole point of 1RR is to prevent edit warring. It doesn't matter who started it. --Haemo (talk) 23:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Block Duration Extended (Mistake)
Your block duration has been extended to 2 weeks due to sockpuppetry.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

NonNationalistEditor is obviously not a sock of Andranikpasha, careful analysis will show they are reverting each other's edit. NonNationalistEditor is clearly User:Sumerophile, whose block has already been extended once for precisely the same thing. . Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the article history had become quite confusing. Your block has been reduced to its original duration.  I severely apologize.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk)  23:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * How many socks does User:Sumerophile have, and how many anonymous ip's for editing? Seems like he has just made an anonymous edit in his own talk page, saying how excellent his contributions are! Meowy 02:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Armenia mediation
Hello Andranikpasha, I asked dab about his preference, and he prefers open discussion. So, as far as I'm concerned you're free to open a MedCab case. If you decide to take that path, please, in addition to the normal procedure, change the Medcabstatus to "status = open" and "mediators = SebastianHelm" to make it clear to other potential mediators that they don't need to take on this case. In the edit summary, please link to this message to make it clear that I authorized you to put my name there. You may also find it helpful to take a look at my own mediation page, User:SebastianHelm/Mediation. &mdash; Sebastian 19:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I opened the case here: Mediation_Cabal/Cases. Andranikpasha 16:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Armenian collage
Barev, can you please cast your vote for the design and content on Armenians collage here?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Armenians Thanks! -- Aivazovsky (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Good idea! I replied there. Andranikpasha (talk) 23:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Check out the "final descision" topic below and cast your votes. I added your suggestions. Thanks again! -- Aivazovsky (talk) 00:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You also should pick at least 10 people. -- Aivazovsky (talk) 00:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK! Ill try:) Andranikpasha (talk) 00:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hayasa
I'll reword my comment. Regards, Artene50 (talk) 09:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but this new variant seems even more radical OR, than the previous one. So lets make an agreement: Ill remove it right now, and if you can find even one reliable source saying "However, most scholars remain unconvinced here since the arrival of the Armenians can only be securely dated to the 6th century BC with the Orontid kings and because very little is known specifically about the people of Azzi-Hayasa per se. Most of what is documented about Azzi-Hayasa concerns its activities against Hatti only.", readd the text, no problem! Otherwise its an turkish propagandist Original research. Thanks in advance! Andranikpasha (talk) 16:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear Andranikpasha. The topic about the origins of Hayasa is NOT Turkish propaganda. I reworded my comment on Hayasa: and removed the statement that non-Armenian scholars don't believe that Hayasa an ancestor of Hayasa. I have read books by O.R. Gurney and Trevor Bryce on the Hittites and they never once say that Hayasa-Azzi was an ancestor of modern day Armenia. These people are Western scholars, not Turkish. There is NO evidence; we know almost nothing about the people of 13th century BC Hayasa--and that is the point of my edit. All we know is what the Hittites record about Hayasa--that Hayasa was an aggressive foreign power that threatened Hatti's security. To claim that Hayasa-Azzi were ancestors of the Armenians is POV pushing as Dbachman notes. I respect the fact that you love your country Armenia after all the tragedy it has endured in the 20th century. But this is an article about the kingdom of Hayasa-Azzi. Not Armenia. If Wikipedia had only one position on the supposed origins of Hayasa with no room for caveats or counter-arguments--something which you seem to be doing, then its credibility would fall into tatters. Why are are you edit warring on Hayasa now? Act less like Ararat Arev and be more neutral here. Can you do this please? Artene50 (talk) 23:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Im in these cases during years so pls do not explain who and what propagands. Armenian (tragic, non tragic) history is irrelevant here as well as citations by Dbachmann (he's not a source) and historians who wrote nothing (?!) about the topic. Pls read the Wiki rules: we're adding any info when we have reliable sourced that prove it. If many scolars dont write Hayas's were the ancestors of Armenians, it never means they're not agree with the sources saying they are. How many historians criticize this theory, how many historians say "we know nothing about Hayasa's relations", how many historians condemn represented view as an pro-Armenian POV? Pls lets be more serious while discussing something. Your, my, Dbachmanns views are not important here, this is an Encyclopedia, which cites serious historical sources. Andranikpasha (talk) 18:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Artaxiad 9 CheckUser
Hi Andranikpasha, I finally got your email in September about this. I don't check that email address often since it is only for my Wikipedia email and I don't edit as much as I used to, so I don't get much email there at all (I've had 9 emails there since May 2006). In the future, please contact me at my talk page since I check that every couple of days.

