User talk:Fadix/archive4

Dispute/conflict solving
Actually, Armenian genocide discussion seems to me as one of nearly unsolvable cases, mostly because of reason of it (different opinions) is external (not in Wikipedia, not in people, but mostly in different ideologies having strong support circles) and in here we see only the symptoms of this. Despite that, I think that it is possible to do some actual positive work. In Lithuanian Wikipedia we try to make some kind of conflict solving methods in advance, and thank to Armenian genocide discussion which I had watched for last two months, I got some experience on discussion/conflict process analysis: conflict stages identification and possible solving methods. So if it is possible I would be grateful to ask you to do some common identification work, may be this wil help making article more clear. Best regards - --Gvorl 20:43, 25 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi again, I still have no answer from you. I would like to suggest you some structural methods to solve at least part of denial problems which are peresented in Armenian genocide article and discussion. Please contact me. --Gvorl 00:32, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi there, I will answer you, I haven't forgotten, It's just that time is lacking theses days. Regards Fadix 01:38, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * BTW, did you read Coolcats userpage? I really don't know of to think of this guy mental health. Fadix 01:38, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi, I think that it would be incorrect to estimate somebody as a person, but if we started this, I think that Coolcat is clever, but actually too idealistic person who lives in world where he can not understand concept of mass killings, genocide, exterminations, etc. I think he simply does not believe that such things are possible at all. It seems to me that he idealises army, ranks, etc., like child. It is possible that he is from country where were no war for more than hundred years :-/ --Gvorl 08:21, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Causa Rovoam
Hi Fadix, here is a copy of my recent message to Rhobite which might interest you. Please also help bringing about a solution:

''Hi Rhobite, I noticed a minute deescalation effort on your part, with respect to Rovoam (Wikipedia List of Banned USERS). Having followed the revert ("World-") war Rovoam is engaged in, due to the rallying by Tabib of helpful and goodmeaning Admins, it is dawning on me that this has turned to some sort of continuous POGROM, in which any voice challenging Tabib is being assassinated upon sight. As someone fairly well acquainted with quite a number of issues in this context, I wish it were brought to the general attention, that Rovoam edits, or those of his suspected socks, tend to make a PERPLEXING lot of sense! It would appear a shame if this escalating character assassination were to be allowed to continue on WIKIPEDIA (our "lifeblood"). Let us all help bringing about a sensible solution, including the invitation of the scholarly learned intellectual Rovoam aka Andrew Kirsanov to a mutual table!! I do not mean to pester you with this ADDITIONAL honorable chore (I know, you are literally buried in incessant contributive work) but I gather YOU could wield some prudent influence in this quagmire of libel, aggression and POV pushing. Sincerely'' --Deli-Eshek 22:34, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Please don't drag me into this, I have no idea of Rovoam other edits outside of the entries I have viewed, so I can not officially conclude. My limited judgement is based on the entries I have viewed and have answered in the talk pages. What I can say, is that in those entries, revert wars were two sided between him and Tabib, and that in those revert wars Tabib was as responsable as him. In those entries, Tabib doesn't seem to be the innocent he is picturing himself to be, neither does he show that he is ready to discuss or ready to make concessions. He seems to be here to impose and use Wikipedia as a webspace to load what he has in his personal website there and enhance the credibility of his POV. This should be clear, why afteral would a political science graduate of the republic of Azerbaijan edit every possible entry involving Armenians and Armenia in anyway? The answer for me is quite obvious. Having said that, I will only oppose him in the entries I may get involved in, and have no interest starting a lobbying war, because I am confident that as more users will oppose Tabibs POV pushing, he'll be more easy slandering other members, like he has done from day one with me. Fadix 23:52, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your assistance on Armenian Genocide is requested
I have made several comments on that article (see Talk:Armenian Genocide). Most of my comments involve a lack of sources for various statements. Would you be able to assist in this matter? - Ta bu shi da yu 03:51, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks Fadix. I appreciate it: the way I see it, if the Genocide happened (as I say, I have no knowledge of this event, due to my location in the world - Australia) then we owe it to those killed to document it as thoroughly, carefully and as neutrally as possible. Let there be no doubt that it happened in the minds of others. As with Adolf Hitler, we allow the facts to speak for themselves, there is no need for us to add or subtract anything from them. If we do this, we honour the memory of those killed in the greatest way possible. - Ta bu shi da yu 29 June 2005 02:19 (UTC)
 * Hi Fadix, could I ask how the attempt at addressing my issues is going? - Ta bu shi da yu 1 July 2005 01:34 (UTC)
 * Heya... I was not aware that you had some versions of the article you were working on! I guess I was asking you for assistance with the article because you seem to be one of the most knowledgable about this issue - I would love to see the alternate versions! What are the wikilinks?


