User talk:Movaigonel

This is Movaigonel's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Extended-confirmed required

It has come to my attention that you have recently started to edit in articles related to Armenia and Azerbaijan, this editing area is under a community imposed extended-confirmed restriction. Your number of edits is below the threshold for editing in the area, thus you cannot currently edit in articles and content related to Armenia or Azerbaijan, please refrain from doing so, any edits you have done since this restriction was implemented should be reverted, I will take the liberty of reverting wherever it's appropriate. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 13:33, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So why are you asking for my articles on the Caucasus Islamic Army to be deleted? Can this be considered vandalism and forced removal because it is not accommodating to your community? is not it ? So do you have hatred against me because I make articles that don't suit your community? Movaigonel (talk) 13:58, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask how long this will be in effect? AmanAmanAmaTurq (talk) 17:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Battle of Salyan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Salyan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Salyan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

- Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for continued violation of WP:GS/AA past multiple warnings on the page Battle of Salyan, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

As explained at WP:GS/AA and other pages related to this restriction and WP:CTOPS more generally, GS and AE sanctions are broadly construed unless otherwise specified. This means that any content relating to the history of Azerbaijan and Armenia and national identity, including historical military campaigns by Turkey involving rebels and/or victims identified as Armenian, is off limits until you are extended-confirmed with 500 edits on en.wiki. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:49, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I don't agree with your decision, there are 90% of the battles mentioned by Kevo327 which does not include azerbaijan, this rule you put it is only talking about the country Azerbaijan, not Turkey, the Ottoman Empire is the history of Turkey, not Azerbaijan.

Here is the list of battles wanting to be deleted that does not contain Azerbaijan (therefore an abusive deletion request):

these requests are literally abusive, because it has nothing to do with Azerbaijan, which is in contradiction with the present rule.

And again I would understand that if my articles were of poor quality, but I have improved a lot, I don't make bad articles, I understand that I have less than 500 modifications but going back to the actions of the past is not fair. Movaigonel (talk) 17:58, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The presence of your contributions to even one article covered by the GS regime, such as Battle of Salyan, is enough to merit the block: note that I have not taken any administrative action on the actual articles themselves or the AfD, so arguing on the basis of the overall validity of the AfD is a moot point.

I'll note, however, that each of those articles describes confrontations between the Turkish army and Armenian formations, whether the Armenian National Council, fedayi, volunteers, etc, which means they are covered by this regime as well. GS/AA covers all Armenian and all Azerbaijani topics, not just the intersection of the two: while ancient Anatolian and Caucasian history with minimal relevance to the modern national/ethnic identities may be safe (e.g. Hittites), anything that has relevance to the modern national constructs is covered by the sanction, including historical articles as far back as the Urartu or Caucasian Albania. The only page listed above that you may have been in the clear to edit is Capture of Trabzon (1918), and even that one mentions Armenian troops in bold in a footnote. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:07, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But is it my fault if the books I mention in my pages tell of the fact that there were Armenians? I quoted everything

I did not understand about the capture of Trabzon from what you told me. Movaigonel (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If sources covering these topics indicate the involvement of Armenians or Azerbaijanis, or bear on topics relating to those groups' national identity, your responsibility as a non-EC editor is to stay away from the topic, not to present an Armenian-free version of Turkish history. I would recommend staying away from Anatolian history entirely in order to be safest. There is no end to the topics you can edit on Wikipedia while avoiding Armenia and Azerbaijan, even when broadly construed. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:23, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not fair, fine if it's forbidden to talk about the subject you want, what's the point of posting articles on Wikipedia? I would continue after my blockage to make articles on Anatolia, or the history of Anatolia, because it interests me, but otherwise, I find it unfair that a sourced article can be withdrawn on the sole fact that I do not I'm not a verified member, there's all the sources, I can't do more. Movaigonel (talk) 18:28, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm starting to believe that wikipedia is not neutral, end I'm not saying I'm making an assumption, so don't start turning what I said against me, how does "User:AmanAmanAmaTurq", do articles concerning azerbaidjan and armenia and has no problem whereas unlike me, there are indeed articles favoring armenia, maybe the administrators of wikipedia prefer armenia? Movaigonel (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you and Mr. Kevo327, use WP:GS/AA abusively to try to delete my articles, and no longer respond to my arguments, I still remain on my position, I do not see how to make sourced articles, with precise quotations is disturbing for the community, the 500 edit argument I find this unfair, my account dates back at least 11 months, I have written articles on the French wikipedia, you blame yourself for my former actions when it are just logical, in the siege of Aintab, Armenian contributors added General Andranik, while he was not in Cilicia but in the Caucasus, moreover no French sources affirm that Andranik was in Cilicia, still continuing , I practically modified things that were not sourced, and also changed campaignboxes to add my articles, I do not believe that these modifications are disturbing for the Wikipedian community, moreover I simply translate for the international populations of articles in Turkish, Azerbaijani and Turkish history in general, which is not prohibited, I still continue on the argument of the fact that Kevo327 wants to remove all the articles which are not in favor of its origins (again this is not an insult so do not turn what I say against me), he did not make the same request for the user AmanAmanAmaTurq, which we can see in his pseudonym contains words in Armenian insulting Turkish people, this nobody also writes articles but he favors Armenia, and he has no problem, as if by chance, I consider it a bit like discrimination for me, but hey, I'm not insinuating anything yet. I would like to be removed from the 1 week blockage and stop trying to delete my sourced articles, I replied to user Kevo327 by sending my sources for all the pages because he used the argument that my pages are not "worried", he never answered me, proof here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Salyan, have a nice day. Movaigonel (talk) 13:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can read the discussion that established WP:GS/AA here: Special:PermaLink/1131222469#Massive_off-wiki_campaign_aimed_at_disrupting_Wikipedia. Armenia-Azerbaijan is one of the most contentious topics on English Wikipedia, with 3 ARBCOM cases (WP:ARBAA, WP:AA2, WP:AA3) and this additional community sanctions measure convened to attempt to curb disruption. Among other problems, we see a lot of dedicated attempts to manipulate content by coordinated groups of editors cycling through new accounts to avoid oversight, hence the ECP restriction. It's also worth noting that as an administrator in a WP:CTOPs area, I have the authority to unilaterally delete your new article creations created in contravention of existing remedies: if my goal was to nefariously collude with Kevo, you would be blocked indefinitely, and the articles you wrote would already be gone (and to Kevo's credit, bringing the articles to AfD rather than unilaterally blanking them, which they would be allowed to do in this context, means much more community oversight as well).