It's good to see that you got removed from the list though. I didn't get to look at your edit history very much, but it looks like you weren't doing anything to warrant being called a sockpuppet. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 11:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Andranikpasha 17:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2
I've removed your name from the list of users placed under supervised editing in the above arbitration case because although I see edit warring from your account, I fail to see any incivility with the edit warring. Sorry for any inconvenience from you being placed there in the first place.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  20:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Armenian-Tartar massacres 1905-1907
I have deleted this page as a duplicate (copy & paste), and replaced it with a redirect. Please do not try to move pages around unless you have 100% consensus, and only rename a page with the WP:MOVE button. John Vandenberg (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry John but I have to disagree. Andranik was exercising his right to be WP:BOLD and you are not assuming good faith. The page was indeed moved without a consensus and its current title is OR. Even people living at that time didn't call themselvs Azerbeijanis. Every self respecting scholar refers to the event as Armenian-Tartar(Tatar) ... Wikipedia isn't the place to re-write the history because its confusing. I'm sure as an administrator and a neutral user you would agree. You were right about the using the move button. Andranik the move button is next to the history tab, if used, it automatically transfers the history and the talkpage to the new location. VartanM (talk) 00:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * VartanM, being constantly BOLD is not the wiki way. So far, Andranik has been too bold, too often, so I felt it was necessary to advise him that he should not be making these decisions on his own.  I do not want Andranik to become another fallen hero - about a week ago (?) I quickly went through the users contribs and found a number of new articles (I tidied a few up and added redlinks because I want to know more), so I honestly want to see a good broad involvement from Andranik.  To last the distance, all new users must learn that this encyclopedia does not need to be "fixed" today.  Rushing around trying to fix everything that is broken is outright disrespectful of the people who like to discuss complex issues.  There are way too many content disputes that Andranik has generated or re-invigorated in the last few days - this has to stop. John Vandenberg (talk) 12:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The definition of the "too bold" for me, is if he started moving articles left and right, edit warring and unwilling to talk or compromise. None of which describe Andraniks behavior. He didn't just woke up in the morning and decided to move the article. He voiced his opinion in the talkpage and received no response, He waited 24 hours prior to making the page move. Also if a user has the time and energy to fix things, I don't think its appropriate to tell them not to. The only thing you and I can do is to show him the right direction. Those content disputes were there long before Andranik joined wikipedia and I don't think its right to single out users and point fingers as to who started them. VartanM (talk) 18:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * VartanM, in this case "too bold" is making a change that is likely to further conflict. WP:BOLD is intended to encourage new editors to get in and help.  It is not a justification for being reckless.
 * In isolation, Andranik move would have been OK, but I am regularly seeing the user making changes that are too bold in an area that is already being hotly disputed, and he is by now well aware that it is hotly disputed and that the Wikipedia community has twice warned everyone in this region to clean up their act, move slowly and carefully, and always use excellent sources.
 * The users energy need to be directed into expanding Wikipedia, and constructively concluding existing disputes. Otherwise excessive energy is akin to a POV warrior that is moving too fast for others to keep up with, and you know how the community feels about that. John Vandenberg (talk) 02:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * John, lets use a little more friendly style of writing and to not forecast who (what user/hero) and when will fall! I don't think that's helping us resolve the issue(s). Andranikpasha 14:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Andranik, the reality is that most of the topics in this region are started by people who are later banned as being too disruptive. The result is that then the rest of us need to go through and figure out what content they created is correct and neutral, and what needs to be removed.  Often we find that it is easier to ban these disruptive users because the create too much mess.  So far, I am finding you prone to be disruptive, and I dont want to suffer the same fate, because you are writing good new articles, so you are also valuable.
 * I can only suggest that instead of trying to tell me how to write my warnings, you actually listen to the message and adjust your behaviour.
 * This talk section started with me notifying you that I had undone your technically incorrect page move, and a recommendation that you seek consensus before doing more page moves. Your response has been argumentative, full of accusations, and justifications of why the page move was correct.  I don't particularly care whether the page move was correct -- I am telling you that the way you are approaching these conflicts is disruptive. John Vandenberg (talk) 02:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you VartanM! It was the best help! Andranikpasha 08:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

...and double standards

 * Dear John! Sorry again you're not right! The page's origianl name was Armenian-Tatar massacres  and it was moved without any discussion by User:Folantin so it must be changed to the original version to continue discussions! I prefer if you be included to this case and do it yourself or let me know if before self-rv I need to ask to "Incidents" page to clear up if Folantin is free to move what and when he want without even discussions (100% consensus...)? hope for a little neutrality, Andranikpasha (talk) 14:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

So far, the consensus is that the current name is more appropriate language in an encyclopedia for readers in 2007.

