User talk:EtienneDolet/Archive 9

A year ago ...
defend Armenia
	... you were recipient; no. 1173 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

WP:AE#Jaqeli

Jaqeli (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Jaqeli. Jaqeli has not edited since 24 January, so it's unlikely they will respond to the complaint. Also I notice that you have made only one post to his talk page in the last six months. This may suggest that the possibiities of normal discussion have not been exhausted. Shall I just close this for now? Then if you see that Jaqeli starts to edit again, you can let me know and we can decide what to do then. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:33, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Hi EdJohnston. I replied to the issue you've raised. I'd also like to suggest, if possible, to have other admins look into this as well. As far as I can see, there's plenty of evidence that shows problems in user conduct, and we shouldn't be dismissing this case as a mere issue of content. So I think we need to weigh some options here. Don't get me wrong, I've always respected your opinions at AE, and I still do. But in this circumstance, I think more opinions would be more helpful. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it's an issue of editor behavior, but Jaqeli has edited very sparsely. And you don't seem to have engaged him in discussion about the items you are citing in the AE complaint. For example, you don't like him making Georgia be a 'medieval great power'. But have you ever posted your objection to that anywhere? EdJohnston (talk) 03:26, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EdJohnston The underlining premise to my report was to insinuate the notion that Jaqeli was continuing the same pattern of disruption that got him topic-banned too many times before. I noticed that this was the case after I had to revert his edit at Tumanishvili. Eventually, however, I examined his edits and suggested conclusively, on the AE board, that it was similarly disruptive in one way or another. Apparently, he learned lessons from his "past mistakes" in his last appeal, but that seems to be all but neglected. So if we all agree that it's an issue of editor behavior, why can't we proceed it as such? At the end of the day, the issue should not be viewed as an EtienneDolet vs. Jaqeli issue, but a Jaqeli vs. AA2 issue. I know this may be hard to conceive since most filers at AE have a personal grievance with those they file an AE report against, but this is not the case at this specific circumstance. In any case, I find it quite concerning to let go of a user you were willing to ban indefinitely simply because I personally wasn't there to remind him how he should or should not edit. The point is that Jaqeli is perfectly aware, even more than me, that these types of edits in the AA2 topic area are under arbitration and can lead to sanctioning. I do not think I should even be there to familiarize himself of this. The very fact that he has received so many warnings, blocks, and bans should be suffice in that regard. Étienne Dolet (talk) 11:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EdJohnston Thank you for taking the time and handling the situation. I don't feel that I fully understand the closure remark here. So I want to reraise the same question Tiptoethrutheminefield had at the AE report: Does this mean he is allowed to edit Georgian specific articles? If that's the case, then he'd also be allowed to edit Armenian specific articles. This may be concerning considering the disruption he has caused in relation to them. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:27, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see what happens when he resumes editing. The diffs in your report seemed to be cases where both Georgia and Armenia were mentioned in the same article. Nobody seems to mind his work on Georgian-specific articles. EdJohnston (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emin Huseynov

Hello, I have slighly cropped the pic, balanced background and softened a little the entire photo. Criticism and suggestions are welcome.--Carnby (talk) 13:44, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Carnby. The pic looks better now. Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mitanni

Hello, some Wikipedia user who appears to be Georgian, removed the Indo-European template from the Mitanni article. This users edit history is full of Anti-Armenian propaganda. Please restore the template in Mitanni, thanks. 166.176.56.197 (talk) 20:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian church near Kharpert used as public toilet after the genocide

The Armenian Evangelical Church, Elâzığ, also interesting for @Yerevantsi:. Do you have a photograph?--Hayodzazgi (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And this one was turned into a cinema for pornography.--Hayodzazgi (talk) 13:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is just propaganda, a fake story, probably invented by those involved in the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation "industry" because they have cast their avaricious eyes onto this monument and realized they can make money out of it, and want to speed things along. Similar fake stories were spread about Aghtamar, and about Ani, to encourage the initiation of projects that did nothing to preserve the monuments but which were financially lucrative for those involved. The Elazig church is probably the last visual reminder of the AG that survives in the middle of any major Turkish city - but its integrity as an historical monument will be destroyed if those TAR parasites get their hands on it. At the moment it is a raw, dramatic and very evocative empty roofless shell, in the middle of a large open space that is used as a car park and which is the last bit of open space in the middle of Elazig. It exists like a rip in the visual fabric of a modern densely-packed city, allowing a glimpse of the past. So it is not surprising that those involved in the fake reconciliation industry want it sanitized by "restoration". Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 03:01, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spam on Putin talk page

I have deleted three more of the "election" sections on the talk page. I hope I can count on your support for this. And if there are more going to appear, perhaps take your turn in removing them. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:35, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tiptoethrutheminefield, I agree there's a lot of spam on the TP. But there's always going to be someone that's going to revert you upon removing them. Unfortunately, the edit-warring is not only on the main space anymore, but has now commenced at the talk page as well. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3RR on VP

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Vladimir Putin. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

3 reverts in just a couple of hours. Yes I know not technically a 3RR violation. But hey! Didn't you recently report someone for similar? Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

No, there was no "tag teaming". You could easily single out a lot of other editors, X and Y, who are active in the same subject area for years and happened to agree on something. Yes, I occasionally check edits made by many contributors, including VM. It does not mean I "wikistalk" them or "tag team" with them. I frequently disagree with them (can provide diffs), and if I make an edit, this is my edit. I know the subject, checked the sources, and think this is good edit. No one recently complained. My very best wishes (talk) 13:29, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's probably 1000s of users who share the same interests with me, but I don't engage in tag-team edit-warring with them. That's not helpful for the encyclopedia. For example, when you make a WP:NINJA-style revert, as you did at Putin, you are not helping to resolve the issue through appropriate consensus building measures. Instead, you're fanning the flames and making it appear that the issue can be only solved through edit-warring, which should never be the case. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now it appears that you have reverted me again. That's a big no-no. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You do not listen. I did not meatpuppet to subvert consensus, and I did not harass anyone. My very best wishes (talk) 19:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vladimir Putin

