| Revision as of 21:16, 25 July 2013 editGiantSnowman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators601,627 edits →Statement by GiantSnowman: cmt← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:02, 19 April 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,883 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:TheShadowCrow/Archive 3) (bot | ||
| (230 intermediate revisions by 30 users not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == |
==Collage== | ||
| Dear TheShadowCrow | |||
| I made the collage using '''Photoshop''' (Adobe), but if you do not have this program installed, I can also recommend the program '''Paint'''. You need to copy all the people you wish to include from Wikimedia Commons, but remember to include a reference, otherwise the collage will be deleted after you upload it. Assemble all the people in Paint or Photoshop to make a perfect square. Save it on your desktop. Now go to Wikimedia Commons and click UPLOAD IMAGES/FILES. Choose your collage, fill out necessary information and include a reference, but you have to include a reference of every single person (picture). I also recommend to do no more than 40 people otherwise the square might not work out. Also make sure your images are not pixelated. | |||
| ] Please help me. If you don't know what happened, just read the above sections. I didn't want to bother you because of the issues you said you have, but there's no one else with any influence here that I can turn to. Do you see a way out of this mess? --] (]) 16:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ] Please come here when you can. If you need time please just tell me. --] (]) 02:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| : {{tps}} ] says clearly the way out of this mess. You're going about it exactly the wrong way, obviously. To help me to help you - don't make me go digging. 1) Show me exactly ''where'' you reported the other person (use a diff please) 2) Start thinking as per ] and ]...you ''could'' have possibly been unblocked ages ago, but you're being stubborn (]<span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">]</span>]) 10:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :: ] . , so it surprised me when Sandstein did. I didn't think at all that I was doing anything that would merit a block. Here I am trying to stay away from all articles and talks that have to do with BLP, Armenia and AA2, and just when I almost make it, another block gets slapped on for reporting someone who broke the rules (who also wasn't even punished, by the way), which I'm pretty sure isn't part of AA2. I just want to edit again. --] (]) 17:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::: *sigh* I didn't ask where you complained to an admin directly (which is ''not'' a formal filing, and would thus considered to be a discussion - and thus against the topic ban). I asked where on ] did you submitted your formal complaint. This may see like splitting hairs, but it's a vitally important difference. Just like a topic ban against someone posting at ANI doesn't prevent them from responding on that formal noticeboard if they're the subject, I believe that you typically ''may'' report someone who is violating an AE situation ''but only at the appropriate formal noticeboard'' - in this case, AE. Posting at Sandtein's user talkpage is a discussion - not a reporting. (]<span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">]</span>]) 17:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] I didn't submit anything to AE. I thought THAT would be a discussion. And since Sandstein ends up dealing with all AA2 violations I've seen, I decided it would be easier for everyone to just send it to him directly. --] (]) 17:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: *blink* How would filing a formal report at a formal enforcement board be a "discussion"? How in any form of logic is posting at an editor's personal talkpage ever be considered "formal"? Do you want to shake your head a little and re-think the logic you're trying to use? (]<span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">]</span>]) 17:53, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: ] Guess I fucked up. I didn't know there was a difference and that one was ok and one wasn't though. --] (]) 18:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: Ok then we may be getting somewhere on more than one front here. So, you understand that formally requesting enforcement against someone ''may'' be ok, as long as it's appropriately supported by evidence, and posted formally at the correct location. You understand that discussing with an admin or other editor is ''not'' ok at any time. Do you understand that adding the word "Armenia" anywhere ... even if it's a ] is still considered to be editing ''about'' Armenia? Do you understand that at this point, even editing anything within the topic ban in your own userspace would be a realllly bad idea? (]<span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">]</span>]) 18:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::] Yes, I understand. Take all reports to ]. Won't forget that. And topic ban that says Armenia articles includes everything Armenian. I'll stay away from those pages and Admin talk pages. --] (]) 21:08, 4 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ](]) 8:57, 29 November 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration enforcement action appeal by TheShadowCrow == | |||
| == ] == | |||
| <small>''Procedural notes: The rules governing arbitration enforcement appeals are found ]. According to the procedures, a "clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors" is required to overturn an arbitration enforcement action. <p>To help determine any such consensus, involved editors may make brief statements in separate sections but should not edit the section for discussion among uninvolved editors. Editors are normally considered involved if they are in a current dispute with the sanctioning or sanctioned editor, or have taken part in disputes (if any) related to the contested enforcement action. Administrators having taken administrative actions are not normally considered involved for this reason alone (see ]).''</small> | |||
