User talk:Diranakir

This is the place to hear from Wikipedia editors on my suggestions for articles.

Armenian Genocide 1 RR restriction
Hi Diranakir. This is to let you know that the following message is on the talkpage of the Armenian Genocide article:

According to the above message you just broke that rule. Please be more careful next time. In fact I suggest you self revert otherwise you may end up blocked. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  07:29, 21 March 2014 (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. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  08:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for violation of a known WP:1RR restriction on an Armenia-Azerbaijan article. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. D P  11:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

I will not likely appeal the block. However, I would appreciate knowing whether it conforms to WP ethics/rules for someone to revert an edit immediately upon its being made. If this is done repeatedly and systematically, it amounts to a block. I am forced to question the good faith of Yerevantsi's edit in question, given the actual nature of the source he cites, which will be evident to any objective reader. That degree of recklessness is very provocative. Editors should be held to a higher standard if WP wants to reduce edit wars and avoid harsh words on the Talk page.


 * It was a coincidence that I reverted your edit so fast. I was online at the time and I saw that you removed a valid reference while your edit-summary did not mention any such removal. That caused me to restore the reference to the article because I thought it was unjustified. At the time I had no idea about the underlying dispute. I am not an expert on the Armenian Genocide and I don't want to take sides in the dispute. I just thought that since you are editing the article you should be aware of the reversion limit 1RR. Edit-warring in this area is very disruptive and this is the reason why Arbcom has instituted the 1RR limit. Going forward, I wish you good luck and I hope you can find some common ground with the other editors in this dispute. Best regards. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  17:08, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Dr. K, thanks for your explanation. The edit summary was admittedly not specific enough. This was because there were two distinct issues involved: formatting of terms, and the substantive issue concerning the term "calamity". I should probably break my edits up into manageable parts in such cases in the future. Let me say that If you had known a little more about the underlying issues I think you might not have made a split second decision that the removed reference was valid and reverted my edit on such short order. The reference may have seemed syntactically valid, but one must look a little deeper than that. In any case, I hope to engage in a productive discussion on the Talk page. Diranakir (talk) 13:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for elaborating further on the issue. My decision might have seemed "split second" but if you look at the article history you edit was at 07:08 UTC and my reversion was at 07:19 UTC, a difference of eleven minutes. In comparison, your subsequent revert was at 07:23, i.e. a difference of only four minutes. So it took me 11 minutes to ponder your edit, which in Wikipedia time, is quite long and for sure not split second. I gave your edit all due respect and a fair amount of time to examine it, but I finally decided that I should reverse the removal of the source. In any case, I too hope that your discussions with the other editors will be productive and I wish you the best.  I am sorry that we had to meet under these adverse conditions. Take care. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις   17:14, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I value the fact that you took the time to give me your side of the story and hope that my future edits will not be as difficult to assess. With best wishes, Diranakir (talk) 03:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Armenian genocide
Your last edit to this article indicates it is to "To eliminate ambiguity and increase clarity". This is good, but why remove what seem to be quite appropriate links to other relevant articles in WP. This is not good. Please explain or re-insert the links. Hmains (talk) 01:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The links have been restored. Thanks. Diranakir (talk) 04:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Armenian Genocide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Israeli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Thank you. I have corrected the link. Diranakir (talk) 15:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide
Hello. Please look at these two revisions of Armenian Genocide (mine left and yours right). Can you explain to me what the right hand revision says that the left one doesn't? More characters are being used yet nothing is being stated so this looks to me like verbiage. --OJ (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

...Also I haven't a clue what you mean by "rounded up" or even how this can come before "arrested". Surely persons would be under arrest first before being "rounded up". Besides, summary execution of a multiple figure surmises that the group was "rounded up" somehow. --OJ (talk) 01:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Dispute resolution
I have opened a case here, in which you are named as being involved. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 23:58, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Diranakir, are you accepting or rejecting the offer of moderated discussion? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 22:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, this is a friendly reminder that I've taken the case for moderated discussion. Although participation is voluntary, you are encouraged to participate and come to a peaceful resolution. Regards— UY Scuti Talk  09:50, 13 April 2016 (UTC) (DRN volunteer)
 * Discussion of the topic is still very much underway and developing. Please give me an idea why you think moderated discussion is necessary now and what advantages you think it would offer. Thanks. Diranakir (talk) 15:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 1)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Diranakir/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Diranakir/sandbox Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Diranakir/sandbox reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Jalaleddin, from its old location at User:Diranakir/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Anarchyte  (work  &#124; talk )   11:49, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jalaleddin (novel) has been accepted
 Jalaleddin (novel), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:34, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Jalaleddin_(novel) help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Speedy deletion nomination of File:For My Fatherland.pdf


A tag has been placed on File:For My Fatherland.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

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 removed 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. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)