 * As for 50/50 on the content of the article: I agree that this is not absolutely necessary for the article: my problem with saying this, however, is that I don't know enough about the issue to say how much weight should be given to each side. It seems to me that we should not attempt such an artificial division and rather just present the arguments of both sides in full: one way might be to present a fact or opinion held by one side (sourced, of course!) and if a commentator opposed this opinion then we should note this, quoting them in full, sourcing them and perhaps giving the context of why they have written it. I feel that this would be the essence of neutrality.


 * As for personal attacks - it seems to have gotten quite heated on that page between both Coolcat and yourself. I can understand if some unkind things were said and insults were traded: perhaps the best way forward would be for both of you to apologise to each other for these things, then start again. If you feel that this is an unfair comment, I do apologise and ask for your understanding in that I am just trying to bring some peace to the article so that we can proceed fairly - and, of course, in the process hope that two fine editors will not get burnt out and can start working together on Wikipedia! - Ta bu shi da yu 2 July 2005 01:49 (UTC)


 * I appreciate that you are willing to apologise to Coolcat for personal remarks, I feel that it a big step and shows me that you have character of spirit to be able to do this!
 * Getting back to the content of the article, it really would be great if you could address my concerns and tighten up the article with sources. I can see that you know a lot about this issue and will have no trouble tracking down sources. I guess at the end of the day this is something we need to tighten up. When there are sceptics and those who oppose what we write, we must just increase the quality of our work through citing our sources and writing more information to clarify issues and inform our audience. This is all I ask, at any rate. I'm sure you already know this, but it bares reminding all participants about so that we increase the quality of our articles: it's the only way that we can work! - Ta bu shi da yu 2 July 2005 14:25 (UTC)

Population Exchange
I did not write the section about the Armenian relocations in the Population exchange article. Putting neutrality aside, I don't think the current version is logically complete. But I decided not to intervene with that issue, since my edits that were trying to show the truth from both sides were cut down and turned into mere anti-Turkish propaganda by yourself and other Armenian nationalists (As a matter of fact, I saw that you abuse Taner Akcam's good intentions and great insight in the same way after I looked into his works more carefully). So, I don't trust you and I know that my efforts of being neutral will be turned to hateful propaganda against myself if I try to reach a concensus with you. Nevertheless, I was only working on the Greko-Turkish population exchange and I believe we can reach a fair concensus with Mel Etitis. So I will be happy if you don't intervene this discussion and carry your concerns about the Armenian relocation section to another subsection in that talk page. Thank you. Cezveci 17:57, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * You don't understand what you read. First, please stop BOMBING our discussion about the Greko-Turkish population exchange, that subsection is not related to the Armenian question and there is a subsection just before that about Armenian question. But what we are discussing with Mel Etitis is the section below it, named "Greek-Turkish Population Exchange". Do you understand? Or do I have to use more simple examples to illustrate my point? Cezveci 21:18, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Second, I did not make any hidded claims about your ill intentions. It is very apparent and the evidence lies in the Armenian genocide article. You are not objective, but you claim to be, and you want your assertions to be taken as objective statements. You use Taner Akcam and other turkish intellectuals' names to support your point, but you fail to mention that these people also acknowledge the offenses by Armenian militia against muslim civilians. You cut the sentence I put in that section in such a way that the meaning becomes the opposite. You claim just at the introduction that the Ottoman society was inequal in favor of muslims, but even sources that support genocide theses (objective ones I mean, not the ones that keep producing fake documents and pictures) state that the equation was imbalanced in favor of christian peoples throughout 19th century both economically and politically as Ottomans lost power against Europeans [See Akcam's "Turkish national identity" book, for example]. An ignorant idiot claims that "Turks wanted to conquer Arabia" and you don't do anything about it while you immediately deleted any of my edits. Did you read these? No. Did you understand these? No. Did you even try to understand these? No. Go try to imprison Halacoglu because he doesn't think like you. I haven't seen such a clear example of hypocricy in my life, honestly. You are not even ashamed of behaving openly hypocritic. Is my response too harsh? Yes, well I am harsh, because I am honest and I feel this way. Cezveci 21:18, 13 July 2005 (UTC)