If you would like to make an unblock request, follow the instructions in the block template at the top of this section, and it will be reviewed by an uninvolved administrator. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why block me now? I can't participate in the debate to respond to Kevo. Movaigonel (talk) 18:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating GS/AA Remedy A, again, on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Salyan, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 2 weeks. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Per GS/AA Remedy A1, which you are expected by this point to have read and understood, non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even within the "Talk:" namespace. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, RMs, and noticeboard discussions. (emphasis mine). _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So you just blocked me for 2 weeks because I'm answering arguments? But ? Is it forbidden to respond to arguments against yourself? if I don't have the right to answer for my end argument the debate is useless?!!! I died laughing Movaigonel (talk) 14:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Or it's written in WP:GS/AA that it is forbidden to participate in the debate?!! 2 WEEKS ?? Movaigonel (talk) 14:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

To reiterate what Rosguill already told you above:

Please read Wikipedia:General sanctions/Armenia and Azerbaijan carefully
In particular, as a non-extended confirmed editor you are not allowed to participate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Salyan
Any repetition of edits that violate WP:CIVIL and WP:BATTLEGROUND such as [1], [2], [3] will likely get you blocked or topic-banned.

Abecedare (talk) 16:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also the discussion at the Administrators' noticeboard in case you wish to respond; you can post a message here and ask it to be copied to WP:AN. But be aware that any further violations of wikipedia's conduct policy is a quick path to escalating sanctions. Abecedare (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know that we could not participate in the debate, end for me it is logical that I have the right to participate in the debate of my own articles, it is for her that 2 weeks whereas what I said in the debate was factual I find it a little abused, but hey Movaigonel (talk) 17:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been repeatedly notified of the existence of Wikipedia:General sanctions/Armenia and Azerbaijan and should have carefully read it the first time, before you were blocked. Had you paid attention to it, you would have known that you are not allowed to participate in these discussions at this time. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but I didn't know I use google translation to talk to you I come from France (verifiable with my ip) I didn't understand that we couldn't participate in the debate, in addition it was only two poor messages that there was nothing insulting or anything else it was just that i was answering (besides my answers weren't misleading), i really need my account i'm doing the articles for the war in western sahara , and suddenly with friends we participate in a project to translate the French + Spanish articles to put them all in English as proof of these articles that I created: Nouakchott raid (1976), Attack on Lebouirate, Battle of Ain Ben Tili (January 1976) I will not do this incident again I promise you.

I would really like to be unblocked to continue my project with my friends. Thank you for your understanding. Movaigonel (talk) 14:22, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Battle of Salyan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Salyan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Salyan (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

- Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 07:17, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Battle of Chapakchur (1916) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Chapakchur (1916) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Chapakchur (1916) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

- Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 07:21, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Kevo327, I was blocked as you know so I can't give you my new sources that I got, so you have a means of communication via email, discord so that I can send you? Movaigonel (talk) 12:10, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Capture of Erzincan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Capture of Erzincan, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capture of Erzincan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Battle of Erzurum (1918) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Erzurum (1918), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Erzurum (1918) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Battle of Karamaryan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Karamaryan, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Karamaryan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for repeated violation of GS/AA after multiple warnings, tendentious nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Halidzor, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking myself, I don't care, but continuing to harm me all the time...[4] your "french" source is written by an Armenian... "K. J. Basmadjian" Who wrote it just before the genocide and before the First World War, in itself it does not prove anything... you and Kevo were crying because I was using "french" sources but it was written by turkish people but you did the same thing. Movaigonel (talk) 14:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Saylan (September 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sionk was:

Artice has already been published in Wikipedia mainspace and deleted following an Articles for Deletion discussion on 22 July 2023.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Battle of Saylan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sionk (talk) 21:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Attack on Karabakh (1920)

Hello, Movaigonel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Attack on Karabakh (1920), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:02, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Attack on Karabakh (1920)

Hello, Movaigonel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Attack on Karabakh".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:49, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Battle of Saylan

Hello, Movaigonel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Saylan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Battle of Saylan

Hello, Movaigonel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Battle of Saylan".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]