User talk:Aruturo Van Kaigan

Antivandalism struggle

My struggle against vandalism
The user is definitely here to build an encyclopedia in accordance with the wikipedia editing rules:

Rule 3. Be bold, but not reckless

Rule 6. Cite, cite, cite

Rule 9. Write neutrally and with due weigh

If the 1864 British Royal Geography Society outlet is "disputed", so shall all other unreliable sources written non-academically by such authors as Galichian, who is/was an engineer and not a historian. The "unrealiable source" was not put random but with a reason. X together with Y deleted the refernce to the 1864 document reference without trying to reach any consensus with me. What is the topic? The topic is whether the term "Azerbaijan" was used in attitude to the region of the contemporary Azerbaijan Republic before 1918 or not. X wrote without stressing the authorsip that the term "Azerbaijan" was never used in the area of its current location before 1918, reffering to several papers, the main topic of which was not even relevant to the discussed issue. I, in my turn, put the reference to the 1864 British Royal Geography Society outlet that proved the usage of the term in relation to the exact region long before 1918. What I got in response, is the erasion of my edits, as if an engineer Galichian's book stance written in the 21st century was more reliable than the 19th century British Geographer, who traveled to the region long before 1918. The existence of this and many other documents proved the unreliability of the citations provided by X. Unlike X and Y, I did not erase their sentences, but added mine, which were vandalized with no respect either to me or the basic rules of Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge. The malicious removal of encyclopedic content, or the changing of such content beyond all recognition, without any regard to our core content policies of neutral point of view (which does not mean no point of view), verifiability and no original research, is a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia. Hence, I believe, that adding ECP would not improve the quality of the page, considering the upper-mentioned facts. I kindly ask the respectable administration to give me some time to reach 500 edits. I also kindly ask to restrict X from vandalism, supporting the free nature of Wikipedia. Source for the 1864 British document: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1799149 Respectfully yours,

January 2024
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Azerbaijani nationalism. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * Ok, let's collaborate and try to reach a consensus. Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * By the way, are you an officially appointed editor in Wikipedia, or Wikipedia is still designed as Free Encyclopedia? Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you also be blocked for edit wars? Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Azerbaijani nationalism. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. '  // Timothy :: talk ''' 18:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * I did not start any edit war. It was started by HistoryofIran who violates the principles of Wikipedia.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism
 * Respectfully yours, Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 06:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

 * Can you, please, restrict Historyofiran from vandalizing wikipedia pages?
 * Respectfully yours, Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 18:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should learn what "vandalism" means before randomly accusing others of it. Also, you're not even allowed to edit this type of articles . HistoryofIran (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism
 * On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge. The malicious removal of encyclopedic content, or the changing of such content beyond all recognition, without any regard to our core content policies of neutral point of view (which does not mean no point of view), verifiability and no original research, is a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia.' There are, of course, more juvenile forms of vandalism, such as adding irrelevant obscenities or crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page. Abusive creation or usage of user accounts and IP addresses may also constitute vandalism. Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge. The malicious removal of encyclopedic content, or the changing of such content beyond all recognition, without any regard to our core content policies of neutral point of view (which does not mean no point of view), verifiability and no original research, is a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia. There are, of course, more juvenile forms of vandalism, such as adding irrelevant obscenities or crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page. Abusive creation or usage of user accounts and IP addresses may also constitute vandalism Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 07:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.  // Timothy :: talk  08:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello. Thank you for your notice. I have already written my answer there. Aruturo Van Kaigan (talk) 11:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

January 2024
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Bbb23 (talk) 14:55, 7 January 2024 (UTC)