Revision as of 23:26, 14 March 2007

This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for suggestions by Arbitrators and other users and for comment by arbitrators, the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies, Arbitrators will vote at /Proposed decision. Anyone who edits should sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they have confidence in on /Proposed decision.

Motions and requests by the parties

Motion to apply 1RR rule to all Armenia-Azerbaijan related articles

1) There seems to be more editors than the ones currently named as parties that are reverting on the article. Motion to apply 1RR rule to all Armenia-Azerbaijan related articles.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed. Since there's a current injunction for this case, ArbCom would have to rule on adding new parties to the case; this motion would be equivalent of the solution. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 06:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Motion to add more parties to this case

1) I would like to ask arbitrators to allow addition of two more parties to this case, i.e. User:Vartanm and User:Zurbagan. The former is mentioned in many evidence as a participant in edit warring on a number of pages and is included in proposed findings of fact as a one of the warring editors. The latter is also involved in edit warring on Ziya Bunyadov and personal attacks and is a suspected sockpuppet of User:Robert599, who used banned socks before to edit the same page. Grandmaster 07:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed by Grandmaster

I support this proposal. On my section of evidences I presented facts about edit warring by user:Vartanm--Dacy69 13:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Zurbagan is a ban material(as I believe he is indeed Robert), some newbie toying with Misplaced Pages is not an arbitration case, he is a "ban by an admin" material. Arbitrators have better things to do than wasting their time everytime some newbie start toying with Misplaced Pages. As for Vartanm, he is a new member, I don't see why a new member who was not much there when this "conflict" sparked should be dumped in this case. He is protected under "don't bite new members." Bring your issues with him. Fad (ix) 16:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Note: User:Vartanm has been added to the case by Mackensen here. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 04:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Motion to add more parties to this case

1) I would like to ask arbitrators to allow addition of one more party to this case, i.e. User:Davo88. He has suddenly become very active on a number of Azerbaijan-related pages (just like some other questionable editors, e.g., Nagorno-Karabakh War) and Caucasus-related pages (e.g., Orontid_Dynasty, Tigranes the Great) after ArbCom was instituted, mostly doing reverts. --AdilBaguirov 22:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

He only had 3 reverts last week. All of which were done after an anon. IP vandalised a page, and

Why don't you tell us whats the real reason you want to add him to the list? Vartanm 22:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed temporary injunctions

Temporary revert parole

1) Until the conclusion of this case, all parties are restricted to one content revert per article per day, and each content revert must be accompanied by a justification on the relevant talk page.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Armenian Revolutionary Federation and Azerbaijan Democratic Republic still under protection, and much edit warring continues (e.g. ). Dmcdevit·t 03:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Could an arbitrator (or a clerk familiar with the wording, maybe its been recycled) respond to my query here about the enforcement of this injunction? Some of the parties have already made a revert or two (on different pages) without talk page explanation. Picaroon 01:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Continued Edit War

I would like to draw your attention to user:Artaxiad continued edit war while certain pages are pertinent to Arbcom temporary injunction. Please check his contrib. Please see pages Khachkar destruction - removing alternative opinion thus destroying NPOV, Farida Mammadova for pasting irrelevant information from other page Ziya Bunyadov and inserting POV comments like "blooper", etc. Many reverts are supported by user:Fadix. --Dacy69 17:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

I see nothing wrong, if you have issues discuss them I barely did one thing and your reporting it already. Artaxiad 18:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Questions to the parties

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Assume good faith

1) All editors are expected to assume good faith in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Courtesy

1) Misplaced Pages users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their dealings with other users. Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile environment. Personal attacks are not acceptable.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Neutral point of view

1) Neutral point of view as defined on Misplaced Pages contemplates inclusion of all significant perspectives that have been published by a reliable source. While majority perspectives may be favored by more detailed coverage, minority perspectives should also receive sufficient coverage. No perspective is to be presented as the "truth"; all perspectives are to be attributed to their advocates.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Misleading, if there are no reliable sources for alternatives to a formulation, the effect is to present that formulation as fact, in effect, "the truth". Fred Bauder 17:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

This policy is most threatned here, and this is one of the major reasons I have not contributed much in the mainspace of the articles. It is unfortunitly a loss, no one is respecting it or seem to not understand it. Some believe it is a form of balance, others believe it is a pass for a 50/50 coverage. There are hardly any articles involved in this dispute which adhere to NPOV policy. And Armenian editors are also to blame. But particularly Adil and Dacy have absolutly no use of this policy at all. Throwing some obscure source from somewhere and then pushing this fringe position not only as simple position, not only the 50/50, but pushing it as far as 100/0. And many of my attacks directed against members was particularly my innability to enforce this policy. I think most of the edit wars will be prevented if people accept to adhere to it. I believe the Arbitrators should read this recent happenings in the talkpage of this article. Fad (ix) 15:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I also believe they shoud read that article which concerns two parties of the conflict, and while perspective of one party (Armenian) is given, some users tries to remove another perspective. It is ironic that user:Fadix speak about NPOV supporting those who remove it. As for nexus for my edit and NPOV - Urartu page should be studied. Here all answers to continued false accusations by user:Fadix And if Britannica and Columbia encyclopedia and works of prominent scholars in the matter of question can be called obscure sources then I should leave Wiki. NPOV was also completely removed from such pages as Monte Melkonian and Armenian Revolutionary Federation. Solution would be if 2-3 admins will be appointed to monitor and facilitate ensuring NPOV on Armenia-Azerbaijani related pages.--Dacy69 16:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