You are getting yourself involved in every possible dispute that you can, related to one very narrow topic, and even creating new disputes. I am trying to advise you that performing actions without 100% consensus is not the way to learn to be a good Wikipedian. Claiming that there is a "double standard" every time someone disagrees with you is not the right attitude. If you feel you need more input into a discussion, you should calmly notify the wikiprojects involved (without suggesting which way they should vote), and wait.

As an example, I strongly disagree with what has happened to the Aisha's age at marriage redirect, but I have left a note and I am patiently waiting for some input from others. If nobody responds in another week, I will start looking for additional input. There is no rush. I would not dare to change it back, because that would only cause "drama", and my original message would be lost in silly edit wars and hot discussion.

There are plenty of other topics you can work on while you wait, such as the red links I added onto "Askanaz Mravyan". I am interested to learn more. John Vandenberg (talk) 15:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Its all right, John! The words are really so beautiful! I just dont know if there was at least one addition/npov-ing/consensus by you which was welcomed not only by Azeri discussing groups but also by Armenians! I think in that case such edits/movings can not be called neutral and surely are not a "100% consensus"! Thank you. Andranikpasha (talk) 16:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * 100% consensus is possible (even between Azer & Arm), and should be your aim for when you are working on contentious topics. If you cant obtain 100% consensus for a proposal, there are only two reasons:
 * The proposal is right, but people contributing to the discussion are purposely being difficult
 * The proposal is wrong, and it shouldn't be done. The proposal may need to be improved.
 * Often the problem is that the proposer doesnt know which reason it is, and starts assuming the proposal is right, when it isnt. We all make many proposals that are wrong.  We all need to trust the comments of others - even people we dont like.
 * Think about it this way ... if you are do something which does not have 100% consensus, how do you know that you are doing the right thing? If you make a change without 100% consensus, how long will your change last ?  If it is rolled back in a few days, then you have wasted your own time!  You should always be trying to contribute in ways that are not causing "drama". John Vandenberg (talk) 22:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thats what I marked previously. As no any user by Armenian side (included me) even achieved a consensus with you and Grandmaster its directly shows that we're always (at 100% of discussions) not right but only you! Can I (we) be interested in such a traditionally one-side consensuses with your participation? Sorry, but the simple statistics says no! Anyways thank you for the interest and reply! Andranikpasha 22:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

In fact
You're so good at it that you deserve a Barnstar

You are welcome
My pleasure Andranikpasha. Wikipedia is a collaborative project so it was wrong for certain people to be unwelcoming by removing the WikiProject Karabakh template from the talk page of the articles. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

T:DYK.
Congratulations! · AndonicO Talk 20:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Contact
hi andranik, you send me a message and i am just replying; it would be interesting to talk to you about wiki as you seem to be a veteran user. Yerkatagear (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Yerkatagear jan! Ill be glad to be useful! Feel free to contact me here! Hajoghutyun! Andranikpasha (talk) 14:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Re
"touched philosophical questions of life's meaning, pain and mercy, joy and pride" or "Soviet monopolist recording studio", OK I admit that it's not a complete appraisal but it definitely has its flaws.--The Dominator (talk) 02:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Dominator, but what must we write if he really sings about the life's meaning etc? And Melodiya was really the monopolist studio of USSR, it is well-known fact. Be sure you cant find one else Soviet studio:) The USSR of 1970's was a totalitar country with no private enterpreneurship. Anyways I suggest you to do a NPOV-checking and then delete the tag. Thank you! Andranikpasha (talk) 02:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it needs better wording "touched philosophical questions" seems unencyclopedic and I don't really like the term monopolistic even if it is true, it just seems so biased.--The Dominator (talk) 02:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Andranikpasha (talk) 10:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Topic ban at Shusha pogrom
Under the terms of Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2, the following sanctions are enacted. For more information see. Thatcher 02:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) For persistent edit-warring over the Waal source, Andranikpasha is banned from editing Shusha pogrom for two weeks.  He may make suggestions on the talk page.
 * 2) For persistent edit-warring over the Waal source and for failing to actually read either their own edits or Meowy's talk page comments about the duplicated paragraphs, Atabek and Grandmaster are banned from editing Shusha pogrom for 3 weeks and banned from commenting on the talk page for one week.  (Since they won't actually take the time to read and comprehend others' comments, their own privilege to comment is temporarily suspended.
 * 3) Andranikpasha, Grandmaster and Atabek are reminded that during their bans they are not to instruct other editors to edit on their behalf, called proxy editing.  Evidence of proxy editing will result in blocking for both the editor directing the edits and the proxy making them.