You and User:My very best wishes seem to be in a dispute. He made this recent edit, which you reverted. While this material about cluster bombs is well-sourced, it is up to editor consensus whether it belongs in Putin's own article. Have you discussed this on the talk page? I am considering if the article should be under a WP:1RR restriction or full protection. Another option is to issue page bans to anyone who reverts a lot and doesn't seem to be actively seeking consensus. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EdJohnston,

The problems concerning this article are not limited to Vladimir Putin. There's some concerning tag-team edit-warring going which is not only hampering the consensus building process of this article, but of many other articles. Therefore, I don't think this particular article should go into 1RR because of that, rather a full protection may be more appropriate. Yes, I have participated in the discussion at the talk page (see: section here). There appears to be at least 5 users that are against its inclusion, and just Mvbw and VM in favor of it. However, the tag-team edit-warring has been effective for them. But Wikipedia is not about who wins the "edit-war" battle, rather it should be an environment of consensus building and good faith editing. Thank you for taking the time looking into this matter. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is against the wikirules to delete or tamper with someone's else's comments.--Galassi (talk) 19:35, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not if they're personal attacks buddy. Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They were not personal attacks, they were a criticism of your actions on the article. Well deserved. And it's not just me and MVBW, but also several other editors, as you well know since you templated them with spurious warnings (like the user above).Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:46, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:PA: comment on content, not on the contributor. Anyways, please see my compromise at ANI. Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you removed my comment [1] because you did not understand my point. OK, there is nothing wrong to explain. I would not recommend you submitting an WP:AE request right now because:

Why did you single me out? Because I edited page about Putin? There are at least two other contributors who are a lot more active than me and who have a greater editing overlap with VM than me.
You suppose to bring to WP:AE only something very recent, less than 1 week old.
Your own behavior is far from perfect (I just gave you a random diff; there is a lot more), so you are risking to be sanctioned yourself.
Bringing battleground requests to WP:AE is a very bad idea. Trust me. My very best wishes (talk) 21:38, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kinaliada

Hallo Etienne, I need a favour from you. ;-) On itwiki I added on the article about Kinaliada the fact, supported by this Turkish official source, that the island has since the 19th century a predominantly Armenian population. Talking about OR, I know the island, and actually when we were there we met several Armenians, had dinner at an Armenian club and visited an Armenian church, and so on. Now there is a Turkish editor who affirms that it is not so anymore, and that nowadays the island is "Turkish" as the others. Do you have info (and sources) about this issue? Thanks Alex2006 (talk) 10:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alessandro57, I'm surprised that's even debatable. Turkish Wikipedia can get tough to edit in sometimes. They'll dismiss sources Armenian sources just because they're "Armenian" or whatever. Anyways, Kinaliada has always been 90% Armenian, up until RTP came around. I'd say in the 19th century it was 95% Armenian (and a little Greek, there's a Greek church there after all). The streets even had Armenian names. You might find it hard to believe but Akasya used to be named Agasyan. Saki Bey was Sarkisyan and etc. I just can't seem to find a source that verifies this, but I remember reading this somewhere. All the apartments' names on the island were Armenian ([2]). In fact, when the island had at least 3 churches, there wasn't even a mosque on the island until the 1970s. The Turkish school wasn't open till then either, while there was an Armenian school (Nersisyan) as early as 1855. Till this day, there is no Muslim cemetery or other Muslim dominated community organizations. The island's heritage still remains largely Armenian. There's one book that highlights all of this brilliantly, and that's Orhan Sevki's Proti'den Kınalı'ya tanıklıklarla Kınalıada. I highly recommend you read that. Étienne Dolet (talk) 13:42, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Etienne, I had no doubt about it, also because I know many Turks which confirm it (and have no problem in doing it ;-)) and the source that I found on the internet are also turkish one, but this guy keeps insisting...Good, I will put this source on the article! Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, EtienneDolet. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

POTD notification

Hi EtienneDolet,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:T'oros Roslin (Armenian, active 1256 - 1268) - Canon Table Page - Google Art Project (6915047).jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on March 17, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-03-17. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Vladimir Putin". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 11 March 2016.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 21:44, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VM stacking, read last comments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Vladimir_Putin#Parties.27_agreement_to_mediation SaintAviator lets talk 00:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Vladimir Putin, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Anita Conti

I was surprised to see you deleted Category:French women photographers. Perhaps you could explain why you find this inappropriate.--Ipigott (talk) 18:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ipigott I corrected my mistake. Actually I meant to delete French photographers category since it's less specific than French women photographers. I know that we need to be more specific when it comes to categorization. Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for arbitration declined

A request for arbitration you were party to has been declined.

The case has been declined as the subject area is already subject to discretionary sanctions and no alternate dispute resolution has recently taken place regarding the issue at hand.