It is funny how you are enough naive to think that suppositions might fool arbitrators. Newspapers like the The Independent, the European parlement or independent investigators like Steven Sims etc. are not just yet another party, as just like Armenia they have accused Azerbaijan. This is called the majority position. As for your accusations, I don't remember ever questioning Britannica, care to show any diff? Yet, I am waiting you to prove I have edit warred or POV pushed, my evidence section document you having done just that. Fad (ix) 18:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I complained about your false accusations, incivility and insults which are unbearable. You just insult people on talkpages and let other expat editors to do editing and rv. That was my point - on ARF you insulted - Fedayee reverted. Artaxiad reverts, you support him.That is it - I never told about your edit war. As for Britannica - since you accuse me of villifying and putting obscure sources - I just show that, inter alia, among my edits I presented views and referenced from Britannica--Dacy69 21:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Go ask Francis, Golbez or any other administrators involved in articles like PKK, I supported Fedayee, because there was a concesus on the use of the term terrorism and terrorist. It took about 2 years of conflicts and finally a concensus was established. And no, I have never encouraged others to revert war, to the contrary. So, are you actually confirming that I do not edit war? What what does expat refers to, I wonder. Fad (ix) 22:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Verifiability and sourcing

1) Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources. Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor. The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not with those seeking to remove it.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Original research

1) Original research is prohibited. This includes a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position; an argument is permissible only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the specific topic of the article.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Relevant and appropriate. Personal analysis, however insightful, cannot substitute for attribution. Fred Bauder 17:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Article probation

1) Where user conduct issues seem to revolve around a single articles, and where there are a large number of editors involved, and those editors are not disruptive otherwise, it may make more sense to put the article itself on probation rather than individual editors. Administrators are empowered to block or ban editors from editing the article for misconduct like edit warring, incivility, original research, or other disruption relating to the article on probation.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Misplaced Pages is not a battleground

1) Misplaced Pages is not a battleground. Misplaced Pages is not a place to hold grudges, import personal or external conflicts, or nurture hatred or fear. Making personal battles out of Misplaced Pages discussions goes directly against our policies and goals. Misplaced Pages articles are not a forum for the continuation of real world disputes by other means.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Proposed. Artaxiad 21:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Nicely worded. Picaroon 02:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. The point I was trying to make was that it was an all out war, before arbitration committee stopped it. Vartanm 02:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is apolitical

1) Misplaced Pages is apolitical and an organized attempt to reverse that shall never be tolerated

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

proposed. Fad (ix) 04:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

A Wikipedian is a Wikipedian

1) Members should consider eachothers as equaly Wikipedians regardless of faith, ethnicity, social class, belief or any other social construct unless a user is harming Misplaced Pages.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

proposed. Fad (ix) 21:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed. Artaxiad 21:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Proposed findings of fact

Locus of the dispute

1) Misplaced Pages has been disrupted by a serious of editing disputes centered around the political and ethnic constitution of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Sources

1) Sources in English include 1993 UN Security Council Resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan: Seven years of Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Human Rights Watch/Helsinki (1994), ISBN 1-56432-142-8 Online. Articles in the New York Times include "Trying to Tell a Truce From a War", By MICHAEL WINES, May 27, 2001 restricted access, "Armenia and Azerbaijan Remain Stalled in Talks", By KATRIN BENNHOLD, February 12, 2006 restricted access, "Hopeful Signs Appear in Solving a Post-Soviet Impasse", By C. J. CHIVERS, February 2, 2006 restricted access, "Attacks in Caucasus Bring New Tide of Refugees", April 7, 1993 restricted access Front page stories, New York Times. Conflict history: Azerbaijan, conflict history: Armenia, and conflict history: Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan).

Comment by Arbitrators:

Notes Fred Bauder 15:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Irronically, the main problems are not on Nagorno-Karabakh, beside the table Adil added. But the bordering articles as well as articles not related with Azerbaijan. Francis and Golbez have done a good job on the main article. Fad (ix) 18:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Edit warring

1) Numerous parties to this dispute have engaged in edit warring including, but not limited to, AdilBaguirov, Aivazovsky, Artaxiad, Eupator, Grandmaster, Elsanaturk, Azerbaijani, Mardavich, Atabek, Fadix, Dacy69, TigranTheGreat, Vartanm, and ROOB323.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 01:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Please check my edit history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadix (talk • contribs) 16:22, March 11, 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

AdilBaguirov

1) AdilBaguirov (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a participant in the dispute.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed Fred Bauder 17:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Personal attacks by AdilBaguirov

1) AdilBaguirov has made personal attacks.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Proposed. Artaxiad 18:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Opposed. Anything that could constitute a "personal attack" from me pales in comparison to what my accusers, such as user:Artaxiad (aka user:Nareklm), have done against both my persona, other individuals, and Wikipedian community as a whole (see specific evidence about their massive sockpuppetry, meatpuppetry, insults (as far as using the f-word towards me), etc. --AdilBaguirov 21:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Stay on topic please, usually when users get off topic they know there wrong. You have attacked others, see stay on topic. Artaxiad 21:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Also you should stop saying Artaxiad and Nareklm, your not going to get me blocked because of that I changed my username there not socks. Which F word? Artaxiad 21:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Original research by AdilBaguirov

1) AdilBaguiov has engaged in original research

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed Fred Bauder 17:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Opposed. There is no OR -- I have commented on user:Aivazovsky's included maps, where he misrepresented what is clearly written on them (i.e, if dates were about early 1920s, he would suggest they support his theory about certain borders being like that until 1931 ).