| Hi,<br> | |||
| ; Appealing user : {{userlinks|TheShadowCrow}} – ] (]) 01:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692239519 --> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ; Sanction being appealed : "Violating ] topic ban" | |||
| Hi. We're into the last five days of the ]. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale! | |||
| ; Administrator imposing the sanction : {{admin|Sandstein}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=WiR_list_2&oldid=812113507 --> | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ] ], a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] 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.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 22:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| <div class="afd-notice"> | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ] is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ''']''' 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. | |||
| ; Notification of that administrator : ''The appealing editor is asked to notify the administrator who made the enforcement action of this appeal, and then to replace this text with a ] of that notification. The appeal may not be processed otherwise. If a block is appealed, the editor moving the appeal to this board should make the notification.'' | |||
| 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.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] (]) 22:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ===Statement by TheShadowCrow=== | |||
| As can be seen in the , I wasn't aware that by partaking in a talk page discussion, I was violating the rules of WP:ARBAA2, and I also didn't know that I was only able to report others breaking rules if I go to ANI. | |||
| I'm really sorry for what I did and would like my block to be lifted now. I promise I will remember what I learned about what WP:ARBAA2 falls under. The one month block given to me has already served for over three weeks. I feel I have been patient and would like to be allowed to edit once again. --] (]) 01:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ===Statement by Sandstein=== | |||
| ===Statement by (involved editor 1)=== | |||
| ===Statement by (involved editor 2)=== | |||
| ===Discussion among uninvolved editors about the appeal by TheShadowCrow === | |||
| ===Result of the appeal by TheShadowCrow=== | |||
| :''This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.'' | |||
| <!-- Please notify the appellant in the event of a successful appeal, in addition to logging it on the case page. ] informs users that "If you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful."--> | |||
| <!-- Use {{discussion top}} / {{discussion bottom}} to mark this request as closed.--> | |||
| == Appeal == | |||
| SC, you have to put everything you want to say in your statement above. You can't refer to other parts of your talk page. The appeal would be transferred from here to AE.--] (]) 01:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :I added everything I wanted to. I was just referencing where I learned that, but I had already summarized it. The only other thing I could do is c/p it, but then it'd take up most of the appeal. --] (]) 02:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::Is what I added to your appeal (discussion -> discussion link) what you wanted? If so, I felt it needed to be clarified.--] (]) 02:08, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::Okay, now I took out the word above (there won't be an above when it's at AE). Will it work now?--] (]) 02:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Yeah, thanks. --] (]) 02:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Good. Unfortunately, I have to go off-wiki and won't be able to do this until tomorrow (I don't want to mess it up). It's possible another admin will stop by and do it before I return, but otherwise you'll have to be patient again.--] (]) 02:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Your appeal has been copied to AE, and I've notified Sandstein. If you have anything further you want to say, please say so here on your talk page, and I or someone else will copy it to the appeal.--] (]) 23:24, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| I have granted your appeal and unblocked your account. Please be sure to read my explanation at to make sure that you do not again make edits that violate your topic ban. To reiterate, you may not edit anything related to Armenia or Azerbaijan, and you may not report or comment on alleged violations of such topic bans by others, no matter on which page. If you disagree with these restrictions, you would need to appeal your own topic ban. Regards, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 06:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Disambiguation link notification for July 25 == | |||
| Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to ]. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
| :] (] | ]) | |||
| ::added a link pointing to ] | |||
| :] (] | ]) | |||
| ::added a link pointing to ] | |||
| It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 11:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Topic ban violation == | |||
| Note that is an explicit violation of your topic ban. I am not sure for how long you should be blockek, and I will leave the block to some other admin, but the topic will be speedy closed.--] (]) 18:25, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''1 month''' for violation of your topic ban. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by adding the following text below this notice: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. However, you should read the ] first. </div><!-- Template:uw-block --> ]] 18:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ] ] There was no violation. At all. ] does not cover sports. This is exactly what ], the person who set the block, said. --] (]) 18:43, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :] ] There is ZERO violation of anything. This is complete abuse of power. --] (]) 18:54, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :: Note the quote from Sandstein above: "you may not edit anything related to Armenia or Azerbaijan". If they clarify the quote, they may unblock you as well, I guess.