For the Arbitration committee. Amortias (T)(C) 20:14, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dydd Gŵyl Dewi

Hi Étienne (and pinging User:Adam Cuerden). I've only just now seen Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dydd Gŵyl Dewi, which closed this morning – which is a pity as I can offer an answer to some of your questions. The photo is, in my opinion, a good illustration of the main St David's Day parade in Cardiff and as such has EV. It does relate to St David's Day more than to any other Welsh event; the druidic costumes for the National Eisteddfod of Wales are a little different from this, with long white, blue, purple or green robes; see e.g. here or here. Parades like the ones in Cardiff and Aberystwyth aren't the only way St David's Day is celebrated – schools hold an eisteddfod on the day – but they are the most public. Very sorry not to have spotted this as Category:Featured pictures of Wales is looking very empty! Ham II (talk) 08:21, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ham II: Why don't we figure out a crop and renominate after? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 12:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: Great idea. I've been bold and done a lossless crop with the CropTool: File:Gorymdaith Genedlaethol Gŵyl Dewi, 2009 – National St David's Day Parade, 2009.jpg. What do you think? Feel free to overwrite it as you see fit. Ham II (talk) 16:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ham II: A bit too off-centre, probably. We may need to lose some of the kilted man on the right to keep it centred enough. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it's better. But now I'm worried that we'll lose the kilted man since he's holding up the flag. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: I've cropped it 6% from the right. Too much, too little or just right? Ham II (talk) 18:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can we add back a little bit more on the left? IF there's a bit of yellowshirt that won't matter so much as an awkward crop, I think. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:44, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It won't hurt to have even a little barely noticeable piece of the yellow man. Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:07, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: I had to upload a third version as the CropTool won't allow me to overwrite the second from the first, so here's the new link: File:Gorymdaith Genedlaethol Gŵyl Dewi 2009 – National St David's Day Parade 2009.jpg. Any better? Ham II (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC) (PS: Am I the only one who thinks the yellow shirt is brown?)[reply]

Brown is just dark yellow. It looks pretty good. Could see trying a little more left, but it's nae bad. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:55, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia page

Someone removed the infobox material of Hayasa and tradional date, please restore this. Thanks. 166.176.58.90 (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, if you check this editor that just recently reverted me on this issue, he was the one that right when he removed the date of Armenian history, he immediately went to the Jewish people article and changed their history to 1000 years older then what was previously on the article, which is to 2000 BC. Do you smell another propaganda agenda wiki user ?? 107.72.98.181 (talk) 20:02, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

wiki-tr situation

Hello, that day on a page I tried to show that I am also sorry for the wiki-tr but the clever user cencured it thou. Best regards Manaviko (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Wikipedia is a joke. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Report

Hi, If it possible for you please reports the vandalism of this user, in Armenian articles to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard thanks,

World Cup 2010 (talk) 06:42, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@World Cup 2010: Hi World Cup 2010. Thanks for notifying me of this. I gave them a AA2 advisory which should be suffice for now. Étienne Dolet (talk) 07:19, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Serzh Sargsyan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia. 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) 10:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:36, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Volunteer Marek (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, EtienneDolet. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Violation of WP:NPOVTITLE?.The discussion is about the topic Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War. Thank you. --Tobby72 (talk) 21:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 109.108.250.225 (talk) 23:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution case

I have opened a case here regarding the Aghet issue. I have not named you as involved because I don't think you are disputing that Aghet should be somewhere in the article beside "Medz Yeghern" - but if you want you are welcome to add your name and contribute.[3] Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 00:08, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Armenian Apostolic Church

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:2014 Erywań, Katedra św. Grzegorza Oświeciciela (05).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong death toll numbers

In the 2016 Armenian Azeri clashes article the death toll is incorrect, many more Azeri have died and less Armenians then what is shown on the article. Please revert the falsifiers. The page is locked for IP users. 166.170.50.156 (talk) 22:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mount Ararat

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Mount Ararat and the Yerevan skyline.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Aghet added to the Armenian Genocide article

Some 16 references have been cited defining the word Aghed / Aghet as an alternative name for the Armenian Genocide. Do you oppose the addition of the word Aghed into the Armenian Genocide article? I would like a straight answer. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:32, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm for the format Armen Ohanian suggested. My only concern is that the first sentence of the article is being bloated with alternative names. If you guys come to a conclusion, make sure it assesses that problem. As for my opinion, I am against its inclusion if it means to bloat the first sentence. Étienne Dolet (talk) 02:57, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The two that now consider you an ally are reading considerably more into your opinion than just "format". So I think you need to clarify. Are you against the inclusion of the word "Aghet" in the body of the article, given parity with and alongside the inclusion of "Metz Yeghern", as alternative names of the Armenian Genocide? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 03:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this was all about the first sentence. Give me a second Tiptoe, and let me clarify with Armen and Diranakir. Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:24, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Next to nothing said by Armen and Diranakir was about the first sentence. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tiptoethrutheminefield what part of the body did you want it added? Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:35, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest a new section, perhaps called "Terminology", or "Nomenclature", I am open to discussion of the title. In it the origin of the coining of the word "genocide" would be explained, and all the alternative pre-genocide word coining terminology English-language names such as "Armenian MAsacres", "Armenian Holocaust", etc, would be mentioned. And the Armenian names used by the survivors, including Aghet and Metz Yeghern. And issues involving their use, including alternative translations, and also the examples of euphemistic use of terminology. And maybe the terminology used by denialist sources ("events of 1915", etc) if we can find third party sources that talk about that terminology (as opposed to us just lifting that terminology direct from those denialist sources). Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:06, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then I suggest just adding a paragraph in the origin of the word genocide section. No need to create a new section. Thereafter, the talk page discussion can focus on what should be placed and under what context. Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Mehmet celal family.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Mehmet celal family.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:05, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Mehmet celal family.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Mehmet celal family.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:00, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mehmet Celal Bey

On 24 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mehmet Celal Bey, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ottoman politician Mehmet Celal Bey is known as the Turkish Oscar Schindler for having saved many lives during the Armenian Genocide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mehmet Celal Bey. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mehmet Celal Bey), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Worm^TT(talk) 21:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rojava