As such, I did not introduce a theory, method of solution, or any other original idea; did not define or introduce new terms (neologisms), or provides new definitions of existing terms; did not introduce an argument without citing a reliable source who has made that argument in relation to the topic of the article; and did not introduce an analysis, synthesis, explanation, or interpretation of published facts, opinions, or arguments without attributing that analysis, synthesis, explanation, or interpretation to a reliable source who has published the material in relation to the topic of the article. --AdilBaguirov 21:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The arbitrators have just to check NK article to see another example of original research, where Adil tries to pass the whole Karabakh population as NK and push it on to include it. Fad (ix) 22:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That's your misinterpretation, that has been soundly disproven. You have a long record of trying to deny and supress facts and evidence -- you've done this on the Nakhichevan page (going as far as denying what Armenia's own chroniclers of the time have clearly written), and do this on the Nagorno-Karabakh page (such as with the fully-sourced and verifiable census table). --AdilBaguirov 23:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Personal attacks by Fadix

1) Fadix has made personal attacks.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Proposed and supported by evidence Atabek 19:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Amazingly the same inaccurate statment as Adil, Zuljan NOT Zuljian, there is no "i" he is a Slovak author and it is about time you guys stop using the word "Armenian" to insult scholars. Another evidence you provide is not a harassement it was retreaved from Artaxiad talk page. The arbitrators could read the context as well as the last part of my message as an answer to Artaxiad requesting to figh back. I said and I quote: The answer is not fighting back, but enforce Misplaced Pages guidelines and policies. Those are the best tools against blind nationalism. Araxiad did revert war and did disrupt Misplaced Pages and I was trying to deal with this but thanks to you Dacy and Adil my tutoring FAILED!!! The rest of the harrassements, for the rest I did harass and take all the responsability. Fad (ix) 20:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, Fadix has a long-string of various personal attacks, harassment and insults towards myself and other editors involved, always starting first, and always being asked to cease and desist: , , , --AdilBaguirov 22:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I have confirmed it, and even said that under the same circumstances I will do it again. I wonder why you push something I have admitted and even gave for you evidences by saying that I will do it again. You have disturbed Misplaced Pages, I will lie to save someone from being murdered, I will steal to save someone from murder. Understand? Fad (ix) 23:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The only thing that everyone would understand from your statements is that you are the one who disturbs the Wiki community, not anyone else. Before finger pointing, one should take a good look in the mirror. --AdilBaguirov 23:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Personal attacks by Fedayee

1) Fedayee has made personal attacks.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Could I please get a link by a third party as to where I personal attacked someone? Thanks - Fedayee 18:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose. Artaxiad 21:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Note the username (nickname) "Fedayee" is extremely offensive to all Azerbaijani, Turkish and Kurdish inhabitants of Caucasus and the greater region. Fedayee, originally an Arabic word, has been adopted by a mix of Armenian ASALA terrorists, irregulars, mercenaries from the Syria and Lebanon (where those ASALA terrorists got their training in the 1970s and 1980s)), and army soldiers and officers as nome de guerre (although it was adopted before the Karabakh war, it has become especially widely used since), during which such slaughters of innocent Azerbaijani civilians as the Khojaly massacre (February 25-26, 1992) were committed, where 613 people are just confirmed deaths, with another two hundred listed "missing". All in all, over 20,000 (half of which were civilians) Azerbaijanis and Kurds were killed (plus a small number of Jews), and about 800,000 Azerbaijanis and Kurds were driven out from their currently occupied lands by the "fedayee". To all innocent victims of the aggression and occupation by these "fedayee", the term is as offensive as "Shtandarten Fuhrer SS" or "Storm Trooper" would be for any WWII victim (whether Jewish, Polish, Ukrainian, Belorussian, and other Soviet and others). Everyone has such sensitivities, including Armenians, who too would be unhappy if Azerbaijani or Turkish users would choose certain nicknames -- this is why Misplaced Pages has a policy against using inappropriate user names. Despite repeated hints to user:Fedayee to change his name , he consistently essentially defended his choice, and expressed pride in the actions of his role models. Misplaced Pages is not the place for loud sounding names of some blood-thirsty killers -- if one wants to be a "hero" or tough guy, he should go into the open, a battlefield, and prove his worthiness (as opposed to massacring civilians). --AdilBaguirov 23:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thats from your point of view, Fedayee has nothing to do with ASALA, so stop causing random trouble you find many things offensive, I find the Azeri government offensive and what? let go of it. Artaxiad 23:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Personal attacks by ROOB323

1) ROOB323 has made personal attacks.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Proposed. One such evidence was reported here: --AdilBaguirov 22:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed. Artaxiad 21:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Personal attacks by Eupator

1) Eupator has made personal attacks.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed. Mackensen (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Aivazovsky

1) Aivazovsky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), formerly Clevelander (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is an Armenian participant in the dispute.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Note Fred Bauder 19:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Checkuser Request for User:Zurbagan

1) I have a reason to suspect that this person is a sock of Robert599 (talk · contribs), who used socks MarkHessen (talk · contribs) and Վաչագան (talk · contribs) to create the article about Ziya Bunyadov for character assassination purposes. Zurbagan (talk · contribs) appeared two days after the aforementioned accounts were blocked and immediately started editing the article about Ziya Bunyadov, edit warring and making personal attacks on other users on talk. Check his contribs. I would like to ask for immediate checkuser of this person. Thanks. Grandmaster 06:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Checkuser Tabib

There are other edits and a number of accounts created from the ip that Tabib used and they are from Azerbaijan; however the edits by the other accounts are childish, not concerning the issues Tabib was concerned with. So essentially, no evidence of sockpuppeting by Tabib was found.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Results of checkuser requested by Fadix Fred Bauder 19:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Checkuser Request for User:ROOB323, User:Vartanm, and User:Aivazovsky by User:Atabek

The patterns of some of these users' edits are astonishingly similar. For example, User:Aivazovsky at ] says:

I find it difficult to deal with User:Dacy69, User:Atabek and especially User:AdilBaguirov.

and at about the same day, User:ROOB323 wrote at ]:

