Medyawatch

Your submission at Articles for creation: Edward Tashji (July 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Edward Tashji may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DanCherek (talk) 15:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Medyawatch! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DanCherek (talk) 15:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Edward Tashji

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Edward Tashji requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/777599. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DanCherek (talk) 15:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

September 2021

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring, as you did at Misak Torlakian. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 13:21, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

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

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

---

Request reason:

Pursuant to: "Where multiple editors engage in edit wars or breach 3RR, administrators should consider all sides, since perceived unfairness can fuel issues." Please provide evidence that all sides in the "Edit warring" have been considered.

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request. Also see WP:NOTTHEM; your unblock request should only address your own actions. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

If you have grievances with how others were treated, you may discuss that once unblocked; it's not relevant to your block. 331dot (talk) 15:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

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

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

---

Request reason:

out of 11 reverts, 5 are mine, 6 are by others. My first addition is not a revert and has provided an entry with a linked reference. The reference is to a website of a history professor linking to a paper written by multiple academicians of various ethnicities. The paper also provided a source to books written by authors of the same ethnicity as the Misak Torlakian. The first revert made by others was a "lol what"? the second was because of "bias partisan source", the 3rd disruption, the 4th (by another party) requesting "extraordinary source (for) extraordinary claims" the 5th stating it's me that "will got (sic) to the talk page" and the 6th revert was done after the block & doesn't count according to wikipedia. So, considering the first unblock request is invalid and I understand edit warring and 3RR as grounds for a block which at least 2 users (incl me) are guilty of but I then (have to ask), do you consider the reverts by other parties as valid?

Timeline below:

curprev 13:35, 5 September 2021‎ Kevo327 talk contribs‎ 5,606 bytes −180‎ Undid revision 1042525298 by Medyawatch (talk) restoring stable edition undo Tags: Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit curprev 12:28, 5 September 2021‎ Medyawatch talk contribs‎ 5,786 bytes +180‎ Undid revision 1042524292 by Kevo327 (talk) Please go to the talk page as you've reverted first w/o a valid explanation or references to the contrary. Or should we go to arbitration as my requests are being ignored. undo Tags: Undo possible vandalism Reverted curprev 12:20, 5 September 2021‎ Kevo327 talk contribs‎ 5,606 bytes −180‎ Undid revision 1042520252 by Medyawatch (talk) per WP:BRD, you are the one who will got to the talk page undo Tags: Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reverted curprev 11:48, 5 September 2021‎ Medyawatch talk contribs‎ 5,786 bytes +180‎ Undid revision 1042515424 by Kevo327 (talk) Reference is provided. Please click on the reference to find just how extraordinary it is; that is it is the History Professor has taken them from Armenian sources. Edit stand, please refer to talk pages. undo Tags: Undo possible vandalism Reverted curprev 11:09, 5 September 2021‎ Kevo327 talk contribs‎ 5,606 bytes −180‎ Undid revision 1042503831 by 176.217.53.111 (talk) go to the talk page and discuss instead of playing with 3rr, reverting out of you accounts also counts towards 3rr, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence undo Tags: Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reverted curprev 09:33, 5 September 2021‎ 176.217.53.111 talk‎ 5,786 bytes +180‎ Undid revision 1042500934 by ZaniGiovanni (talk) 3RR, (3 revert rule) please don't do a 4th and revert and take it to the talk page. Note: reference links were provided (i.e, a Turkish history professors page & an a book written by Armenians) whereas reference links to the contrary have not been provided. undo Tags: Undo possible vandalism Reverted curprev 09:07, 5 September 2021‎ ZaniGiovanni talk contribs‎ 5,606 bytes −180‎ Undid revision 1042498156 by 176.217.53.111 (talk) rv, disruption, restoring stable edit. It's on you to achieve consensus for your changes. That pdf you're adding isn't a reliable source, and nationality of an individual doesn't automatically make them reliable. Please, don't re-revert, and take your concerns to talk page undo Tags: Undo Reverted curprev 08:41, 5 September 2021‎ 176.217.53.111 talk‎ 5,786 bytes +180‎ Undid revision 1042497118 by ZaniGiovanni (talk) Notice the contradictory claim of bias of sources even while coming from an Armenian a Turkish paper? All the while not provided evidence via a reference to the contrary? Edit stands. Take it to the talk page. undo Tags: Undo possible vandalism Reverted curprev 08:31, 5 September 2021‎ ZaniGiovanni talk contribs‎ 5,606 bytes −180‎ Undid revision 1042319308 by Medyawatch (talk) rv, first of all, just because someone is of certain nationality, that doesn't automatically make them reliable lol. Secondly, you aren't even talking about the added source, which is a biased partisan source hence my removal. In case of a disagreement, please take your concerns to the talk page undo Tags: Undo Reverted curprev 10:27, 4 September 2021‎ Medyawatch talk contribs‎ 5,786 bytes +180‎ Undid revision 1042314865 by ZaniGiovanni (talk) As stated by eduard abramian an Armenian from Armenia. Refer to ref. link! undo Tags: Undo possible vandalism Reverted curprev 09:45, 4 September 2021‎ ZaniGiovanni talk contribs‎ 5,606 bytes −180‎ Undid revisions by 176.217.53.111 (talk) rv, lol what? undo Tags: Undo Reverted curprev 22:13, 3 September 2021‎ 176.217.53.111 talk‎ 5,786 bytes 0‎ undo Tag: Reverted curprev 22:02, 3 September 2021‎ 176.217.53.111 talk‎ 5,786 bytes +180‎ Added being a member of Nazi spy group undo Tags: possible vandalism Reverted