Parev Etienne! Can you please watchlist the article? 'Cause i have noticed many distorting edits by some users (probably mostly Turkish). Regards, Alkarisi (talk) 21:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What edits are you talking about? Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of edits actually...But the current edit(s) by an ip for example. lt was very obvious one and thus i thought that i have to fix it. Alkarisi (talk) 22:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dorpater: i saw your revert on Kurds in Syria. Compare the contributions of two ips. What do you think? l noticed various ips belong the same editor on Kurdish-related articles. Alkarisi (talk) 21:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talat Pasha

Hello Étienne Dolet: I've had a look at your article as requested and have made some minor adjustments to it to improve the flow. I also added a number of links to WP articles I considered were relevant or important for the reader to know about. Hope this helps. Regards. Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Cossva Anckarsvärd

Hello! Your submission of Cossva Anckarsvärd at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 17:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Cossva Anckarsvärd

On 1 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cossva Anckarsvärd, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Swedish diplomat Cossva Anckarsvärd, a witness to the Armenian Genocide, called it an attempt to "exterminate the Armenian nation"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cossva Anckarsvärd. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cossva Anckarsvärd), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 02:53, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Where are you from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boracasli (talk • contribs) 18:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC) --Boracasli (talk) 18:22, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination for Garo Paylan

Hello! Your submission of Garo Paylan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HazelAB (talk) 00:09, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Saint-Étienne-du-Mont 2

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:St-Etienne-du-Mont Interior 2, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Garo Paylan

On 17 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Garo Paylan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Garo Paylan was one of the first ethnic Armenians to serve as a member of the Turkish parliament in decades? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Garo Paylan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Garo Paylan), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:26, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Venus and Adonis

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Venus y Adonis (Veronese).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:15, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Portion vs almost all

Firstly, we don't question our sources. As for your "Kars-related concerns" (as I know it's because of that); it purely depends on whether Kars is included in the definition or not, whether all or most of eastern Armenia was ceded in 1828. Kars can be considered both part of Western as well as Eastern Armenia. "Portion" is a nonsensical term regarding this matter and no academic or historian has ever used the the formulation "a portion of eastern Armenia" (or anything alike) to refer to the 1828 event. What portion? 10%? 20%? 90%? 80%? 33,3%? The lesser or the greater portion? "Almost all" or "most of" are the sole correct wordings here given that only Kars fell outside the Qajar reach. Mind you though, a lot of academics simply keep it on the entire territory of eastern Armenia that was ceded in 1828. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop vandalism

Stop vandalising Turkey releated pages. As you did here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khanasor_Expedition&type=revision&diff=729426217&oldid=729373414 you removed only source there. And here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dersim_massacre&diff=prev&oldid=729427210 you are changing a rebellion to massacre.85.105.170.64 (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

do you mind supporting the claim in your edit summary in talk where it can be replied? Your revert is an abuse of process! Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 04:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who studied at San Lazzaro degli Armeni has been nominated for discussion

Category:People who studied at San Lazzaro degli Armeni, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 08:27, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personne morale

Hi, I assume you speak French given your username. I need someone to create an English version of this article: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personne_morale

It has a version in all major languages except for English. This concept is foreign to the English world, being reason of serious selection bias when drawing a list of publications. It was in the Ottoman considered as the household. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 19:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Db Kegham Parseghian.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Db Kegham Parseghian.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Einar af Wirsén

On 12 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Einar af Wirsén, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Swedish diplomat Einar af Wirsén (pictured) was a witness to the Armenian Genocide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Einar af Wirsén. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Einar af Wirsén), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:11, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category and Template

Hi If possible you for participate below survies about speedy delation

this and Category:Nagorno-Karabakh_Republic-stubs

thank youModern Sciences (talk) 00:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Perast

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Widok na Perast z zachodu 01.JPG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:15, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:The Monkeys at the Fair (1942).jpg

Thank you for uploading File:The Monkeys at the Fair (1942).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Huon (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Paris Under occupation chahine.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Paris Under occupation chahine.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Huon (talk) 16:28, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Soghomom Tehlirian monument Fresno, CA1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Soghomom Tehlirian monument Fresno, CA1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:13, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reported as well

Here. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:52, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ayse Kulin

Since I did not wish to clog up the Arbcom with off topic matter;

"In a television interview, Kulin claimed that the Armenian Genocide could not be compared to the Holocaust and that the genocide was a "relocation event" ("bir tehcir olayıdır")."

If my exceedingly poor understanding of Turkish is correct, Ayse does not say "Armenian Genocide", but "relocation event". Ergo, the sentence as it stands right now is factually incorrect, since Ayse does not say Armenian Genocide. It is all a matter of perspective.

What would be better, IMO;

"In a television interview, Kulin refers to the Armenian Genocide as a "relocation event"("bir tehcir olayıdır") and thus it could not be compared to the Holocaust."

Your thoughts?

FYI, I appreciate what you said at Arbcom and always thought you did excellent work here, as well. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliments Kansas Bear. I just looked into the Turkish and you're right on the dot with the translation. She also said "why would we kill those Armenians out of nowhere?" That phrase was pretty significant and it ticked off a lot of Armenians, especially the Armenians in Turkey. Karin Karakaşlı of Agos wrote a really strong response to it. Brings chills to my spine every time I read it. I must admit, I overlooked the concerns you now raise when I reverted. The more glaring problems caught my eye, so I decided to revert right then and there. I'm also impressed with your Turkish. Bravo. Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Amalia de Llano y Dotres

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Amalia de Llano y Dotres, condesa de Vilches (Federico de Madrazo).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 05:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, EtienneDolet. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Marie-Gabrielle Capet

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Marie-Gabrielle Capet - Self-Portrait - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Françoise-Marguerite de Sévigné

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Francoise-Marguerite de Sevigne Roslin 1753.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:07, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Damadian MRI.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Damadian MRI.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nthep (talk) 16:25, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iğdır province

Hi. Your edit is already counted here Iğdır#Demographics and your edit is just based about the city center, not the province. Thus your edit has nothing to do with the province (a bigger area) but about the city center. It says "Erivanskaya Guberniya" Yerevan governorate thus Igdir was not a governorate then, the census is about city center. Cheers. Beshogur (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Carnival of Venice

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Venice Carnival - Masked Lovers (2010).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:31, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coincidence?