It is very difficult to deal with this two users User:Atabek and User:AdilBaguirov

Further User:Aivazovsky writes at ]:

I can discuss issues with Azeri users such as User:Grandmaster and come to eventual compromises

and then comes from User:ROOB323 at ]:

Although there were some conflicts with User:Grandmaster, but eventually we were able to come a compromise

Also, User:Vartanm and User:ROOB323, as it can be clearly seen here ] are engaged in coordinated edit warring at Monte Melkonian

Thanks.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

If you're attempting to prove that User:ROOB323 and I are sockpuppets, then good luck. According to his profile ROOB323 lives in California. I live in Ohio. We most likely have completely different IPs. So we happen to agree on Azeri users, that doesn't prove anything. -- Aivazovsky 01:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

loooooooooooooooool oh my god, WOW!!!!!!!!!! This is the funniest thign I ever heard. WOW Atabek, I really can't control my self laughing, it is just so hilarious that all your other tactics did not work out and you came out with something like this looool. I can't believe it. What can I say, nice one looool go ahead and prove it. ROOB323 06:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Coordinated edit warring? We simply removed the irrelevant sources added by you. None of the sources you provided contained the information that you were trying to add to the article. Three of them didn't even mention Monte Melkonian.Vartanm 17:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh and lets not forget that Atabek knows first hand what a sockpuppet is Tengri. --Vartanm 22:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser Request for User:Batabat

I ask that the administrators investigate User:Batabat. In this user's short tenure on Misplaced Pages, he has defended Adil's behavior of User:Khoikhoi's talk page and he created a user page that only consisted of the following text (also see here for evidence: ):

It should be noted that the Republic of Armenia has never laid claim to Nakhichevan, the autonomous Azerbaijani exclave seperated from the rest of Azerbaijan by Armenia's Syunik province. This was an obvious attempt to provoke a response from Armenian editors. His clear unconstructive attitude towards the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict is a violation of Misplaced Pages:Assume good faith. It has been claimed that Batabat is a sockpuppet of User:AdilBaguirov, though this has yet to be proven. -- Aivazovsky 01:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

User:Batabat wasn't proven to be a sockpuppet of anyone, so it's premature to claim him a sockpuppet of User:AdilBaguirov or anyone else. User:Batabat is blocked based on suspicion (not proof) of sockpuppetry and cannot defend himself in this case, so your accusation looks more like a one-man party.

Regarding User:Batabat's comment which you're trying to use as incrimination, any user has a right for his opinion expressed on his own user page, as long as it reflects the truth and does not violate Wiki policies. And it's not quite visible why what User:Batabat said is a violation, given the fact that majority of ordinary Armenians (including yourself at Qazakh page), lay claim on Azerbaijani lands on just about every Misplaced Pages page. Here is just one example, which should be actually considered as Misplaced Pages:NPOV violation, at ]:

No, we admit that what is now Republic of Armenia, as well as half of Azerbaijan, has been populated by Armeninians since antiquity, whose percentage decreased only due to Turkoman invasions in 16-18th cc (except in Karabakh and some other areas). And much of the area began to become fully Armenian again after the Genocide and influx from Diaspora. And we fully intend to restore the Armenian population to the rest of these ancestral lands, bit by bit.--TigranTheGreat 14:37, 5 February 2007

I think this kind of hate attitude is really counterproductive in balanced approach to editing. Atabek 06:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

What is so racist about that comment? I see nothing wrong. Artaxiad 18:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Batabat is not a sock and has been unblocked. Grandmaster 13:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

So much for user:Aivazovsky accusations above! It shows that Aivazovsky and some other users are ideologically and politically motivated, acting in bad faith, ready to accuse those whom they view as "enemy" of anything to achieve their disruptive aims. It's unbelievable that user Batabat has been blocked for so long, by the way -- on one hand an innocent user, who is not a sock, is blocked for a month, and on the other hand, a multiple-time convicted sock and meatpuppet, harrasser Nareklm (user:Artaxiad) is blocked "indefinitely" and then unblocked. Only shows that the former is just an honest and simple person, who just wants to contribute his knowledge and expertise to Misplaced Pages, whilst the latter is a cunning and shrewd puppeteer, who learned how to abuse the system to his and his possy's benefit. --AdilBaguirov 23:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Checkuser Request for User:Patriot77

He has been vandalizing the Khojaly_Massacre page since yesterday. When he stops anon IP user User:212.49.255.107 continues. Before they arrived User:Javanshir was vandalising the article. History of the page. --Vartanm 18:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Not sure he is relevant to this case Vartan. Artaxiad 18:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

He could be a sockpuppet. Probably not, but his vandalizing articles involving this arbitration. And I reverted his vandalism.

Comment by others:

Grandmaster has revert warred

1) Grandmaster (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has revert warred.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

I would like to add supplementation. Check the reverts based on his edit summary counts. It does not include all the reverts. Fad (ix) 18:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It is another piece of forged evidence by this person. No diffs, no search results, just baseless accusations. Grandmaster 10:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Count them yourself, that section clarify how the data was collected. Press "Ctrl + F" and count them in your edit history, or ask Francis if you want. Then the other condition by excluding the word previously used and so on. Calling evidences forgey or using term such as "by this person" is only affecting your own credibility. Fad (ix) 13:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I have more than 7300 edits, you mean to say that you personally checked them all? And since when the word "person" is an insult? Grandmaster 14:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

another piece of forged evidence by this person is an insult. But don't worry I don't have a sensible heart. The only personal attacks I consider are those for instance when Atabek compare Iranism with NAZIsm and get users infuriated and than report that he is harassed. You indeed have that much total edit, check your edits on the namespace of articles, and you will slice a very significant portion. And no I did not check each, I used the research function and counted each hits. And I can tell you that very few times were you reverting vandalism as per your edit summary, check it. Not to say those reverts are not all, as it is edit summary based. It is clear that you have the highest number of reverts alone, this is abusive given that you are not an admin and are not doing sysoft control. Fad (ix) 14:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Care to provide any proof other than a suggestion to count myself? Grandmaster 17:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You don't expect me to post 508 diff are you? Restrict your hits on your edits on articles namespace. I leave you choose any neutral contributors to rerun the count. Fad (ix) 18:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Proposed. See the evidence I've compiled here. Picaroon 01:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Artaxiad has revert warred