The term "Azerbaijani"
Do you know if there has been any extensive discussion on Wikipedia about the use/misuse of this phrase. It is my opinion that an "Azerbaijani" is a citizen of Azerbaijan. The republic of Azerbaijan did not exist before May 1918, so nobody prior to that date could be called an "Azerbaijani" (they would either be ethnic Tartars (or ethnic Azeri Tartars) or ethnic Armenians, and so on). And, furthermore, anbody who was a citizen of Azerbaijan after that date, even if they were Armenian or Georgian, could also legitimately be called an "Azerbaijani".

BTW, thank you for your support of me in the AE discussion about the Susha Pogrom reverts. Meowy 16:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks to you for your constructive position at Shushi Pogrom! According to the sources, the republic under the name of Azerbaijan was firstly founded in 1918. Untill that there wasnt any usage of Azerbaijani term except of some Russian sources who call the Turkic inhabitants of the "Azerbaijan/Aderbadagan" region Tartars, Caucasian Tatars and rarely Azerbaijani (Azerbaijanian; of Azerbaijan) Tartars. And surely the usage of Azeri is more correct when we're describing a conflict between inhabitants of Azerbaijan, for example, between the Azerbaijani Armenians and Azerbaijani Tatars (Azeris) in Baku. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, that is more or less what I believe. "Azerbaijan" has a legitimate use, pre-1918, as a geographical or regional descriptor - but "Azerbaijani" can't be used as an ethnic term then or now (unless it is used to describe every citizen of Azerbaijan regardless of their ethnicity or religion). But has this been discussed anywhere on Wikipedia? Meowy 17:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I dont know if this has been discussed earlier. We can search at related article's talks. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Anbayman
My pleasure! --RaffiKojian (talk) 16:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Daniel Varujan
Barev! Isn't there a wiki-page abt Daniel Varujan (in English wikipedia, I created it in the Italian one)...? Is it possible? Bye! Amiens984 (talk) 13:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Barev! Yes, its strange! We need to expand it! Andranikpasha (talk) 15:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Abameliks
Barev, Andranik! Just wanted to let you know that we already have an article on the Abamelik family. I'm redirecting your entry to it. Best,--KoberTalk 05:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hovhannes Katchaznouni
Hello, I need your advice in this article, which's one section I proposed to merge to this one called The ARF Has Nothing To Do Anymore (book). --Vitilsky (talk) 21:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Shusha pogrom
Цифры жертв в большинстве фантастичны, цифра 30 тысяч больше, чем всего было армян в Шуше в 1916 г. (23 тысячи), впрочем, я встречал цифры, что в 1920 г. в Шуше было уже 67 тысяч населения и из них 30 тысяч армян (видимо, число увеличилось за счет беженцев, а также тех карабахцев, кто с началом революции вернулся в Шушу из России?) - тогда цифра 30 тысяч родилась просто из того, что все армянское население сначала описывали как жертв погрома - а затем это приравняли к понятию "убитые". Цифра Хованисяна - 500 человек - кажется явно и непонятно заниженной. Мариэтта Шагинян в книжке 1930 года дает оценки от 6 до 12 тысяч - видимо наиболее распространенные тогда - по-моему истина ближе к нижней цифре. Арсен Мелик-Шахназаров, внук недавно (около 1989) умершего Зарэ Мелик-Шахназарова, того самого, что участвовал в убийстве Джемал-паши и оставил интереснейшие воспоминания, говорил со слов деда, что, в общем, подавляющее большинство шушинцев успело спастись и уйти по каринтакской дороге. Вообще подробно смотрите в статье "Шуша" русской Википедии, она в последние дни сильно увеличилась, там все ссылки, оттуда перенесите что-нибудь в данную статью, мой же английский слишком плох для этого. Цифры энциклопедии Хатчинсона видимо возникли так: вычли из числа проживавших в Шуше накануне событий число проживавших в Шуше после событий (9 тысяч азербайджанцев), а остальных отнесли к убитым. По всем этим причинам, самое разумное было бы - вынести цифры погибших в особый раздел и снабдить их комментариями. Sfrandzi (talk) 18:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. об Андранике. Точно ли он на рубеже 1918-19 годов был в Шуше? По моим сведениям, он на границе Карабаха был встречен представителями союзников и по их требованию вернулся в Зангезур. Согласно письму Карабахского Армянского Национального совета, когда Андраник со своей армией двинулся к Карабаху, "народ с замиранием сердца ждал своего героя и жаждал видеть его у себя. Однако английский командующий в Баку Томсон, вняв просьбам азербайджанского правительства, сразу же отправил специальную миссию и остановил генерала Андраника на берегу Агару (...)