--] (]) 18:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::] ''That'' topic ban expired on the 11th. Two weeks ago. --] (]) 19:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::: Does not sound credible given that Sandstein wrote this on the 23th. Anyway, let them clarify.--] (]) 19:05, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::] Because I got a block that lasted for a month starting on 29 June, but was removed early. The ban, on the other hand, was . --] (]) 19:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{ping|CT Cooper}} and {{ping|Sandstein}}, comments welcome please. ]] 19:00, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::{{tps}} Is everyone aware that CT Cooper is away from Misplaced Pages for an indefinite period of time? So he may not respond to this as swiftly as some may have hoped for. ] ☮ ] 19:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Yes, I was aware - but still does no harm to notify them. ]] 19:06, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I can't really go into too much detail as to why Cooper is away. He has informed me privately and asked that I keep such details confidential, to which I am honouring his request. But the likelihood of him returning any time soon is very slim. ] ☮ ] 19:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I wouldn't count on this block - or your Admin position - being active when Cooper gets here anyway. --] (]) 19:11, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I beg your pardon! I do not recall even stipulating that I am an administrator. What brought you to the conclusion that I was? Or was that comment meant for someone else? ] ☮ ] 19:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::It's aligned to Snowman lol. --] (]) 19:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| To the limited extent that it matters, I agree with the block, if not for the reason provided by the blocker. <p>The covers "all articles, talk pages, and discussions covered under WP:ARBAA2 (meaning Armenia-Azerbaijan and related ethnic conflicts)". Per ], the scope of the topic for which discretionary sanctions are authorized is "all pages related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related ethnic conflicts, broadly interpreted." This means that TheShadowCrow is forbidden from editing anything related to Armenia. Now, they correctly point out that at , the sanctioning administrator did say "Sports men and women and other general sports articles which happen to be based in Armenia, as long as it does not concern any political or cultural controversy, should be okay although you should still exercise caution". By doing so, they limited the scope of the topic ban. The edit cited above did concern a sportsman and appears politically uncontroversial, so it is in my view not a violation of the topic ban. <p>But TheShadowCrow's recent edits contain many edits that do violate the topic ban because they relate to Armenia, but not to sports, e.g. their of ]. On the basis of these edits, the block appears appropriate. That another topic ban by {{u|King of Hearts}} expired on 11 July does not change the fact that the previously existing indefinite topic ban by CT Cooper remains in force, as far as I can tell. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:16, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :] You mean the definition superseded - by you? And how the hell is your logic at all reasonable? Those are two separate issues. I also argue that Russian Armenians in sport related, as it was in my editing, and contains several sports related articles. Where does it say categories fall under this anyway? Russian citizens also don't have anything to do with Armenia and Azerbaijan as countries. --] (]) 19:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :] Do not ignore this, you are assisting someone abuse the Admin system by doing so. --] (]) 19:42, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::I've not changed or superseded the terms of any restriction applying to you; my comment above, in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator, was based on the terms of the ban as specified by CT Cooper. However, you are correct that the ban does not apply to categories, as it was phrased as "all articles, talk pages, and discussions covered under WP:ARBAA2". Accordingly, your category edits did not violate the topic ban. Because all your other (article) edits appear to concern sports topics, I am now of the view that you did not violate your topic ban and that the block should be lifted. However, GiantSnowman is not to blame for the block, because the sports exception was not logged at ], so they couldn't be aware of it. You should ask CT Cooper to log this exception there to avoid future blocks of this sort. For future reference, the topic ban as worded by CT Cooper covers anything that is related to ''either'' Armenia ''or'' Azerbaijan. <p>Also, please stop throwing unfounded allegations of "abuse" around, as this only makes you appear confrontational and unsympathetic. I have no doubt that GiantSnowman acted in good faith on the basis of the information available to them, and I see no grounds on which to criticize their judgment on that basis, except that it might have been advisable to invite you to comment before applying the block. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:51, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::] Does this mean the block gets lifted? --] (]) 19:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::::That's for GiantSnowman to decide. If they do not lift the block, you may appeal it. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 20:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ] Read the above discussion and decide on whether or not you remove the block. I will appeal it if you don't remove it or take to long to decide. It won't look good for you to be shown giving a block for "topic ban" without even knowing anything about it. --] (]) 20:16, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| * Based on the edits of TSC, he has violated not only the ''spirit'' of the topic ban, but also the ''letter'' of it. Fricking ridiculous, and unbelievable. As someone who went to the mat for this editor, I would encourage that this block not be lifted until it formally expires. I'm also surprised that this block is not for ''longer'' than the last, based on the escalating nature of the block process. His threats about someone's admin status "not being here" are red-herrings because he got caught, and are behaviour that should not/cannot be permitted on this project (]<span style="font-family:Forte, cursive, sans-serif;color:black">]</span>]) 20:19, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :*TSC, despite you continually notifying me, insulting me & threatening me - no, I will not remove the block. Please appeal it and let an uninvolved admin decide. ]] 20:27, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ] I would really appreciate it if you'd review this. --] (]) 20:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ==Arbitration enforcement action appeal by TheShadowCrow== | |||
| <small>''Procedural notes: The rules governing arbitration enforcement appeals are found ]. According to the procedures, a "clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors" is required to overturn an arbitration enforcement action. <p>To help determine any such consensus, involved editors may make brief statements in separate sections but should not edit the section for discussion among uninvolved editors. Editors are normally considered involved if they are in a current dispute with the sanctioning or sanctioned editor, or have taken part in disputes (if any) related to the contested enforcement action. Administrators having taken administrative actions are not normally considered involved for this reason alone (see ]).''</small> | |||
| ; Appealing user : {{userlinks|TheShadowCrow}} – ] (]) 20:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ; Sanction being appealed : "violation of topic ban" (unspecified) | |||
| : | |||
| :[http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:TheShadowCrow#Topic_ban_violation Discussion) | |||
| ; Administrator imposing the sanction : {{admin|GiantSnowman}} | |||
| ; Notification of that administrator : ''The appealing editor is asked to notify the administrator who made the enforcement action of this appeal, and then to replace this text with a ] of that notification. The appeal may not be processed otherwise. If a block is appealed, the editor moving the appeal to this board should make the notification.'' | |||
| ===Statement by TheShadowCrow=== | |||
| GiantSnowman did not even specify that ban exactly I violated, so I'll assume its my only one: ]. As can be seen on , another Admin, ], was under the impression . Note that he didn't give the block himself, GiantSnowman jumped in and did that. | |||
| I soon pointed out that, in the words of the Admin who assigned the block, . Ymblanter has yet to give a counter argument, though it seems he has none. | |||
| ], another Admin, had soon showed up to say that . After I replied, Sandstein admitted . | |||
| Although two Admins already saw no reason for the block, GiantSnowman still refuses to lift it. Therefore, I call upon a third party to judge. --] (]) 20:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ===Statement by GiantSnowman=== | |||
| *Firstly, please note ] that expired only two weeks ago - you clearly have not learnt from that and I am half-tempted to request it is extended to indefinite. Secondly, per , I still think ARBAA2 applies to your edits to ]. Your topic ban states "Armenia-Azerbaijan and related ethnic conflicts broadly construed" - well you were editing on a topic related to both Armenia and ethnic/regional divisions, were you not? Finally, it's not that I ''refuse'' to lift your block, it is that I feel it would be more appropriate for a fresh set of eyes to review the situation in full. ]] 21:16, 25 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ===Statement by (involved editor 1)=== | |||
| ===Statement by (involved editor 2)=== | |||
| ===Discussion among uninvolved editors about the appeal by TheShadowCrow === | |||
| ===Result of the appeal by TheShadowCrow=== | |||
| :''This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.'' | |||
| <!-- Please notify the appellant in the event of a successful appeal, in addition to logging it on the case page. ] informs users that "If you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful."--> | |||
| <!-- Use {{discussion top}} / {{discussion bottom}} to mark this request as closed.--> | |||
Latest revision as of 19:02, 19 April 2024
| This is TheShadowCrow's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 14 days  |
Collage
Dear TheShadowCrow
I made the collage using Photoshop (Adobe), but if you do not have this program installed, I can also recommend the program Paint. You need to copy all the people you wish to include from Wikimedia Commons, but remember to include a reference, otherwise the collage will be deleted after you upload it. Assemble all the people in Paint or Photoshop to make a perfect square. Save it on your desktop. Now go to Wikimedia Commons and click UPLOAD IMAGES/FILES. Choose your collage, fill out necessary information and include a reference, but you have to include a reference of every single person (picture). I also recommend to do no more than 40 people otherwise the square might not work out. Also make sure your images are not pixelated.
User:Oliszydlowski(talk) 8:57, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
MfD nomination of User:TheShadowCrow/sandbox/Irina Vaganian
User:TheShadowCrow/sandbox/Irina Vaganian, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:TheShadowCrow/sandbox/Irina Vaganian (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:TheShadowCrow/sandbox/Irina Vaganian 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. Legacypac (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Artur Khachatryan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Artur Khachatryan is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Artur Khachatryan 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.