1) Artaxiad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (formerly Nareklm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) has revert warred.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed. See the evidence I've compiled here. Picaroon 22:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Artaxiad has been meatpuppeting

1) Artaxiad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (formerly Nareklm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) has been meatpuppeting.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. See the evidence here. Grandmaster 13:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose. No evidence, that I allegedly wrote it. Artaxiad 21:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

AdilBaguirov has revert warred

1) AdilBaguirov (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has revert warred.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

I will like to add supplementation to support that he did just more than revert warring, his edit wars have closed many articles which were never closed before. See.

Comment by others:

Proposed. See the evidence I've compiled here. Picaroon 22:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Artaxiad blocked

1) Artaxiad has been blocked indefinitely

Comment by Arbitrators:

Note. Kirill Lokshin 13:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Provisionally unblocked, based on promises of good behavior. Kirill Lokshin 09:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Let me note, for anyone unclear about this, that the blocking was an emergency measure related specifically to the attempt at revealing personal information (and, hence, the unblock is due to my being reasonably certain that this particular behavior won't be repeated). The other issues being discussed here will be considered by the Committee in due course; but they do not require any emergency action at this point, given that the matter has already reached arbitration. Kirill Lokshin 18:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Kirill, just see the post by User:Fadix below. Your "reasonable certainty" about this particular behaviour not being repeated has only resulted in this:

• Adil and Tabib were contributing under their real name, the information thosefor is under public domain. And the harassement was appopriate...

Thanks. Atabek 20:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Krill can read you don't have to quote me there. Misplaced Pages remaining apolitical is above every other policies and guidelines here. If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore them. That is what I did and will do it again. Fad (ix) 20:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

I think by saying "blocking indefinitely" and then unblocking the user, who violated perhaps the most fundamental Misplaced Pages rule, you only opened a "can of worms". This shows that it would be sufficient to attack, threaten, harass, stalk, create sockpuppets, etc. for an established user, and then ask for forgiveness (for 3rd time now). Better then not block anyone at all, and have a complete anarchy. And if someone gets a physical threat, obviously none of you, as administrators, will care to take responsibility. Atabek 16:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

This is simply ridiculous, we both know that no one will be physicially threaten, it is not as if Artaxiad provided an information about someone who does not do similar things in real life regardless of the consequences. Two of the users contribute with their real names here and the information is easily available on google, it is public domain, they knew the consequence of their act by registering under their real name. I admit that Artaxiad by providing another name did it wrong, as no user by that name was contributing here so it would be considered as revealing personal information. The Arbcom on the other hand should consider the harm that this would cause to the real person. In this case none. Persian and Armenian users here are not active with such stuff in real life, neither elites in this domain who are known to have very strong published opinions, just like the majority of contributors on Misplaced Pages they do mistakes, and should be shown how to act. This should not be compared with an organized attempt by an originized and financed elitist group to reverse the apolitical nature of Misplaced Pages and this is worst than any misbehaving having been done. I always said that this was not about content dispute. This is worst and the Abrcom should have this in mind. If it does not take position on the principale that Misplaced Pages shall remain apolitical under any circumstances. This case then is worthless, I attacked members because I knew something, my attack was a "devoir du citoyen." Fad (ix) 17:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Fadix is actually guilty of similar offence, i.e. harassment by revealing and distorting personal info. See evidence below:

• "Tabib who has voted, works in a tink tank organization which work with political parties in Azerbaijan, was a real life friend with Adil, who has associated himself with think thank organizations members of the republic of Turkey, like Sedat Laciner, and even got articles published by their journals, among many things denying the Armenian genocide and adhering to Laciner ultra nationalistic views."

• "Look around you and check who are contributing, Tabib is a known leader of some tink tank organization working with Azerbaijan political parties. Adil has a specialisation on media information, particularly the internet. What do you seriously think someone with some form of graduate degree in international relations and who has a specialisation in the transmission of this information will do on the internet." Grandmaster 17:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Public domain, I don't think anyone would have any problems if Zundel would have contributed in Jewish related articles and being treated this way. I have never revealed names of someone who contributed under another alias even though I had informations on them. Adil and Tabib were contributing under their real name, the information thosefor is under public domain. And the harassement was appopriate. Adil is a known contributor to Sedat Laciner extrem right newspaper, in which he denies the Armenian genocide and accuses Armenians of having exterminated 2.5 million people. Adil is a published Zundel, there is no way that he will be treated fairly by any Armenians by full knowledge of knowing how prejudicial this guy is. Tabib had in his site materials denying the Armenian genocide and the rest of the information about him is public domain. I have done nothing wrong there and I will do the same now and ever. I will never permit Misplaced Pages to be controled by organized and financed political groups who use it as their servers. Fad (ix) 18:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Before listening to further attacks and discussion of personality by User:Fadix, which obviously does not contribute in any way to the ArbCom case resolution, I suggest the administrators to review the information on the list of Turkish diplomats and officials murdered by Armenian extremists in the course of 1970 - 1990s, with two diplomats murdered just in Los Angeles . And then I like the administrators and arbitrators to think how dangerous it can get when one user in this conflict is trying to reveal the identity of even unrelated persons, thus attracting more hate attention. I am rather puzzled by this continuous leniency towards User:Artaxiad/User:Nareklm after two sockpuppets, persistent edit warring, personal attacks and now harassment. This is all while, User:Batabat was baselessly accused of being "suspected sockpuppet" after 3rd day of his appearance and blocked permanently. Now there is User:Zurbagan/User:Robert599, who is involved only on 2-3 pages revert warring and POV pushing on Armenian side, yet again let go free. May I see the reason for such obvious double standard? Do Azeris have somehow more default guilt than Armenians? If this kind of attitude persists, I think Azerbaijani users should just leave Misplaced Pages. I am not trying push any POV, but it only seems the brunt of attacks is always directed against Azeris, while they're the ones who have their land occupied, they're the ones who have 800,000 refugees on the ground, they're the ones seeking peace despite all the attacks against them. If Azeri User:AdilBaguirov is accused of attack, despite providing tons of referenced material, it's a big deal that even catches the attention of administrator. If User:Fadix and User:Artaxiad openly coordinate their attacks and insult others, with User:Fadix even trying to justify that he should attack, it's OK for administrators, forgiveable. Why? Please, let us know if we should leave now. Thanks. Atabek 18:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