I have noticed a similarity in editing between Beshogur and Gala19000. See here. Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt it. Gala's English was atrocious. He used to spell 'which' as 'wich'. Beshogur is much more legible. He might be Maurice07 though. Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I got a better result here guys.--Abbatai 19:32, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abbatai LOL. Good luck with that one Abbatai. Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reported

here--Abbatai 09:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BLP warning

This comment violates both WP:NOTAFORUM and WP:BLP. It links to an unreliable source and even that is cut and cherry picked. It concerns a trivial slip up. The purpose of your link, and your comment is to disparage a living person. I strongly suggest you remove it.Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:42, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is C-SPAN not reliable? Also, it's his own words. How would that be considered disparaging? That reminds me of the time when Trump complained during a debate about how Clinton ran a negative campaign against him when all she did was use his own words. But in McCain's case, I'd say it's more than a trivial slip up. There are several reliable sources that questioned McCain's ability to govern after that comment (yup, that even includes the Washington Post). Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Jesse B. Jackson

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:JesseBJackson.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:06, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Armbrust: who can I talk to in order to place this beauty on the main page? Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492:. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Crisco. Hope all is well. Is the April 24, 2017 slot open? Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:08, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's open. I've tentatively scheduled the image. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:47, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: I can add a blurp now? Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:53, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: I added a blurp. Let me know what you think. Étienne Dolet (talk) 00:34, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look comes April. Things may change between now and then, both in the article and in the draft blurb. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:31, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the AE complaint about your edits

Per this AE decision, both you and User:Abbatai are admonished and warned against battleground behaviour and failure to edit neutrally. Future examples of these behaviours are likely to result in a topic ban. These warnings are being entered in WP:DSLOG and can be referred to if further problems occur. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TALKNEW

Since you brought it up, see also WP:TPO.Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:12, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Place du Capitole

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Toulouse Capitole Night Wikimedia Commons.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:17, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, EtienneDolet. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Your AE request

Hi, Etienne. Your arbitration enforcement request has been closed with no action.[4] Thank you for voluntarily abstaining from participation at WP:AE for six months (other than filings where you're a named party). Bishonen | talk 21:46, 2 January 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Your Graphics Lab request

Hello, EtienneDolet. Greetings from the Photography workshop. A reply has been made to your request. You may view the reply here.
If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}}

Regards, AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 02:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC).[reply]

You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Photography reply}} template.

Ararat picture

Hi, I have a small sample (I loaded a full size, but the site reduced it) here [5]. Part of the field was removed (but the essential was kept), because the picture was too much emphasizing on it. The image received several modifications

Texturing (and cloning) to repair the blurred sections.
sharpening of some sections in the right side, where cloning was not possible.
oil painting filter to remove camera bias.
adding noise to tempter the picture (and remove camera bias)
contrast tweaking.
color glazing (again to remove camera bias)
increasing color saturation
lowering brightness to remove camera bias.

See the problem with pictures in general, is that it goes against the spirit of free editing, because those who have expensive camera's would take better pictures, and they will be less prone therefor to have failures of the kind shown here.

True free editing would require to obtain the same results no matter which camera (even regardless of the resolution) one uses.

Take a small picture, increase its size, then add a filter like oil painting. No matter the initial resolution, if there is a size of the strokes (for oil painting filter), it is that which sets the end result (and resolution). The same goes with adding noises.

Each camera reproduce colors in an unique (and biased) way. Here is where glazing comes in... traditional paint pigments have their equivalent color values (example, #E30022 for cadmium red). If we glaze elements in the picture with their closest traditional pigment values, we assure that no matter the camera, the colors will be similar.

Of course we run at risk of having different labs setting different values, and here is where lowering the brightness of the pictures comes in. Color variations are less perceivable at lower intensity.

There are other biases, such as lens aberrations and sizing of pictures which are all prone to material bias. There is a solution with this too, by using size constants like closest to a Fibonacci number etc.

If you like that picture, I will be loading the full size. But I advice against it, because I have not yet finished developing the standardized method (but close to it).

My plan was to start with every Armenian related pictures (and texts also, but using same strategies).

Any manipulation techniques developed would be developed AND will be running on minimal hardware, that is, an embedded system with ARM architecture. Any new projects survives because of its supporters, it does not take a genius to understand why Armenians (ARM) will associate themselves with ARM embedded systems :). Anything which is developed in those systems can be developed anywhere with minimal resources.

