User talk:Ionidasz

Hello, Ionidasz. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hetoum I.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Ionidasz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 16:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ionidasz. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

May 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Karabakh Khanate has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 20:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, mind to explain why you reverted me on Karabakh Khanate?

Before reverting check editing history and revert yourself. It would also help to read the talkpage, where it is shown that the source does not support what is claimed and that's why it was removed. Ionidasz (talk) 01:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, today I made several mistakes, I reverted my edit. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 01:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have overreacted a little bit, I'm sorry for my rude language. Ionidasz (talk) 01:51, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, it is natural. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 01:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Hi. I share your concerns and, unfortunately, Brand's disruption isn't limited to solely the Karabakh khanate article. My experience with his edits goes back a long time, and I can simply direct you to take a look at all the edit wars he initiated on the Caucasian Albania and Gardman articles (see my comments on their respective talk pages). Asides from this, there's a tendency to deny or minimize as much as possible the traces of Armenians in the Karabakh region, something which is far more symptomatic of what Azerbaijan's government does. Just a few days ago, Brand even removed the translation of the Latin designation of the Apricot (Armenian plum) on the flimsy basis that there were no references, when all he had to do was scroll down to see them, or at the very least see the resemblance between the two terms. I understand your exasperation but if you feel that his edits have reached to the degree where you must report him, then you can follow the simple instructions on the ArbCom page and fill out a complaint.

p.s., I hope the book I sent you helped clarify the details of the history of the region during that point in time. If you want more material, I'd be more than happy to send them to you. Regards.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 15:06, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AA2

Please be aware of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2#Principles before further reverts. Thank you. Brandmeister[t] 07:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pathetic comments by Brandmeister in this sense. All they did was against any of those principals and now he speaks of them.

Yes, part the materials about their organisation is freely available on the net with obvious conspiracy how to act on the issues, articles, deletion, merge, request for comment, even voting for and against Administrators. A whole bunch of biased and conspired pro-azeri editors. And I was thinking about why they had their calles in even Azeri media...obvious recruitment of soldiers. Aregakn (talk) 12:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Brand for the warning. It's to lte though, I'm off..., already paked my bags. :)

Persecution of Muslims

Ionidasz, I am writing about your undo in the "persecution of muslims" entry. I have provided citations to the statements in that subsection. Please don't hesitate to ask me any questions if you are interested. I am planning to expand that subsection as time permits with citations and sources. If you have any concerns you can send me a message or you can work with me on that subsection. Let us try to find a middle ground. All I said was that Muslim people were killed in Anatolia. This did not happen under Ottoman control. This happened during the Greek campaign of Western Anatolia and Russo-Armenian campaign of Eastern Anatolia. If you agree, I will undo your edit. Happy editing. Robert Willie (talk) 01:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I understand how frustrating it should be for you that Turkish authors are tagged as Azeri when they were Turkic authors who influenced all Turkdom. I understand that you may seem to think that they're all nationalists over here. But this probably does not represent reality. Part of the reason why editors might act the way you think they act is that there are off-wiki coordinations. See here the arbitration on Russian Wikipedia. I myself was dragged in an edit warring because I accuratly replaced Azeri with Turkic. Ionidasz (talk) 14:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible. In Englich Wikipedia are off-wiki coorinations considered as Wikipedia:Sockpuppet ? Takabeg (talk) 13:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More likelly meatpuppets, there is a more serious issue here between Azeris and Armenians than Armenians and Turks. Conflicts over here between Turks and Armenians is pretty much limited to the genocide issue, while those of Azeri and Armenians pretty much extend to claiming everything Turkic in the region as Azeri and everything Armenian as Caucasian Albanian or as unspecified. So the meatpuppeting become more problematic when 26 editors are involved and the targets are a wide range of articles. Ionidasz (talk) 22:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, Maphobbyist and GroenLinks are apparent meatpuppets maybe sockpuppets. Takabeg (talk) 07:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. OK. Now I have a question. How do you think about this use's behavior ? Takabeg (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you refering to the removal of the tag? Ionidasz (talk) 18:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeees. Takabeg (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit

Could you please explain this? --Quantum666 (talk) 17:36, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Ionidasz. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^DR goes to Wikimania! 01:23, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]