We eat babies also, we cook them and than eat them. What relevency does the above have? I agree that Robert should be blocked, he has done nothing else than throwing oil in the fire. While I see him as yet another person disturbing Misplaced Pages you see him as yet another "Armenian." And please STOP!!!! MAKING THIS AS AZERI VS ARMENIAN! This is again, about an organized group. Azeri members are more than welcome, who I will never welcome are Adil and Dacy and you his meatpuppet. You guys can not contribute in good faith, as you are not here for that purpouse. Misplaced Pages is not your servers, you guys have enough website for that purpouse. Fad (ix) 18:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I really don't understand Atabek because he is really not being honest and fair, he never admits his use of sock puppets for example one of his, Tengri a confirmed sock. Another thing he's incivility towards me and other editors, . You should also see this, WP:AGF regarding me and the new editor. Artaxiad 20:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Artaxiad/Nareklm/Micara, while sockpuppets of yours were identified and blocked, despite yourself being an aged user by the time those were caught. User:Tengri was confirmed due to using the same IP as myself within first week or two of our appearance. Obviously, it was our initial lack of experience or knowledge of Wiki regulations. Though it was never proven, and can never be proven that Tengri was myself. However, the extent of your personal attacks, insults and outright racist statements on your talk page after the blockage is well documented on the evidence page, the most grotesque among them calling AdilBaguirov, myself, Dacy69 and GrandMaster as "pan-Turkist nerds" and linking to Nazi page. I am delighted to present these and other proofs of attacks here: , , , ,. My suggestion to you, instead of writing back and getting more evidence in return, just wait until arbitrators decide. Atabek 22:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

This level of sophistication is an issue there. You know pretty much well that you guys could "eat" members like Artaxiad like cake, and this is why I have asked such members to step out. It takes a little satisfaction in doing that. You have compared Iranism with NAZIsm, didn't you, and you're offended with being accused of a Pan-Turanist? Artaxiad is probably a teen or a young adult and some members were able to discourage him following the Ararat arev path, all this work on him was wasted when you, Adil and Dacy came and corrupted members including him. Also, sorry to decieve you, but it can be proven that you and Tengri were the same user. IP crossing, not only directional would pretty much demonstrate that(which means user one having using IP of user two, and user two having used the IP of user one). But we don't need to go there as it was clear that you were not being honnest and lacked consistancy. Here let me give an example. You say here and I quote: Khoikhoi, who gave you an assumption that Tengri and myself is the same person. He is my friend, and I did use his computer last week. But it does not mean we are the same person. But you also said: As a result my friend Tengri who used my computer about a week ago, was accused of being myself without any legitimate proof on hand. You can come clean and just admit it, but you had the occasion to come clean and you did not. In fact in all this, neither you, nor Dacy nor Adil have ever recognized having done anything wrong in all this process of edit warring and closure of articles, you guys had even the audacity to accuse me of edit warring, when I am an advocate of harsher consequences for edit warring, at least 72 hours. Fad (ix) 05:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