Here lies my interest with Armenian articles. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 02:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I'm the author of the image you nominated as Featured Picture. Thank you. I've corrected the issues mentioned in the discussion by redoing the panorama with only 2 frames. I describe my changes and the options moving forward in the discussion on that page. Thank you and best wishes, Սէրուժ (talk) 09:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS, had I known earlier about the issue (e.g. a message) I would have fixed the issue earlier. Hopefully it can be reconsidered as a FP. I made a special trip that morning to take that photo during the rare weather and atmospheric conditions :) Սէրուժ (talk) 09:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Etienne, please re-nominate the newly stitched, cropped version. I'd be happy to support. --Janke | Talk 14:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Janke I'm back from my break. I'll handle that soon. Thanks for being so supportive. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.^[1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.^[2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mount Ararat 2

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Mount Ararat and the Araratian plain (cropped).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:51, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:EtienneDolet/Evidence

User:EtienneDolet/Evidence, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:EtienneDolet/Evidence and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:EtienneDolet/Evidence during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 18:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I do hope you would at least try to have a balanced approached towards this, considering that this page has also not been deleted. Étienne Dolet (talk) 00:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DOLET I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT DAMN PAGE EXISTED. What is the matter with you all? Shall I go and harangue you ever time I find something wrong on the internet? Balanced approach my ass--try the non-passive aggressive approach, and when you do, I'll be glad to look into it. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: That subpage was used as "evidence" in a case you commented on, as was my subpage you requested to be deleted. So I had the assumption that you were aware of it. Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:30, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No man, not at all. Your page was linked in some discussion that followed from something on my talk page or on the Trump page or on the whatever page. Etienne, they're not all out to get you, and neither am I. Now that you mention it, I remember that I did look at that before, and it should go for the exact same reason, and I will get on that right now. Drmies (talk) 03:51, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I see. Well, I don't see it linked to any one of those pages. Anyhow, I simply thought that you were informed about the case you were involved in. But if you forgot, then I understand that as well. Just had to remind you. Take care. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was mentioned and linked to in an ANI case as evidence I think the page should be kept for the record. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:08, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see I MfD'ed that page also? I try to be an equal opportunity offender. And seriously, you have no idea how much I forget and how quickly, which is why I am so impartial. I keep forgetting who is on whose side. Later, Drmies (talk) 04:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

edit warring

The RfC of 2014 was clear. Your addition is clearly WP:OR when examining the source. Please revert this. Collect (talk) 18:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Collect: That's strange. You were the one who added that claim and removed the sources for it in this very edit of yours. I merely restored it and added a source for it, thereby making an improvement. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And the source is not valid for that claim as I point out at WP:RSN. When a claim is not backed up by a source, it is properly removed. Collect (talk) 18:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You. Made. The. Claim. You, in your edit-summary in this very edit said that this removes culpability. You said this yourself: "my wording includes the Genocide without any implication of wrong-doing which meet". This is ridiculous. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And now that I have been able to check the source provided, I find Nthep was correct that the source does not support the claim made. Checking sources is always proper at any time. Collect (talk) 19:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WOW. Way to spin it Collect. First off, Nthep did not make such a claim. He merely removed it because it wasn't sourced. Which was true. Therefore, I added a source. Secondly, the entire source was provided for you with this link on the talk page. We also quoted the entire passage over and over again from Ungor's book on the talk page. Your entire argument, at the time, was to remove complicity of Omer Sabanci vis-a-vis the Armenian Genocide. You therefore made that edit to solve that matter and the community didn't act upon it since then. I personally didn't mind your wording either. But now you're trying to remove YOUR very own edit then turn around and accuse me of accusing the Sabancis of genocide when I restore it? I'm baffled. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:06, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary at Armenians

Regarding this edit summary: can you say more? Or are you just pointing out the similarity to 205.209.91.171? Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 06:01, 8 March 2017 (UTC)are[reply]

@EdJohnston: Similar, but quite obvious. Wario-Man made a similar observation at the TP and I just picked up from it. Edit-summaries are strikingly similar: [6][7]. Can we just have a quick CU-check? Would save us a lot of time figuring this out. Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:22, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't call for a CU unless there is abuse, such as simultaneous use while pretending there is no connection. Does the claim of an Assyrian-Armenian relationship have a history on these pages? EdJohnston (talk) 06:37, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: There's abuse. In the form of circumventing the semi-protection. I never remember dealing with this Assyrian issue until these recent days. Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:42, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That guy targeted Armenian-related articles since the day he joined WP. All of his disruptive edits are about Armenians. For example [8], [9], [10], [11]. Plus, his strange obsession with racialist terms (e.g. Armenoid race) and unsourced/unreliable genetic claims. In my opinion, this is a WP:NOTNOTHERE case. Adding his personal opinions, ignoring WP rules, edit warring, single-purpose, disruptive and pov-pushers user. Other editors reverted most of his edits. --Wario-Man (talk) 06:44, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, forget the sock puppetry. That account should be blocked for disruption. That's the more obvious solution here. Étienne Dolet (talk) 07:03, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1934 Turkish Resettlement Law

The anon is right. The fake edit summary is this [12]. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Putin GDP lede

As you well know this was discussed extensively last year. You tried to remove it then because... I don't remember. Regardless, you waited till people stopped paying attention to the article, came back and stealthily removed the info against consensus. I have restored it. Your reasoning this time appears to be that "it's outdated". Forgive me if I don't buy that. You wanted it removed last year. You want to remove it now.

If you do wish to remove the material, which is long standing and which had consensus in discussion, please start a new discussion on the talk page and get new consensus. Otherwise you're behaving disruptively.

Of course you know all of this.

If there is new data (can you provide a link?) then you can add it. But the economic decline in 2015 is *still* relevant for geopolitical reasons - the sanctions are still in place, the conflict in eastern Ukraine is still there, and these economic outcomes were a direct result of Putin's foreign policy. So yeah, it still needs to be there.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:31, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Volunteer Marek: I didn't wait for a year, nor did I stealthily remove anything. A year has passed, new stats are out, and the stats for 2015 and the significance behind it has now diminished since the economy has now rebounded. And let me clarify, I wanted to remove it last year because of recentism. I still would like to remove it now because of recentism. It's for this reason why I don't feel that it's justified to add the new 2016 stats either. However, if you insist in keeping something regarding the 2015 economic history in the lead, I may just budge for the sake of building consensus. Perhaps having something in the lead like: "In 2015, Russia's economy was affected negatively during sanctions and falling oil prices, but it rebounded in 2016." Obviously, this can be modified if you'd like. Otherwise, if we can't reach an agreement, this will have to go through an RfC.

