| Revision as of 05:59, 8 December 2008 editGolbez (talk | contribs)Administrators66,917 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:43, 11 December 2008 edit undoCapasitor (talk | contribs)472 edits →BlockedNext edit → | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| ==Blocked== | ==Blocked== | ||
| I've blocked you for one week for this edit: We do ''not'' abide such comments here. Considering you are well aware that the Armenian/Azeri situation is a stressful topic on Misplaced Pages, I am giving a stronger block than what may be considered usual for a 'first offense', but frankly, such racist comments are never 'first offenses'. --] (]) 05:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC) | I've blocked you for one week for this edit: We do ''not'' abide such comments here. Considering you are well aware that the Armenian/Azeri situation is a stressful topic on Misplaced Pages, I am giving a stronger block than what may be considered usual for a 'first offense', but frankly, such racist comments are never 'first offenses'. --] (]) 05:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :: Ok. If so, you should also call to order those who are trying to deny or question the validity of sources used in articles based on racial or ethnic specification. Those include known to you users Grandmaster and "Brandmeister" (or whatever). It is them who foster the atmosphere of racism and provoke others. In contrast, I think that choice of sources should be based on the inherent intellectual merits of scholarship. Unchallenged scholars coming from Western countries and universities should be used regardless of their alleged ethnic roots, whereas academics coming from Soviet or post-Soviet traditions of nationalist-flavored scholarship (especially if their bias and/or unethical behavior have been exposed and explained) can be excluded. There will be special cases and exclusions from this rule. It also came to my attention that you NEVER challenge pro-Azerbaijani editors. Your impartiality is being questioned and you shall demonstrate your worth of being a relevant mediator in the Armeno-Azerbaijani case. ] (]) 00:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:43, 11 December 2008
reason with reason
Monastery
I reverted the addition of this identical link to multiple vaguely related pages. It really belongs only on the monastery article itself, or perhaps on an article on the people who run the monastery. It certainly doesn't belong on an article about Nagorno-Karabakh, any more than a link on the Lincoln Memorial would be appropriate on the United States article. --Golbez (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
This site is about the monastery in the context of the history of the region if you noticed. Capasitor (talk) 14:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello
If you had read the talk page archives you would find that I am quite familiarised with the subject matter. Thank you at any rate for your concern. - Francis Tyers · 20:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Your vote has been discounted
Hi, just letting you know that I discounted your vote for Rlevse because you do are not eligible to participate in voting. Any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks, — neuro 16:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- You had under 150 mainspace edits before November 1st. Regards, — neuro 16:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Blocked
I've blocked you for one week for this edit: We do not abide such comments here. Considering you are well aware that the Armenian/Azeri situation is a stressful topic on Misplaced Pages, I am giving a stronger block than what may be considered usual for a 'first offense', but frankly, such racist comments are never 'first offenses'. --Golbez (talk) 05:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- Ok. If so, you should also call to order those who are trying to deny or question the validity of sources used in articles based on racial or ethnic specification. Those include known to you users Grandmaster and "Brandmeister" (or whatever). It is them who foster the atmosphere of racism and provoke others. In contrast, I think that choice of sources should be based on the inherent intellectual merits of scholarship. Unchallenged scholars coming from Western countries and universities should be used regardless of their alleged ethnic roots, whereas academics coming from Soviet or post-Soviet traditions of nationalist-flavored scholarship (especially if their bias and/or unethical behavior have been exposed and explained) can be excluded. There will be special cases and exclusions from this rule. It also came to my attention that you NEVER challenge pro-Azerbaijani editors. Your impartiality is being questioned and you shall demonstrate your worth of being a relevant mediator in the Armeno-Azerbaijani case. Capasitor (talk) 00:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)