That comment was made out of frustration due to the admins lack of action with regards to Atabeks remarks against me and Armenians in general. Also Adil, Dacy69, Atabek and Grandmaster have jointly vandalized and locked up Armenian articles that have nothing to do with Azeri issues. But I was unblocked so Its a new start you really try to get users blocked who are of Armenian descent, you should assume good faith. I'm not the only one who has said comments like this while blocked although I have to worry about my conduct, but I'm done here, I'm not going to argue with someone about my block because its point less, you should follow Misplaced Pages guide lines, part of Assume good faith, and also don't bite the new users. As far as I know the admin loskhin has given me a new chance and that is sufficient. Artaxiad 03:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I am in difficulty to see what contribution user:Fadix has made in Wiki except groundless and numerous accusations and continuos insults. In the meantime, he does not want to see contribution of others. At least, mine was has been appreciated by several neutral editors. user:Fadix does not appologize for insults - instead he tries to justify them. He insist that he continues to do what he is doing - destructing the spirit of Misplaced Pages, denies cooperation and rejects to work together towards consensus. He wants assert his POV and jettison of others' (non-Armenian) edits. From one page he travels to another with the same set of accusations and rigid dogmatic denials of the right of Azeri editors to make contributions in Wiki. He puts watershed in Wiki - (you, Azeris, mind your pages, we care of ours) I regret that thus far nothing has been done on that. --Dacy69 21:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I think you are pretty much mistaking yourself as me. I have not fingered Azeri members as Azeri members, as you Adil and Atabek have done against Armenian members. You three have come here with a single purpouse. I admit having slandered the three of you. Neither of you three, and certainly not you nor Adil are here to contribute in good faith. You guys are intelligent people and highly educated, you should really have better things to do than taking Misplaced Pages as hostage. Azeri members are more than welcome, I see them as Wikipedians as much as any other users. But you Atabek and Adil, I don't consider you three as Wikipedians, and you could be Armenians this would not change anything. You three should indefinitly be blocked from here a symbolic decision for those political groups who might decide to do the same. Under no circumstances an organized attempt to revert the apolitical stature of Misplaced Pages should be allowed. As for I having done anything positive. I have actually tutored many Armenian members to become good Wikipedians. Some of whom I have been very harsh with. In my evidence I did not justify members edit wars, misbehavings, all of you have protected eachothers and created this polarised atmosphere of Armenians vs Azeris, you have made any possible contribution between Azeri and Armenian members very difficult next to impossible. I accept the consequences of my acts and will pay the price, but will do it again, again and again. Not to say the way you are corrupting other Azeri members. Fad (ix) 21:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Fadix, this is workshop page, it's not for lengthy discussions. Kirill unblocked Artaxiad, which I think should not have been done given the fact that Artaxiad was already let free once before being caught with sockpuppet, while being a well experienced user with several months of experience to know that sockpuppeting is not good. Most importantly Artaxiad's proven actions undermine the integrity of Misplaced Pages as safe contribution environment, I am sure he will prove this with his actions once more. It's not because of personality (personalities can change with rules) but ideology that drives him, which can never change. Besides that, I don't see reason for your lengthy textual diatribe above on this page, which has no use for admins or arbitrators. I suggest moving your ad hominem to another discussion page or to evidence page and piling it all up there. Maybe someone will care to read it. Atabek 06:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You were caught with a sockpuppet too, Tengri nothing happened. Artaxiad 18:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Mardavich edit wars

1) Mardavich edit wars on article's where he is not a regular contributor, and in many cases has never edited the article he reverted before. This may indicate tag team reverting, reverting after being asked to revert or wikistalking. Examples: .

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

I think this case deserves special attention. He also does the same on other articles (e.g. List of Iranian scientists and scholars), but these are relevent to the Armenia-Azerbaijan dispute so I only posted these. NagornyKarabakhian 19:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Single purpose account, likely sockpuppet of Jidan. Khoikhoi 22:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Tabib revert war

1) 1) Tabib revert warred in a verry abusive way. see.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed, Fad (ix) 17:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed, Artaxiad 04:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Dacy69 edit war

1) Dacy69 edit warred in a verry abusive way. see.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed Fad (ix) 17:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

On my section of evidences I left comments about false accusation and forging of evidences by User:Fadix --Dacy69 00:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, your evidences on my forging of evidence will be taken into consideration. Nothing will justify the fact that the majority of the articles you had touched were closed and that as my evidence shows you and Adil with Atabek organised from outside of Misplaced Pages to come and take articles as hostage. When a user only engage in articles which close, there is no evidence at all that will ever justify that. Fad (ix) 00:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it makes sense to propose separate sections for edit warring of various individuals, because there's a proposal that lists all people who did, and this person did not edit war more than those who propose this fact finding. In fact, Dacy69 was trying to add accurate info, which is attested by User:SilkTork, who mediated the dispute by Dacy69's request, so it is those who repeatedly removed verifiable info are to blame for page protection, i.e. User:Eupator, User:TigranTheGreat, User:Artaxiad, etc. Grandmaster 10:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Actualy it is necessary, Dacy69 and Adil have not only edit warred, it is evident from the evidence page that they have just more than edit warred. Adil has closed many articles which were never closed before, Dacy69 by coordination acted as his meatpuppet. TigranTheGreat and Eupator did not close most articles they have touched. Eupator in particular has a history of editing Armenian editors who push their POV too and opposed editors such as Ararat Arev. Fad (ix) 13:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

No one edit warred as much as those 2. Tigran even got protected Nakhichevan after his revert war with Aivazovsky, in addition to getting all other articles blocked because of his edit wars with different Azerbaijani users. Grandmaster 19:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Aha! You pinpointed something interesting thank you. Yes, Tigran revert warred, and yes both Aivazovsky and Tigran revert warred one against the other. I reverted Armenian users myself. Here is a clear differences between the Armenian users here and the Azeri one. Armenian users have conflicts among themselves, they disagree with eachothers, they revert eachothers. You guys on the other hand, gang, never ever in any conflicts among you, not a single message in the talkpage of the other, but so well coordinated. You change your mind, misteriously the others change their minds. This is actually called meatpuppeting. As for the amount of revert war, we both know that no one has as high of a correlation between his presence and the closure of articles as Adil, Dacy and Atabek. And I have documented that they came here organised to take articles as hostage. This is worst than any misbehaving having been done by any users, and yet you have not ever blamed them. I did blame various Armenian contributors, you have blamed not a single Azeri contributors. Fad (ix) 20:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