And I'll have good faith and assume that you didn't notice my new TP section regarding my edit. The link has been provided for the new 2016 World Bank report there. Étienne Dolet (talk) 02:48, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. (Going backwards) You didn't provide any link to any report there.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2. I didn't say you "waited a year". I said you "waited until people stopped paying attention". But I guess it was about a year. The original discussion was in Feb and March of 2016. You came back this Feb [13], removed it and were immediately reverted by another user. You then persisted and edit warred and here we are now.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:54, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3. "Rebounded" here would be OR. Negative growth which isn't as bad as previous negative growth isn't "rebounding".Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:57, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Volunteer Marek: Well, how do you know I "waited until people stopped paying attention"? You can't just assume that I did such a thing, that's just bad faith and you know that. So let's not go down that road. I'm being respectful and am reaching out to you to build a consensus version of the lead. And yeah, I totally thought I added the link. So I revised my comment and added it. So not rebounded, perhaps improved? There's no debate that -3.5% to -0.6% is an improvement. Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Precious two years

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:02, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

I believe you just broke 1RR on the Battle of Aleppo article. Please self revert.Volunteer Marek (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Civil War general sanctions notice

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

The appeal to cease edit warring doesn't work if you accompany it by a revert that continues the edit war. Further, making a second revert mere minutes after the 24 hour mark doesn't inspire confidence. Please discuss, same as with everyone else. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 21:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BU Rob13: Alright, thanks for reminding me. I will refrain from reverting and resort solely to the talk page. By the way, since you are reminding me of these sanctions because I reverted shortly after my 24 hour mark, shouldn't Mvbw be notified as well? After all, his revert came only 24:15 minutes after his last revert. Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You had no notification logged at WP:GS/SCW, which is why I "formally" notified you, although I included the note so you're aware that reverting precisely once per 24 hours is likely to be viewed as gaming the system. I did also post a general warning at Talk:Battle of Aleppo (2012–16) that future reverts will result in blocks. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 21:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jean Althen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armenian. 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) 09:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Graphics Lab request

Hello, EtienneDolet. Greetings from the Photography workshop. A reply has been made to your request. You may view the reply here.
If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}}

You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Photography reply}} template.

$ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it.$ 14:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Langers' reliability and more

You can not dismiss a source solely because you disagree with its conclusion. His position regarding those events are those of a strategist (he was heading the Research and Analysis Branch of the Office of Strategic Services during WWII). He is therefore mostly interested in the strategies used by Armenian revolutionary groups. Did elements in those groups use those strategies? Obviously YES! Is it the whole story? Of course not, humans are just more complex than using entirely preplanned mechanical strategies.

To have an accurate representation of an event, the four representations of Cognitive functions have to be taken into consideration (Those were first explicitly referenced by Carl Jung, but they existed in a form or another for ages, prior to all those modern know-it-all academics):

Intuition: Abstract perception of the environment.

Sensing: Concrete perception of the environment.

Thinking: Impersonal assessment.

Feeling: Person-centered assessment.

It takes 5 minutes to read the biography of any given author, draw the personality profile (from the above) and from it guess the thesis that person would be defending in any given subject (à priori bias)!

Authors are like individual colors, they represent saturated colors (bias), they’re not the painting which represents the whole masterpiece. Academics can never be neutral, because they have a position to defend, unlike the simpleton who is the only viewing the world like it is, without using any glasses biasing his view.

Ideally each authors have to be identified according to their cognitive functions so that the editor knows that he has to provide coverage for each functions. Thinking is the one which takes most resources, because it is fed by institutions. For this reason people tend to believe (wrongly) it’s the most important.

Are there paintings, music, cultural artifacts which depicts the event, oral stories ? If not… thinking is overrepresented… there should NOT BE any article on the subject ! If an event was worth mentioning… the entirety of human existence should document it, not only institutional artifacts which entirely rely on material resources to ensure their existence and can all be fabricated.

There is nothing new in what I am writing. It’s like guessing the depiction of events by each evangelists in the Christian Bible based on the icons they represents (winged man, winged lion, winged ox/bull, eagle), and the attached bias of each icons (based on the meaning behind each symbol). For anyone who knows at least a little on this, he will predict easily why an event is depicted by one evangelist and not another (the scripts had just to choose one of each element to compose a Bible). Either four representations of an event are presented (like the Bible) or less details, more abstract words (allowing wider interpretation) are used (like the Quran).

I apologize to write this in your talk-page, in personal talk-pages I can not be accused of WP:OR or any similar things for simply presenting the obvious truth (of the idiot). Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 16:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I suggest you talk to the blocking administrator and ask how they determined it was a proxy (I assume they mean an anonymous open proxy but can't be sure). AFAIK, the ultimate question you have is unanswerable except by the provider itself.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1RR violation... again

This and this constitute a violation of the 1RR restriction. I believe this is the third or at least second time in the past two weeks that you have violated the restriction with your edit warring. Please self revert.Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteer Marek The first one is not a revert of your edit. As you can see, I merely moved the material from to lead to the body of the article. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteer Marek Can you clarify which part is a 1RR violation again and how is it that this edit is a revert? Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moving text is also a revert, especially when you do it twice, which is what you did.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, no. A WP:REVERT would be to undo or negate your edit. In other words, it would be to remove your addition. I did not remove it, I merely moved it, and that's not a negation of your addition. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:42, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, your edit summary is ... umm... "misleading". You did not "keep" some of it, you pretty much performed a blind revert. For example you even reverted straight up grammar fixes like the removal of repetition of words. Did you even look at the edits or just hit the revert button? Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:59, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I kept some of the improvements you made. The other stuff needs to be discussed. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, between the 1RR violation and you defending a source which has neo-Nazis as writers... you *want* to self-revert.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Admin consultation

As I just noted in Ottoman history talk, I'm consulting an admin for one of the general policy disagreements we seem to be having. If I'm not presenting your position correctly, I would appreciate your clarification there. Eperoton (talk) 03:06, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, EtienneDolet. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hi Etienne,

I just emailed you regarding your recent Putin article revert. Would like to discuss this edit further with you.

