Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/January 2007/Grandmaster

Case Filed On: 08:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedian filing request:



Other Wikipedians this pertains to:



Wikipedia pages this pertains to:



Questions:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
 * Answer: Yes, I have.

'''How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)'''
 * Answer: Content dispute and policy violation.

'''What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.'''
 * Answer: Khoikhoi tried to mediate, and a request for mediation was filed, but it was refused by User:Fadix.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
 * Answer: An assistance in resolution of the dispute.

Summary:
The dispute is as to whether or not the ancient province Caspiane/Paytakaran was part of Caucasian Albania. Also, it is disputed that the city of Paytakaran, which was the centre of the province of the same name is the same city as Beylegan. Tigran, Eupator and Fadix claim that it never was a province of Albania. Moreover, they revert all of my edits, despite each of them being based on reliable sources. This is my version of the article, which was completely reverted: Currently the page is protected because of edit wars. User:Fadix also denies that Caspiane is the same province as Paytakaran, despite there being a consensus with other editors that it is. Fadix acknowledges that he reverted my edits even without reading them, which in my opinion is a violation of Wikipedia policies.

The sources that I quoted support the fact that Caspiane/Paytakaran was the province of Caucasian Albania.

According to Strabo:

To the country of the Albanians belongs also the territory called Caspiane, which was named after the Caspian tribe, as was also the sea; but the tribe has now disappeared. 

Article from Encyclopedia Iranica about the tribe of Caspies. It says, inter alia:

''Herodotus, Strabo, and other classical authors repeatedly mention the Caspians but do not seem to know much about them; they are grouped with other inhabitants of the southern shore of the Caspian Sea, like the Amardi, Anariacae, Cadusii (q.v.), Albani, and Vitii (Eratosthenes apud Strabo, 11.8.8), and their land (Kaspiane) is said to be part of Albania (Theophanes Mytilenaeus apud Strabo, 11.4.5). Whether or not they belonged to the Median empire is not clear. According to Herodotus (3.92.2), they, together with the Pausicae, Pantimathi, and Daritae, were included in the eleventh nomos of the Achaemenid empire under Darius I. This region later was attached to Media Atropatene and Albania in turn ''. 

Ancient Albanian historian Moses Kalankatuatsi (source is in Russian):

''А после смерти Трдата некий Санатрук воцарился в Алуанке в городе Пайтакаране и восстал против армян. 

After the death of Trdat, some Sanatruk became a king in Albania (Aluank) in the city of Paytakaran and revolted against Armenians.

Fadix claims that Caspiane is not the same land as Paytakaran, despite its having its center in the same city of Paytakaran. I cited my sources to demonstrate that it is. For instance, according to professor Robert. H. Hewsen, it is the same land:

BAGAWAN (Baguan or Ateshi Bagawan), a district of the land of Kaspiane (Arm. Kaspk, later Paytakaran) lying along the right bank of the Araxes river and corresponding to the northeastern part of Iranian Azerbaijan. 

I have more sources, which are available on the talk page of the article. I would really appreciate any assistance in resolving this dispute.

Grandmaster 08:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion:
Here we come, another disruptive behavior by Grandmaster. The description of the situation by Grandmaster above is simply not accurate, embelishing things and claiming things which I allegdly claim. Not everyone has the time time to waste as he does edit warring and POV pushing on every single articles involving his Azerbaijan in some misterious way. The Land of Kaspiane, has no delimitation, it is the land of the Kasps, the same way as some could say of the Land(aka the continent) of America, is the land of America, when claimed to be found by Americo Vespucci the United States of America? Yes? So what is Canada? Bresil etc. ? Grandmaster has a history of attaching claims on quote, which the author doesn't imply. Just like he attempted to claim there was no Armenian in Paytakaran, and forged a signification for a sentence which used the term alien. Grandmaster is also lying when he claims I even treated about the Abania, it is a total none-issue, as the term Paytakaran is used to refer to the province which borders were invented by Armenia, all his fighting is over this, as usual he want to dissolve an article and place the Albanians in EVERY SINGLE ARTICLES RELATING TO A HISTORIC CITY, PROVINCE, KINGDOM OF ARMENIA. To do this, he will also add some Azeris term in the lead. Grandmaster has no evidence that the term Paytakaran was ever used to refer to a city or a district, the city he is talking about was never called Paytakaran, the Armenian records should 'know best', as the term Paytakaran is Armenian and that there was a reason why that province was called that way. What best evidence there is than quoting the actual scholar who started the rumor that both were called the same way, claiming that he is not sure of this? The only reason why Grandmaster want to equal both terms is to justify his inclusion of the Azerbaijani term.

The quotes he provides have absolutly no value, as the article already mention Albania, indirectly without implicitly saying anything, which is good since such theories are all speculations, one of those speculations Grandmaster is attempting to present as Truth when it is specified on the NPOV policy that this is a not to do. The current article has one mistake, which I have already reported, that Caspiane equals to Paytakaran, Grandmaster is using this mistake to introduce ittelevencies in this article. Fad (ix) 16:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Please remain civil and refrain from personal attacks. I presented more than enough sources both in the talk of the article and User:Sir james paul/AMA Desk. And all of your above statements are just your original research, not supported by any sources. Please refer to aforementioned pages for the quotes and more detailed info. Grandmaster 17:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You did no such thing, providing sources is one thing, the source supporting what you want in the article is another. Also, you still don't understand that it is not to someone to show non-existance, but rather to the one claiming existance. It is like accusing someone wanting evidences for the existance of a god to do original research. I clearly said that there was no historic records calling a city Paytakaran, and that the first time the term you equal it was used was after the fall of the province. This is something which is established, no one denies that. Equaling both, can be retraced to one scholar, whom I personally quoted, but that scholar himself answer in a paper that he is not convinced of that, this too I have quoted. So, what you request is actually original research, wanting to include some minority view not only as a position but as a truth, is not only against NPOV, but in your cases is POV pushing. As for civil, not wanting to be considered as a sophist, I will still make a point, those accusations against you were directed not only by me, not only by Armenians(since your decisions are all ethnic based on Wikipedia), but also by Iranians, and probably others. Maybe it is time for you to think a little bit and consider that maybe there must be some truth there. And when I talk about accusations, I am not talking about hard core bad mouthing, but accusations of manipulating or POV pushing, which in this cases, can't be really considered as civil and personal attacks Fad (ix) 04:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * So many words, and no sources whatsoever. How many times are you going to repeat that Caspiane and Paytakaran were not the same province? Just in above section I provided a quote from Iranica article by Hewsen, stating that it was the same province. Still you pretend that you have never seen it. If you think that they were not the same, then cite your sources. I cited mine that they were the same. Also in above section I cited sources that Caspiane/Paytakaran was the province of Caucasian Albania. I have plenty more sources on other talk pages. Deny all that you want, but I’m going to take this issue thru all stages of dispute resolution. And I’m not gonna respond here anymore, because Sir James suggested to continue the discussion at User:Sir james paul/AMA Desk. Interestingly, you abandoned that page as soon as he suggested to submit this case for mediation and get more advocates involved. He still expects you to answer his proposal. Grandmaster 05:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The only thing I see in the above quote is about the land of Kaspiene, which had no defined borders. It is for you to document that both a border of a Kaspiene AND Paytakaran are the same. You never did that, and I doubt you could ever do that, there is no way in the world that two localities distant of few centuries would be identical, when the seconds border were invented. The Kasp does not refer to the province, but the land of the Kaspienes, Paytakaran does. Lastly, I don't know of what abandoned page you are talking about, the only reason I came here was because the guy asked to continue discussing it here. I see that you haven't stopped finding intentions in my actions. Fad (ix) 17:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hewsen clearly states that the land of Caspiene was later called Paytakaran. If you don't want to see it, I will have to refer the dispute to impartial mediators. You cited no sources with regard to borders of Paytakaran, how can you claim that it had different borders? And please comment here: User:Sir james paul/AMA Desk, he made a proposal and expects your answer. He left a message at your talk and asked you to continue discussion there. Grandmaster 18:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * He says the land of, he doesn't say province, a land has no administrative meaning, it has no defined borders. Paytakaran was a province. Impartial mediator? How many times were we there? Was Francis not neutral? How long did you obstinently tried on the Karabakh article and disagreed with him, did it ever end? No, we just left it, I too left it. Because when you have something in your mind, you have no inclination to understand what others are saying. This is why I always opposed to mediation, because mediation supposes that people will discuss, compromise..., while you on the other hand see in mediation a way to sell your sausage, and I always opposed to give you such opportunity. Fad (ix) 19:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Which means that you are not sure that you are right and therefore avoid any mediation? Grandmaster 20:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Give me one example, just one example of any mediations, unformal OR formal, which both of us were involved and which gave any positive result, in which both of us have made concessions and not just me. One example of mediation, which finally I was not borred because you would not try to understand anything, and that I haven't left? Can you? Fad (ix) 16:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's try to resume normal operations, on the article's talk page, okay? There I've initiated a thread to discuss specific statements and sources to be added to the article.  Please join us.     Th e Tr ans hu man ist    00:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The discussion on Paytakaran has been split up all over the place. Please resume all further discussion back on the article's talk page where it belongs. Thank you. I hope to see you there. Sincerely,   Th e Tr ans hu man ist    00:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Followup:
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:

Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
 * Answer:

Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
 * Answer:

If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
 * Answer:

If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
 * Answer:

AMA Information
Case Status: open

Advocate Status: Sir James Paul