Decline reason:

WP:NOTTHEM. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:23, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

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

---

Request reason:

Bias. Refer to attempts in editing timeline above and unblocking. Unfortunately, yet unsurprisingly (as stated by Wikipedia co-founder: "I no longer trust the website I created" @UnHerd); Wikipedia is run by a clique of biased editors

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:22, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• I've revoked TPA.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:53, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Addition the Misak Torlakian page.

I've added "In 1943 he became a member of Nazi Germany's Armenian led reconnaissance-sabotage group AG-114 in WW2, headed by Drastamat Kanayan and is one of the many Abwher groups of which Garegin Nzhdeh was involved." Please consider very carefully before reverting as this addition is a neutral point of view and verifiable; it has 2 sources that include Russian, Armenian and Turkish academics. Thank you and respect Medyawatch (talk) 09:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Edward Tashji

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Edward Tashji requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Bbb23 (talk) 12:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Edward tashji.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Edward tashji.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:45, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Edward Tashji

If you recreate that article again, you risk being blocked. If you wish to create the biography in draft space, you may, but if you again commit WP:COPYVIO, that may also cause you to be blocked. You're on very thin ice, so be very careful.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

What happened to my first contention where I listed the reasons? Why did it magically disappear w/o a response? While revising my draft and uploading it as an article the previous article was deleted by other admins. What is going on? Do the wiki admins gloat in their glorified station from being editors? Edward Tashji is known in the Armenian & Turkish academic communities. He has books published, with one of them referenced for being a primary source. He was the public relations director for Turkish American relations, his life has a web presence, and a wiki page in German. Why do you feel the need to nitpick this account? Is it because the articles I post or edit upset you personally?. Can you direct me on where to complain about admin abuse. Medyawatch (talk) 16:39, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:ANI, but, honestly, it may backfire on you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if it backfires, It's a win win for me; if you get booted off you are kept way from me and if ı get booted off you are still kept away from me. Why haven't you answered the disappearing contention? Medyawatch (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked

I have blocked you indefinitely for persistent disruptive editing, including restoring material at Misak Torlakian twice after expiration of your last block, agenda-driven edits, copyright violations, and battleground mentality. Since you created your account in July, you have made 36 edits, of which 29 were live edits. Of those 29 edits, only 10 were to article space. You have created pages with copyright infringement, and then recreated the same pages, even though the badly-written material wasn't even enough to withstand an WP:A7. After the article was deleted, you recreated it, which was clearly an act of WP:IDHT. You have made it clear that you have your own agenda without regard to Wikipedia policies or norms and that that agenda would continue if you were blocked for only a limited duration.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:11, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

By being blocked indefinitely from editing, you mean banned? if banned why don't you just say it, what's the difference? This account's edits were not disruptive as they were reliably sourced, neutral, academic in nature, and only caused discomfort to a clique of editors - not a disruption. This account didn't restore material after being blocked, it was an addition that was expanded and added another source. This account does not have an agenda either, the 2 editors and yourself have an agenda w/ one of the editors in the clique reaching the 3rr. This account couldn't, due to inexperience, report it with "tags" etc, so freely used on new users by experienced editors, especially when edits are not liked or provides another point of view or narrative unique to theirs. The other editor came and started reverting after the 1st reached the 3rr and placed a complaint claiming this account was also reverting while unlogged to override the 3rr. It was like he came in as if he was tagged in a wresting match. I've listed the reverts made in this accounts dealings with you lot so this account knows who has done what edits in total, so no need to list them here to substantiate your block. You and others fully know well who the innocent party is here. Copyright was innocent too and not intentional, so don't make the LOST time this account has spent here as an agenda or something sinister by casting "aspersions". The "badly-written material" could've been improved upon by this account or others instead of incessant reverting w/o substantiation and the slapping of blocks. This account's experience on wikipedia is something this account wouldn't wish on enemies; a non-stop bashing from the get go. Appalling misuse of power by a clique of editors cum admins and it just strengthens the distrust of wikipedia by the world at large and by the cofounder in his recent interview. There should be a quality management system/policy in place & regular audits, but this won't happen because of the voluntary & free nature of wikipedia. Medyawatch (talk) 07:45, 8 September 2021 (UTC) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Edward tashji.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Edward tashji.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of http://edwardtashji.atspace.com/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 00:30, 9 September 2021 (UTC)