Thanks,

Scott P. (talk) 05:19, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, EtienneDolet. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

again. Scott P. (talk)|

Sorry

Sorry I had to revert your addition to Armenian Genocide recognition. The source says 45 states, while you changed the number to 46. Thanks. Lourdes 17:08, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

al-Masdar

[14] You KNOW al-Masdar is not reliable for anything controversial. So why are you restoring that edit? It looks like you're purposefully trying to pick fights and provoke edit wars. Please stop and self-revert.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:19, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your position was that stand-alone controversial claims made by Al-Masdar would have to be removed. This not a stand-alone claim because it is validated by the fact that the White Helmets suspended them for 3 months for that incident. Étienne Dolet (talk) 02:23, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion re: you

Courtesy note: a talk page edit made by you is being discussed at User_talk:Drmies#Is_there_a_policy, and perhaps elsewhere also given there is an accusation of admin shopping. - Sitush (talk) 08:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I nearly blocked you, but..

.. but I always hesitate in particular to block a user without a previous block log. If it wasn't for that, you'd now be blocked for linking without warning to a horrible video, which I'm not going to link here, see this discussion. Your casual and callous non-apologies don't impress. ("Didn't think that sharing another similar video would cause much grief. Come to think of it, I should of at least warned users before they clicked on it. My bad y'all" "However, as I have mentioned earlier, I should've warned users before they clicked on it even though there's no policy in that regard"). Please think before you link, and then think before you speak. Don't be in a hurry. Bishonen | talk 16:56, 27 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

File:Vartkes Serenkulian.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vartkes Serenkulian.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:32, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on talk page

I asked this question an admin who protected the page. This involves you. My very best wishes (talk) 23:11, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bolshoi Theater

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted

Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Moscow-Bolshoi-Theare-1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Armenian Genocide/GA2

My first read through is done. There are a lot of issues to fix, but you seem to have been the one doing most of the fixing so far. Best wishes in doing so! Jclemens (talk) 07:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jclemens: I'm trying man. Lots of work for just one user. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's kind of a rough, sensitive topic. Can you enlist others to help with it? I'd really like to be able to award the article a legit GA pass, you know? If you can keep working on it steadily, there's no real expiration date on the hold. Jclemens (talk) 23:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jclemens: Sorry, what do you mean by "enlist it"? Étienne Dolet (talk) 02:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow, I failed to write down the middle of my thought. I finished it, inline, in bold above. Jclemens (talk) 05:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have been away from the article for a while, and it looks like you have as well. Are you ready for me to review it again, or do you need more time and/or help? Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 22:15, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jclemens: Let me finalize some things and you can conduct a re-review tomorrow or some time next week. Is that okay? Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, absolutely--I'm in no hurry, I just want to make sure the process is not waiting on me. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 22:24, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vartkes Serenkulian.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vartkes Serenkulian.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Toynbee

You made an incorrect statement, I provided a link for you to read. There is no need for me to do more then that. Your block deletion of sourced text [15] was based upon an error. There is no need for more then just pointing out who Toynbee. I am glad you self reverted.Slatersteven (talk) 17:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Slatersteven: Actually, why don't you check the TP before making the assumption that I made an "incorrect statement"? The fact is, I did not make an incorrect statement and if your response is not impressive, I will revert my self-revert. I only self-reverted out of good faith and not because of any mistake, by the way. Étienne Dolet (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Bakucommercialbank1901.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bakucommercialbank1901.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Turkey#RfC--lead

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Turkey#RfC--lead. Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 11:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:180px-Sabiha gökçen.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:180px-Sabiha gökçen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:DEMYC logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DEMYC logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Orphanageprinkipo.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Orphanageprinkipo.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, EtienneDolet. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your continuing reinstatement of unsourced dubious claims

You keep reinstating these unsourced dubious claims, and then accuse me of disruptive edits while I inserted sourced content. Can you provide any source which supports the following claim?

"The Turkic peoples have influenced and assimilated neighboring peoples also elsewhere. Examples include the Qaratays (a Tatarized former group of the Moksha people), the Besermyans (a partially Tatarized subgroup of the Udmurt people), and the Koibals (a Khakassized former group of the Samoyedic peoples)."

Thanks. Akocsg (talk) 17:04, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

could you help me?

hi.this dude [16] does anything he likes and nobody bans him [17] .94.176.89.105 (talk) 14:34, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AE

The first RfC was formally challenged, by me. It was agreed after a long discussion at ANI that there would be a second RfC. The second RfC was opened by User:Icewhiz and it was closed Talk:Turkey#RfC--lead. If you want to challenge the close you need to contact the closer, or post a formal challenge on ANI as I did. I am restoring this, do not continue to edit war over it. Seraphim System ^(talk) 22:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Operation Olive Branch

Why did you move the page? 87.214.138.158 (talk) 20:32, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish–Turkish conflict

While I agree with you in that the conflict is broader than the groups themselves, the Syrian Kurdish groups PYD and YPG are part of the conflict and should be included in the page. – amateur (talk) 23:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.

[2] Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

[1]

[2]