If you want to see arguments among Azeri editors you should study Azerbaijani pages related to its political leaders and human rights - just an example. As for coordination - I presented evidences how Armenian editors concerted their efforts in rv. Besides, it is easy to monitor situation from the watchlist. It has nothing to do with meatpuppeting. It is just common interests on certain subjects. (Once when was a novice, I even complained about Artaxiad how he follows me and he told that he has 400 pages in his wathclist) And again - in evidences you presented only one article was blocked after me. The rest - after Armeniana editors, including two after Eupator. So what - you are blaming me why I touched them ? It is my right and justifiable if I put well-refernced info (as for example in Urartu, Armenians and some others. I improved them which was affirmed by neutral parties. Guys who reverted me with no discussion or weak arguments - they should be blamed for closure of those articles. My or Grandmaster or someone else strongness does not depend whether we blame or not our expat editors. --Dacy69 21:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh Pleeeeaazzz. Can't you come with anything better than that? Armenian editors edit because you edit articles related to the Armenians. While you guys have meatpuppeted for articles which had not to do with Azerbaijan but to do with Armenians. As for organisation, there is ample evidence of coordination and organisation in my evidence page. You have yet to address those. As for your claim that only one article was closed after you irrelevent, absolutly irrelevent. Administrators lock articles because of an edit war, when they lock it means there is an edit war, and all of the articles I have cited you engaged in those edit wars. When most articles that you have edited lock, there is no way you can accuse anyone else. One, could be coincidence, two, also, three..., hmmm., 4, 5, 6, 7, etc. Try finding any other users beside Adil, you and Atabek with such a correlation between their presence and the locking of articles. Even Artaxiad does not have such a record. And this is not about watchlists either. Fad (ix) 22:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Atabek edit war

1) Atabek edit warred in a verry abusive way. see.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed Fad (ix) 17:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Artaxiad 18:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

User:TigranTheGreat edit warred and trolled

1) User:TigranTheGreat has been engaged in edit warring and trolling

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. Grandmaster 13:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Artaxiad Harassment and Incivility

1) In addition, to meat- and sockpuppeting already shown, User:Artaxiad (formerly User:Nareklm) was also caught with harassment/stalking and incivility , , , , . The user's contributions to Misplaced Pages are persistently disruptive.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. Atabek 19:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed. --Dacy69 19:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, this user has been engaged in edit warring, sockpuppeting, meatpuppeting, harassment, incivility, deleted Azerbaijan related images (this might be not the complete list of his violations) and it is hard to find anyone who made as many violations as this person. Still he got away with everything, while many people were punished for less than half of what he's done. Grandmaster 20:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed. Additionally, user:Nareklm (user:Artaxiad) threatened revert wars and more of his sockpuppetry to admin Dmcdevit: "if you guys want to play this game i will to, im not stupid i know how to find these things out, and i promise you its not going to be nice rv wars will start, im not threatening but alot of us are becoming inpatient"

He also expresses his intentions to user:Fadix on 13 February: "Hmm you are right i agree, but we should learn how to fight back because that is what we are known for i have a few tactics but i can't list them here, you remember that email?" A few minutes later on the same page he openly states : "we need more hyerer here" (that is, we need more Armenian meatpuppets - Hyerer's. He also constantly harasses me and others, claiming to be government agents, government employees (? which is hardly a bad thing had it been true), affiliated with political parties (which once again is hardly a bad thing had it been true), etc. --AdilBaguirov 21:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I made it clear it wasn't a threat second stop reading my talk page, thats stalking. Artaxiad 21:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I find it interesting how Adil, Grandmaster and Atabek accuse me of stalking when they read my talk page constantly and follow my edits in other peoples talk pages. Artaxiad 21:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Also stop saying random false things, I never said we need more Armenian sock puppets so don't put words in my mouth. Artaxiad 23:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Topic probation

1) All articles relating to Armenia, Azerbaijan, and associated geopolitical disputes are placed under probation. Any uninvolved administrator may, upon good cause shown, ban any user from editing a related page. "Related page" is subject to the administrator's discretion. If, after three months, normality has returned to this topic area, the probation may be suspended.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Proposed, based on a similar remedy from Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming. Mackensen (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Another possibility is establishing a "list" of administrators empowered to ban, to reduce confusion. I think ten would be the maximum. Mackensen (talk) 19:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Support, but disagree with the "list" idea. The remedy Mackensen linked from had no such idea; it is hard to arbitrary pick 10 administrators too. Misplaced Pages:Mentorship however... - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 01:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Mediation Proposal

1) If I may propose, as a person well familiar with the roots of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, I don't think that even with all the body of reviewed evidence, ArbCom may solve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. It has far deeper roots than Misplaced Pages. Banning of the users is not a solution either, unless those users were involved in a serious abuse of Misplaced Pages, such as harassment, libel, threats or massive external meatpuppeting with recruitment purposes. Two, three or more people will get banned, despite being contributors, and some time in future, new users will be arriving unaware of this ArbCom case on either side, and similar problems will resurface again. This is not a solution clearly.

I think the best solution would be appointing a number of independent mediators to deal with a set of troubled pages. These mediators will also cooperate with few admins for keeping the order as well as with the contributors for achieving (and enforcing the achieved) consensus. Obviously each mediator should be familiar with the content of pages. I guess even a mediation committee with 1 or 2 contributors from each side could be created and enforced.

2) Regarding Persian users Azerbaijani and Mardavich, who clearly interfered into the conflict on Armenian side, I propose restricting them altogether from creating or editing Azerbaijani- or Armenian-related pages. This may help to solve the problem as far as their involvement in this ArbCom case is concerned. I welcome short comments. Thanks. Atabek 22:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Banning members is the solution, Armenians or Azeris, whomever was the cause, this was not some content dispute. Armenian Azeri conflict does not justify everything that was done, taking hostage Misplaced Pages can not be justified under any circumstances. Banning is the solution!!! Mediation works when people are honest with themselves and do not think that mediation is a way to provde they are right. None of the mediation submissions were in good faith, it gave a positive result on the NK, but that was AFTER AdilBaguirov took his wikibrake. Fad (ix) 22:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Analysis of evidence

Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis

Karki (Azerbaijan)

Karki (Azerbaijan) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is a town which is part of Azerbaijan, but located within Armenia.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Kalbajar

Kalbajar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Artsvashen

Artsvashen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Military occupation

Military occupation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

General discussion

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others: