This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mike V (talk | contribs) at 02:12, 5 March 2015 (→Blocked for sockpuppetry: account unblocked). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 02:12, 5 March 2015 by Mike V (talk | contribs) (→Blocked for sockpuppetry: account unblocked)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Steverci, you are invited to the Teahouse
Hi Steverci! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. |
List of Bagratuni rulers of Armenia
I have moved the article (and its history) to User:Steverci/List of Bagratuni rulers of Armenia. Regards, GiantSnowman 17:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Armenian language
I very much would like an explanation of this edit where you completely changed the meaning. I also note that you don't use WP:Edit summaries to explain your edits, which means that they may be reverted simply because editors don't know why you are making changes. Dougweller (talk) 12:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions alert
Please carefully read this information:The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.Template:Z33 Dougweller (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Adding unsourced opinion
On the List of military disasters you have twice added the unsourced and historically incorrect statement, "Armenian victory", concerning the Battle of Avarayr in 451. Sources stating Sassanid victory;,, --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:53, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andranik, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armavir. 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:13, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hamazasp Srvandztyan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Karin. 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Interesting
Not only impersonating a bot, but impersonating an extinct bot. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:15, 12 December 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 Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:05, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
- Ashot Ghulian
- added a link pointing to Khndzristan
- Poghos Bek-Pirumyan
- added a link pointing to Karakilisa
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jaques Bagratuni, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Paris Peace Conference and Zangezur. 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Ashkhen
Your link does not really help. You'll know what i mean when you actually take a look on it yourself instead of just writing something and linking it to me. Anything more to say? --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- I was giving you yet more examples. I also pointed to WP:OPENPARA. Unless you want to make an argument that her Iranian ancestry is notable (it isn't), please don't revert my edit again. --Steverci (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, why would it not be notable? this ridiculousness is from a person who has tried to hide the Iranian origins/customs of articles such as Tiridates I. I guess Ashkhen is your next target? By the way, do NOT remove sourced information on that article. You, who know the rules so well should know that. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 17:08, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
By the way, if you want to revert something, at least discuss about it here first. And before you begin to think negative about me, know that i have created several Armenian articles (some better than others ), so i have nothing against you and neither am i trying to disrupt Armenian-related articles. I am saying that because i have been accused of such ridiculous things a few times. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 17:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- User:HistoryofIran I wasn't thinking anything negative about you at all. I was actually close to telling you that I respect you and hope you don't take this personal or anything.
- Has she done anything notable as an Alan princess? How is her background relevant to her life? When it's generally just trivial then it's not notable.
- When I said I read the twenty pages I was referring to the online page that has all twenty on it. If you can point me to the part where it says he implemented Iranian customs I have no problem keeping it. And I thought we had already come to the conclusion he had Armenian ancestry?
- I had actually had a similar dispute as yours with the Bagrationi dynasty members before. The Georgian users do their best to remove any mention of the fact the dynasty was Armenian at all, along with the fact one third of noble families in Georgia were Armenian. It's also worth sharing that the original Iberians were to Armenians as Austrians are to Germans, and Georgians came about as a result of ethnic mixing and language distortion in Iberia according to a page in The Georgian Chronicles that is always censored in Georgia, but that's another story. As I looked at other royalty articles and saw that ethnicity is rarely considered a big deal and is often overshadowed by nationality, I stopped arguing for it as much and decided to have that outlook. So the Bagrat dynasty is an Armenian family that also ruled Georgia and the Arsacid dynasty is a Parthian family that also ruled Armenia. Where is the logic in Armenian background being overshadowed in both? That is what I have been thinking this whole time. --Steverci (talk) 18:04, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- Well, I don't know what you're thinking, that's why i wrote that to you. But I'm glad to hear that. Forget it about the Ashkhen article by the way, do as you like - I had exams today so i am pretty tired and really can't use my energy one this, but it doesn't mean, to be honest I don't really care if it's in the lead or not. To best honest, I just thought you were one of those who liked to make disruptive edits, well that's clearly stupid of me thinking, and I'm glad that i was wrong.
- About the source in the Tiridates I article, i have just checked it through and it says something about a reform/reorganizing by Tiridates, but that's clearly the wrong source, I must have added the wrong one, but i can't really bother finding it right now, so you're free to delete it.
- Yeah, i had forgot that about the distant Armenian ancestry, but it is important to remember that it was his great-grandmother that was an Armenian, which doesn't mean that we can add the "1st-Armenian people" category in the article, but instead add the "People of Armenian descent" category. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 19:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- Actually both of Vonones II's known grandparents had Armenian ancestry. Lots of nobles had mixed Greek/Iranian/Armenian background, it'd be impossible to give an accurate percent. People of ________ descent articles are meant for diaspora which isn't appropriate in Tiridates' case. Anyway, I hope we can be friends and good luck on your exams. --Steverci (talk) 22:53, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Not really, since he was an Iranian figure, that's why the "1st-Iranian people" category should stay, while his other origins should be written as "People of xxx descent". No ruler was of pure origins. You don't see figures such as Ismail I being called a Greek because he had Greek descent, or Bahram V being called a Jew because his mother was Jewish, etc.
I hope that too, and thank you - if you ever was in search of sources about Late Antiquity-Armenia, come pay me a visit on my talk page. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
He was an Armenian figure obviously because he was King of Armenia. His nationality was Armenian. William the Conqueror is called an English of French descent, so if your arguing Tiridates had too little Armenian background then that means your saying a 'descent' category isn't accurate. Ismail wasn't a Greek citizen and Bahram was a Zoroastrianist but that isn't listed either. And thanks, appreciate it! --Steverci (talk) 23:21, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Neither was Tiridates a Armenian citizen and nationality is a modern term, plus Armenia was under OCCUPATION (writing it with caps-lock to make you focus on that word) by a Parthian king. You don't see dynasties such as the Seljuqs being called for Iranians, even when they practiced many Iranian customs and spoke Persian. Then there is Tiridates I, who was a Parthian Zoroastrian priest who is not reported to even practice Armenian customs and speak the language, yet he should be called an Armenian? --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 11:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- User:HistoryofIran Sorry, this slipped my mind. Armenia did not lose its independence though, as it stood from 331 BC to 428 AD. There was just had a change in leadership. Client state is a metaphorical status. This is very similar to William the Conqueror not actually conquering England for France. By the way, William never bothered to learn English, lived nearly his whole life in France, enforced French customs and treated Englishmen horribly, and he is still categorized as English. So even if Tiridates really didn't practice Armenian customs, that's not a good argument. Also, Napoleon had no French ancestry and has all French categories besides one saying he had Italian ancestry. --Steverci (talk) 02:00, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
You're comparing two European figures with a Middle Eastern one, why not do it with a Middle Eastern one instead? by the way, I'm sorry, but seriously? Napeleon? that's a bad example. It actually can't even be used as an example. Plus there are no reliable sources that call Tiridates an Armenian. And if there is (which i am 99% there isn't), i could always counter it with several reliable sources which talk about his Iranian ways and also about many other members of the Arsacid dynasty of Armenia. Not to forget the heavy Iranian influence they spread in Armenia. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 13:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- User:HistoryofIran It's all the same, I'm just going by what I know. Please don't go back in circles, I just said why with the William example why even if Tiridates was an Iranophile with no Armenian ancestry that it doesn't make him less of a national Armenian. And you put the same Iran Encyclopedia link back but I've looked it over for a third time and still can't find mention of Tiridates bringing in Iranian customs. In fact, I noticed the use of the word "probably" a lot; do they know what they're talking about? If you can't quote that line from the book then please stop. --Steverci (talk) 23:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Umm.. yes it does, because he was simply not an Armenian no matter how you want to use the word. By using your logic we would need to the same on the Seljuqs, Ghaznavids and many others. By the way, here is the quote: "The practice, like the term, was unquestionably of Iranian origin and was probably introduced when Tiridates I and his immediate successors reorganized the Armenian court." And if you look on the rest of the article, you will see various Iranian offices/customs/words which the Arsacids had brought to Armenia. That's your question answered. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 12:18, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- User:HistoryofIran The Seljuqs were a Turkic dynasty in a Turkic state so I don't know what you're saying there. The Ghaznavids on the other hand support me. It's a Turkic mamluk dynasty ruling Persia, and all of its monarchs have 10th-12th century Iranian people categories. You see it's not about region. I am citing William the Conqueror because his article is featured, so we know the categories are being used right, and because it's the perfect example for this case because he brought in French governors and customs there was basically nothing English about him besides his title, and that's how he is remembered. I feel like this is getting unproductive and you are going in circles now and hope you will realize that a category meant for modern diaspora people is not going to work here and even if Tiridates loved everything Parthian and didn't care about Armenian culture at all (which in William's case is fact if you switch Parthian with French and Armenian with English) that he is still an Armenian by nationality if nothing else. And in case I have to repeat myself again, Armenia did not cease being a nation, the Arsacids just usurped the Artaxiads, just like how England didn't cease to exist as a state when the Normans conquered it.
- As I recently said, I now realized that this article says "probably" and guesses that the customs could have been implemented by Tiridates' successors. In other words this is not a fact presented by an academic historian, but an opinion given by a group of Iranian nationalist college students. --Steverci (talk) 01:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Wait what? you mentioned all the Ghaznavid monarchs, but yet linked the category of their viziers. Care to explain what you mean? since i did not understand that.
Iranian nationalist college students? since when did the historian M. L. Chaumont become "a group of Iranian nationalist college students"? You should really read the article properly before you say such ridiculous things, plus the sentence i mentioned did not say "probably". Even if it did that does make it unreliable. Say whatever you want, but Iranica is reliable, you should know that, since you know the rules so well (which means that you should which source is reliable and which one is not). Over half of the 321 articles i have created use Iranica as a source, one of them even being nominated as a good article, so please drop those ridiculous claims. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 11:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- User:HistoryofIran It doesn't really matter because all of those articles are stubs anyway. Can you show me a good or featured article that uses your category outlook? I showed you a featured one, and we should go by that.
- Because ultimately this is an encyclopedia like Misplaced Pages, meaning it collects sourced material and puts it together but on it's own is not a reliable source. Chaumont does not give a source and even states it is just a guess of his own, saying "probably" introduced by Tiridates, but its just a guess. Most of the Parthian influence in Armenia that article talks about anyway is about religious customs that happened long after Tiridates' time. --Steverci (talk) 02:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Actually they are not stubs, and they do not have to be a featured article to be reliable. It is not a guess, Chaumont is a historian, his words are reliable, whether you like it or not. And for the 100th time, he does not say probably and even if he did it is still reliable. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- User:HistoryofIran We're both busy college students and I don't really want to spend much more time saying the same thing again and again, so please take a good look at Category:People of Armenian descent and realize it is meant to hold subcategories, not articles, for modern diaspora people. This is the same with all People of * descent categories, with the exception of a few who aren't correctly categorized. Tiridates the only person there. Please understand this is incorrect so I don't have to waste the time filling out a request for a third party to point this out. As for the Iranian customs, you should expand what exactly these customs are, because it tells the reader nothing otherwise. I also think it should be moved to the body and not header, because this is ultimately an educated guess (albeit by an expert), not a historical fact. --Steverci (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Shusha
I would have to disagree with you. First of all, minority appellations cannot claim to be universal alternatives for a toponym; they might have their contextual use, but nothing beyond that. Secondly, in the lifetime of the people concerned (i.e. in the Russian imperial era), the city was officially known as Shusha, and any Russian administrative records from that period will attest to that. Parishan (talk) 02:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
WP:AE
Hi. Please be aware of this report at WP:AE: Thanks. Grandmaster 00:36, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Douglas Frantz
I think I've done enough explaining on this. If you restore that material again I will escalate. §FreeRangeFrog 20:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry
This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Steverci. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mike V • Talk 22:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
|
Steverci (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
User:Mike V I have never used sockpuppets for intelligent reasons (to attempt to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, evade blocks or otherwise violate community standards and policies). I had used alternate accounts when I edited different articles for security and privacy purposes once I had realized some editors had been following my contributions, which I thought was okay under WP:SOCK#LEGIT. --Steverci (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Before we go any further, you should provide a complete list of accounts you have created and the area where they edited. PhilKnight (talk) 15:30, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- For security, the instructions clearly show that you should publicly link the accounts. As for privacy, "editors had been following my contributions" does not fall under that criteria. It's for legitimate, real world threats of harm or harassment. Even so, I have a hard time understanding why you needed to create at least 5 different accounts. Furthermore, a number of the accounts edited the same article. If you were truly worried about privacy, why would you have so much crossover with the accounts? Mike V • Talk 22:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- User:Mike V I had thought connected meant to log on from the same computer, I didn't see anything that said exactly what it meant. I was trying to keep the edits spread as far apart as possible so that way people I suspected were following my contributions were less likely to do the same for an alternate account and they were mostly pages I didn't want to put in Steverci's history. I had forgotten to log out a few times while checking other watchlists, I don't think it was more than two or three times though. And I never pretended to be an extra person or avoid sanctions or anything like that with them. --Steverci (talk) 22:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- User:Mike V I admit that I should have read the rules more clearly, and for that I take full responsibility and offer my apologies. I still maintain that I never used the alt accounts for malicious purposes or dodging a sanction, and they had never caused or been part of a disruption. Looking at duration of block, I would say that as someone who's never been blocked before and given that lengthy blocks are for repeated high level disruption, I don't think an indefinite block is appropriate. If given another chance, I promise I will not make an inappropriate sock puppet again, and will accept any level of severe enforcement if I do. --Steverci (talk) 02:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
User:PhilKnight Here are all of them:
- User:HoustonJackson - World War I and II in general (partly French) articles
- User:Keg12345 - Mostly corrected Armenian information on non-Armenian articles, accidentally edited Armenia and Armenian language before realizing I was still logged on
- User:Irtden - Aviation articles
- User:Bacho74 - Fixed error on Aram Khachaturian, also forgot to log off when I was fixing something on Andranik
- User:Erohw - Just sandbox, no articles
--Steverci (talk) 04:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for that. I suggest you make a new unblock request, and mention how these alternative accounts ended up overlapping with each other. PhilKnight (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Steverci (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
As stated previously, I had never used alternate accounts to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, evade blocks or otherwise violate community standards and policies. I had not realized I needed to connect them and they accidentally overlapped, and for that I'm sorry and promise to read the rules more closely in the future. According to duration of block, I would say that as someone who's never been blocked before and given that lengthy blocks are for repeated high level disruption, I don't think an indefinite block is appropriate. With the encouragement of at least one admin, I'd like to request that the block be removed. --Steverci (talk) 01:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Accept reason:
I think that you've put a bit of thought into this conversation and I don't think it's likely that you will create additional accounts now that you are aware of the policies. As such, I've unblocked your account. Mike V • Talk 02:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Could you discuss the comment you made here? Thanks, Mike V • Talk 20:00, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- User:Mike V I stated NiksisNiks, Hayordi, Harut111, and Tzir-Katin are not me, which was proven to be true. --Steverci (talk) 20:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)