Между тем местные татары и азербайджанское правительство продолжали свои посягательства. Ежедневно они устраивали на границах армянских районов демонстрации под руководством турецких офицеров,  отдельные убийства, разбой, несколько раз нападали на Хцаберд, Кюратаг, Чартар и другие армянские села"(Нагорный Карабах в 1918—1923 гг.: сборник документов и материалов. Ереван, 1992, стр. 122, документ № 78: Письмо Карабахского Армянского Национального совета генерал-комиссару Зангезура и Карабаха Арсену Шахмазяну, 19 марта 1919 г.). Кстати, вы совершенно напрасно упорствуете, меняя в статье форму Шуша на Шуши: официальное название города и в Российской империи, и в Советском Союзе было - Шуша, тут уже ничего не поделаешь. Sfrandzi (talk) 00:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Andranik with his volunteers were in the Shosh (the village near Shushi) when they were stopped by the British forces. Andranikpasha (talk) 03:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Чем цепляться за цифру 30 тысяч, лучше переведите из русской Википедии подробности погрома. Там очень красочные свидетельства приведены. Это будет гораздо важнее, уверяю вас. Если описать ситуацию в деталях, то вопрос о числе "убитых азербайджанцев" отпадет сам собой. Хотя какое-то количество их конечно перестреляли, см. воспоминания Мелик-Шахназарова. Жаль, что мало. Sfrandzi (talk) 17:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * For me the article is very informative and I'm one of the main authors. It is unacceptable to use partisan POV's and even memoires as they are not a NPOV. If we start to do this we will have many unreliable views in different articles and not only here. This is an encyclopedia, we have no memoirs at Holocaust or Armenian Genocide articles. Neitralnost' previshe vsego! Andranikpasha (talk) 17:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Я сам вставил необходимое, поправьте пожалуйста мой английский. Есть две вещи, которые надо признать: 1. было восстание, просто следует разделять восстание и погром. 2. Число жертв исчисляется видимо несколькими тысячами, но во всяком случае не десятками тысяч. Это и есть нейтральная точка зрения. Ведь на чем строится партийная точка зрения? 1. Восстание смешивается с погромом - а потом получается, что вроде как Шуша была разрушена не в ходе погрома, а в ходе каких-то "боев" с напавшими на мирных азербайджанцев армянскими войсками. 2. Указывают, что 30 тысяч армян в городе не жили - и из этого делают вывод, что весь погром - миф. Да, восстание было, и число жертв погрома гораздо меньше 30 тысяч. Но погрома это никак не отменяет. Sfrandzi (talk) 18:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thomas de Waal
I'm certain you're aware of the AA cases at ArbCom, given your probation, so it shouldn't come as a surprise to you that several editors have found it inappropriate that you are inserting inflammatory language into a biography based on something that is not generally considered a reliable source. Since the information you're inserting (and reverting to) is clearly covered by the scope of this Arbitration and your probation, if you revert again, its likely that additional sanctions will be put in place. Shell  babelfish 20:26, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The person himself is very unreliable and obviously engaged in a dirty business. What kinds of sources we need to use for that "giant of neutrality"? for me a Russian analyst is the best source! Andranikpasha (talk) 03:14, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * By "person" would you be referring to the subject of the article? If so, please remember that the BLP policy asks that you avoid these sorts of comments on any page at Wikipedia, not just the article itself.  If you feel there are issues missing from the article, finding multiple, high-quality sources is the fastest track to having that information included.  Editing at Wikipedia can be incredibly frustrating, but its very important that you discuss issues with other editors instead of reverting. Shell   babelfish 02:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I know that it is a BLP. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Буниятов
Коллега, в критику Буниятова стоит поместить мнение Бурнатяна, оно есть здесь. Divot (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Shusha pogrom
Просьба обратить внимание на мои последние правки в статье, и если Грандмастер возьмется с ними бороться (как он это пытается делать в русской Википедии) - защитить. У меня для этого недостаточно английского :)) Sfrandzi (talk) 21:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

New move and merger request
It is a new move and merger request see: Talk:Denial of the Armenian Genocide -- PBS (talk) 16:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:AN. Moreschi (talk) 00:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rodhull andemu  01:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Please disregard this notice; it was made in good faith, but it is to the wrong noticeboard and you have already been advised of the correct venue. Thanks, LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Ողջույն
Ողջույն, հարգելի Fedayee, ես ռուսական և հայկական վիքիփեդիայի մասնակից եմ: Գրում եմ քեզ, որովհետև դու լավ ես տիրապետում անգելերենին: Հարցը նրանում է, որ ես անգլերեն այն մակարդակի չեմ տիրապետում, որ կարողանամ պայքարել այս քարտեզի դեմ քոմմոնսում: Սա ֆալսիֆիկացիոն է, և եթե քեզ ժամանակ ու ցանկություն ունես, խնդրում եմ, բարձրացրու սրա ջնջման հարցը քոմմոնսից:--Elegant&#39;s (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Avsahakyan.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Avsahakyan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 02:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

blocked
revert parole vio at Shusha, blocked for a month. You are running out of chances. Moreschi (talk) 11:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * dont care. the problem is that you are a bastard. we both nor your azeri friends can change it. Andranikpasha (talk) 13:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No, he's just an administrator. It is ill-considered for him to be involved in giving this block given his recent unjustified and failed attempt to get you permanently banned . Meowy 21:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Andranikpasha! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Hakob Hakobian (painter) -

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Natalie-saryan.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Natalie-saryan.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 03:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide new paragraph: "Patriocide"
Greetings!

I'd like to inform you about a new discussion opened on the talk-page of the Armenian Genocide article. I proposed adding a new paragraph about Patriocide, along with other losses due to Genocide. Would be glad to see your participation.

Regards,Aregakn (talk) 00:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! And the falsification of Western Armenian toponyms is also an important issue. Andranikpasha (talk) 09:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, you're right. We can include the changes of toponyms in the Armenian Highland in the article with references to researches and reports. Can you participate in the discussion of the section and make your offers there as well as express your opinion? Regards, Aregakn (talk) 18:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:AE
Hi. Please see this report at WP:AE:. Thanks. Grand master  12:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If you are blocked, appeal streight to the arbitration committee, there is a clear attempt to discredit a living person here, by adding a material which is known innacurate. Ionidasz (talk) 05:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010
To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked for a period of 3 months from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. T. Canens (talk) 13:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC) Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
 * This above means, go streight to the arbitration committee. The fact is that no matter you have a strong case no admin will unblock you. The request is useless. From all those similar requests how many were granted? Probably near zero, either the admins are always right or even when wrong, they do not reverse their decision. Also, since Cox article is one of Grandmaster wiki mail group target (as evidenced by the mailgroup), it might be wise if you send the arbitration committee a copy of the mailing group too. Ionidasz (talk) 15:39, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You're absolutely right, thank you! Andranikpasha (talk) 06:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Ekimyan.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ekimyan.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  18:07, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Hambartsumian.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Hambartsumian.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  18:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Spendiarian.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Spendiarian.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  18:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Shiraz84.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Shiraz84.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  18:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Graps.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Graps.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  18:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2010
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. a_man_alone (talk) 10:24, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Related to the above, do not use phrases like "dirty azeri propagand" in edit summarties, as . Describe what changes you are making, don't provide political commentary, particularly commentary that may be seen as an attack on other editors. TFOW<b style="color:#F00">R</b> 10:33, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Your allegations
Hello. I think it's not a good idea to use wordings you used here. I am not waiting for your apologies but I really hope you will talk to me in a more constructive way and avoid phrases like "double standards", "continuous POV-pushing", "you're pushing your attacking view". At least you should provide good evidence. Thanks. --Quantum666 (talk) 11:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I missed the reply at ANI that Quantum666 linked to. Saying that "X has described Y as a terrorist organisation" is fine (when backed with a source, of course!) What's not fine is saying "X is a terrorist organisation". We say who said what, and let the reader decide. We don't imply that Wikipedia believes "X is a terrorist organisation": Wikipedia follows a neutral point of view.

And, in case it needs repeating, we certainly do not use phrases like "dirty Azeri propaganda" in edit summaries. <b style="color:#000">TFOW</b><b style="color:#F00">R</b> 12:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, TFOWR! Andranikpasha (talk) 13:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)