User talk:81.214.107.89

July 2023

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Armenian genocide for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. — Czello ^(music) 23:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Talk:Armenian genocide) for a period of 1 year for persistent disruptive discussion bordering on, and crossing the line of, genocide denial. Talk pages are for improving articles.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 17:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

81.214.107.89 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not denied genocide because there was no genocide. 81.214.107.89 (talk) 18:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Wow. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

81.214.107.89 (talk) 18:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

81.214.107.89 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not violated any policies. I cited sources and shared my opinion on a historical dispute.

This is a question of definition and nowadays the word "genocide" is used very loosely even in cases where no bloodshed is involved at all and I can understand the annoyance of those who feel refused. But in this particular case, the point that was being made was that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany and that is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale. Great numbers of Armenians, including members of the armed forces, deserted, crossed the frontier and joined the Russian forces invading Turkey. Armenian rebels actually seized the city of Van and held it for a while intending to hand it over to the invaders. There was guerilla warfare all over Anatolia. And it is what we nowadays call the National Movement of Armenians Against Turkey. The Turks certainly resorted to very ferocious methods in repelling it. There is clear evidence of a decision by the Turkish Government, to deport the Armenian population from the sensitive areas. Which meant naturally the whole of Anatolia. Not including the Arab provinces which were then still part of the Ottoman Empire. There is no evidence of a decision to massacre. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence of attempt to prevent it, which were not very successful. Yes there were tremendous massacres, the numbers are very uncertain but a million nay may well be likely. The massacres were carried out by irregulars, by local villagers responding to what had been done to them and in number of other ways. But to make this, a parallel with the holocaust in Germany, you would have to assume the Jews of Germany had been engaged in an armed rebellion against the German state, collaborating with the allies against Germany. That in the deportation order the cities of Hamburg and Berlin were exempted, persons in the employment of state were exempted, and the deportation only applied to the Jews of Germany proper, so that when they got to Poland they were welcomed and sheltered by the Polish Jews. This seems to me a rather absurd parallel.
— Bernard Lewis, American historian and leading US foreign policy advisor

81.214.107.89 (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's very clear if the block is lifted, you'll go right back to your prior behaviour. No. No chance. Also note that Wikipedia isn't the place to share your opinion. Yamla (talk) 21:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

ANI request

@Yamla Can you start an ANI thread for me so that the community can evaluate this block? 81.214.107.89 (talk) 22:49, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, do you think the wider Wikipedia community is going to look favourably on genocide denial? — Czello ^(music) 22:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Czello I do not deny genocide. I acknowledge the suffering of Armenians in 1915. 81.214.107.89 (talk) 23:00, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

81.214.107.89, you are free to do this yourself; you are only blocked from one single page. If you are not able to do so, I'm willing to do so. Note, though, that I'll be advocating you be blocked indefinitely from all pages, not just the one page. I strongly expect that's what the community will decide is appropriate, too, though obviously I can only speak for myself. --Yamla (talk) 23:27, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth

"CityOfSilver Here's my question to you: Were, in your view, the internment of Japanese Americans and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki genocide or do you deny it?" First question: no. Second question: yes.

I believe the internment was a wide-scale war crime for which its perpetrators, which would have included Franklin Roosevelt among many others, should have been punished. Because I've never seen anything that says there were people who were deliberately killed, in my view the internment was not a genocide. As to the bombings, in my view, they were both genocides and their perpetrators, from Harry Truman on down, should all have hanged. (This matter isn't related to your block so I'm not really supposed to be doing this but you asked a question and the discussion was closed before I could answer it. So I guess I'll see if I get in trouble for this.) CityOfSilver 16:13, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Site-wide block

As per this close and the discussions therein, the IP address range you are editing from is blocked site-wide for six months and you personally are considered blocked from the site indefinitely. You have access to the talk page solely so you can contest your block. --Yamla (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla Does the site ban apply to only English Wikipedia, all language Wikipedias or all Wikimedia sites? 81.214.107.89 (talk) 17:37, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi The closer does not mention the indef ban in the closing comments. Does the closer endorse this? 81.214.107.89 (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It applies only to the English Wikipedia. It specifically does not apply to Wikipedias in different languages and does not apply to other Wikimedia sites. --Yamla (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Your behavior is a time sink. Go troll on another project so you can be blocked in more places Star Mississippi 00:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This site is better off without this anonymous user on it. Good riddance, who cares, so long, etc. That said, it's really sad that this reply, which is flat-out encouraging an attacker to damage other projects for no good reason, is from an administrator. A successful WP:RFA is the site issuing a bulletproof vest and we're really getting it wrong if we're giving that sort of untouchable status to people whose temperaments are as gross and immature as what User:Star Mississippi is showing here. CityOfSilver 00:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're definitely reading more into my response than I intended especially considering I was the one who blocked them. Their question was whether they can edit elsewhere. They unfortunately can. But if they keep it up, they'll be glocked. Star Mississippi 01:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CityOfSilver: Yes, I too think your were reading too much into Star Mississippi's comment. In the context I saw it as irony, not as actually "encouraging an attacker to damage other projects". I think it was probably unwise for Star Mississippi to express their views in that way, for several reasons, but I'm not convinced that it was any worse than "people whose temperaments are as gross and immature"; in fact on the contrary, as that remark appears to have been meant literally, not ironically. (I also find it interesting that you think being an administrator confers "untouchable status". That is very far from being my impression.) JBW (talk) 11:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough @JBW and I apologize for that. Someone who is blatantly trolling (the iP, not @CityOfSilver in any way) sometimes brings out the impolite in me. I'll make all efforts not to Star Mississippi 14:01, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: I strongly, sincerely believe that administrators have far more leeway than policy allows. (As a longtime editor, I also have more leeway than policy allows, although not as much as admins.) CityOfSilver 18:17, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CityOfSilver: Yes, but that falls a very long way short of "untouchable status". JBW (talk) 18:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: I honestly don't think that's the case at all but we can agree to disagree. CityOfSilver 18:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi I didn't ask you whether I can edit elsewhere. I asked a question about the closure. 81.214.107.89 (talk) 01:08, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Asked and answered already. --Yamla (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.