 * To the contrary, I fully understand. You brought in that section the Armenian genocide, not me, I simply indicated that while you had a probably on the inclusion of the "genocide" with Armenians in the article, you had no problem with the fact that the majority position was left out in the favour of an argument that is even contradicted by official Turkish state translations. I hardly see this as "bombing" discussions.


 * Secondo, I am objective, and this regardless of what you claim about me; however I do have POV, but my opinions doesn't exclude me on participating in articles, since my POV are left out in the final product.


 * Comming to Taner Akçam and other Turkish intellectuals, looky who is the hypocrit there, can you please quote me where it is said in Akcams book that Christians had more right than Muslim? The only thing it is reffered is the governments new progressist policies to give more right to Christians, which BTW was reverted and never placed in application. I almost forgot how Abdul Hamid II rejected the Ottoman constitution and that the Young Turks came to power by promissing to reestablish it. Hypocrasy you say? I don't think so. As for Arabia, we were there, and I told you that you COULD HAVE edited and corrected that thing, if you pay a closer attention, it was not only for this edit that I was not very active during that change, I can of course not see and read every edits in the article. Oh and I forgot regarding Armenian militias..., we certainly didn't read the same books by Taner Akcam, neither presented ourselves to the same same lectures he gave. Since Taner Akcam point out the clear "ridiculity" of such a comparaison between the destruction of the Armenians and the instances of crimes by Armenians. Taner Akcam write that the foundation of the turkish republic stand on the extermination of a people. Do you Sir. want me to quote that? So please stop this BS.


 * And finally, I hope that Tony will be as fast to react when people like you transgress Wiki-etiquettes, than he is to protect Coolcat. Continue with this intellectual intimidation and I will submit a complaint. Fadix 22:14, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Threatening me to submit a complaint to others? Why, because you are unable to solve your problems with me yourself? What an analogy between micro- and macro-level relations. By the way, yes, he says that, and it is not as difficult for me as for you to accept that he says it, I can discuss it with him or anybody else who is objective, but not with you. Please don't submit a complaint for me, I won't bother you again, I promise, because dealing with you is really not good for my psychology. And be happy with the "fact" that you scared off the barbarian guy, congratulations. (And yes, I believe that you have successfully sabotaged the discussion about Lausanne exchange, congratulations for that too). Cezveci 22:34, 14 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Threatning you? Maybe, if there is something for you to be afraid about, it could be called such. What problem with yourself? I don't overestimate your nuisible presence in my talk page, so I won't really call this a problem. Oh and, please be nice to quote, or at least provide me the page where he says that. Thanks. Fadix 23:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Armenian People
If you didn't notice it already, I think you might be interested in what Coolcat are doing regarding the Armenian Genocide on the Armenian People article these days. -- Stereotek.


 * I will look at it when I have time. Fadix 23:32, 13 July 2005 (UTC)