Jump to content

User talk:Kevo327

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BaxçeyêReş (talk | contribs) at 09:26, 21 July 2021 (→‎IsmayilovAkif as a sockpuppet of EljanM: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Doug Weller talk 19:46, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Information icon Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Religion in Azerbaijan. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:12, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited September Days, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Army of Islam. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:48, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Information icon Hello, I'm Mosesheron. I noticed that you recently removed content from Church of Caucasian Albania without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mosesheron (talk) 09:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi fellow editor, yes I did remove part of the background section from that article, with the intent of replacing it with a more accurate and clear religious background rather than the one included in the article, I'm afraid my intention didn't come across clear enough. In the future I'll redact it once I add new content. Thank you for your concern.@Mosesheron: - Kevo327 (talk) 09:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point. However, the removal of a sourced content is fairly likely to be contested by any standard. The best way of curing a poorly written content, I think, is clarifying it either according to the existing sources or adding some new if you really want to rewrite it in order to reflect a balanced view. I think that is exactly what you are trying to do. Happy editing! Mosesheron (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian Crosses

A fictional article, Albanian Crosses, has been nominated for deletion. Could you please elaborate here [[1]]? --Addictedtohistory (talk) 09:24, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
You're polite, civil and helpful, even in discussions where we don't agree. Thank you for being a good editor. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 20:35, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CuriousGolden:, thank you for my first barnstar XD. I personally believe that all human beings by nature are prone to disagree, even more so if you consider racial, ethnic, linguistic, religious and other differences, But that should stop us from trying our best to be civil and polite and interested in others. Have a nice day. - Kevo327 (talk) 10:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Center for Middle Eastern Strategic Studies

Please stop unilaterally removing Center for Middle Eastern Strategic Studies references (ORSAM); you'll need some supporting evidence to declare that it is a "biased" source. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:53, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: thank you for contacting me, I may have not made my reasoning clear by calling it biased (for the lack of a better term).

My rationale for removing it is that it was used to add translated names for Syrian cities and villages (the source being in Turkish), and not proper used names. The same source also says that Syrian Turkmen mainly speak Arabic, which weakens the claim of Turkish names. If this source is considered a proper reason to add names to leads, then I'm afraid that all of Wikipedia will one day be a jumble of semi transliterated names. For now, I'll do as you asked and stop editing in that topic area until the neutrality and proper understanding of my edits can be established. - Kevo327 (talk) 16:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kevo327: I agree about commonnames being held in bold but you are removing local languages. I'm afraid that all of Wikipedia will one day be a jumble of semi transliterated names. can you say the same for Karabakh settlements? The same source also says that Syrian Turkmen mainly speak Arabic, which weakens the claim of Turkish names. They're Turkish people, not all of them are Arabized. Plus you remove legit names like Çobanbey, even this name has its own Arabized version called Jawban Bayk. Beshogur (talk) 16:18, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Beshogur: can you say the same for Karabakh settlements? How is this of any relevance here? They're Turkish people, not all of them are Arabized. WP:OR. The only source we currently have says that they mainly speak arabic, if possible please provide sources. Plus you remove legit names like Çobanbey it could be used in the article lead with a good source, but in other articles the Common name is Al-Rai. - Kevo327 (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My objection is primarily to unilaterally removing the source, and removing text stating that those settlements have significant Turkmen populations. I don't object to applications of WP:COMMONNAME, and though there isn't a global consensus on when to include language variants for names, I tend to support limiting of language name variants; i.e., for a given settlement, we should use the official language of that province or nation, or perhaps the language of the majority of residents. I'd support including Turkish names only if we have a reliable source that Turkish is the majority language of the settlement, or has some official standing. Perhaps remove the Turkish name, but retain the Turkmen category that was removed, and mention that the settlement has a signficiant Turkmen population (if I'm reading the translation correctly, the Orsam source is identifying border towns with significant Turkmen populations, though it's not clear if they are the majority demographic). OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ohnoitsjamie: please correct me if I misunderstood, or if you have a better suggestion to what i should do:
  • I shouldn't remove the ORSAM source: but it is used only to cite the Turkish translation of the official name or an unofficial name. Should I keep it only when another source says that there is a Turkmen Majority in the village? And otherwise remove it with the Turkish name?
  • I can remove the Turkish name if it hasn't any (sourced) historic notability or official status and if no source says that the population are mainly Turkophone.
  • If Turkmen population majority is proven, I shouldn't remove the category

Note: the ORSAM source goes all the way to abandoned villages in the Golan heights. - Kevo327 (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Yes; that source is probably OK for some uses. (2) There isn't a hard policy that says we can't have names in other languages, but as I said, I'm on the side of minimizing native names unless they have some official status for that entity, so I won't object to you removing those. (3) If there is a reasonable source that suggests it has a significant Turkmen population, I see no harm in retaining the category. However, I can't say "that settles the matter." Per Syrian_Turkmen#Current_population, it will be difficult to reliably make any sort of population assessments. It might be worthwhile to solicit broader community input. The main takeaway is that I was concerned that you were making mass unilateral changes to article without any sort of clear consensus or policy basis (besides WP:COMMONNAME). I appreciate your willingness to discuss/compromise. I understand this is a contentious topic. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

Additionally, your signature appears to go against WP:SIGAPP, which says to avoid markup that enlarges text.

You are encouraged to change

- [[user:Kevo327|<b style="color:#d90012"><font size="3">K</font></b><b style="color:#000000">evo</b><b style="color:#d90012">3</b><b style="color:#0033a0">2</b><b style="color:#f2a800">7</b>]] ([[User talk:Kevo327|talk]]) : - Kevo327 (talk)

to

- [[user:Kevo327|<b style="color:#d90012">K</b><b style="color:#000000">evo</b><b style="color:#d90012">3</b><b style="color:#0033a0">2</b><b style="color:#f2a800">7</b>]] ([[User talk:Kevo327|talk]]) : - Kevo327 (talk)

—Anomalocaris (talk) 00:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thank you for notifying. - Kevo327 (talk) 12:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Istanbul - Damascus twinning

Hello, can you please send me a source of a claim in edit summary of this yours edit? Ideally an up-to-date list of twin towns of Damascus. The official Instanbul list was last updated in 2020/12 and Damascus is still considered as its twin town. Thank you! FromCzech (talk) 07:09, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FromCzech: I'm afraid that I cannot provide one, my edit being from real life knowledge and not an online source; because I live in Syria. With the start of the Syrian civil war almost all sorts of contact stoped between the Syrian and Turkish Governments, and tensions reached to the degree of military confrontation. Feel free to revert my edit if you must, I don't mind. - Kevo327 (talk) 08:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Kevo327! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 18:56, Tuesday, February 9, 2021 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijani Carpets

I understand your emotional state but if you have an issue with article please post it in talk page rather than deleting large sections and making it unreadable  Agulani (talk) 11:21, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Agulani: my emotional state? Vandalism? The article has been mostly unsourced for 2 years, by WP:BOLD and WP:V that content can be deleted untill they are duely sourced, making WP:ASPERSIONS doesn't justify blindly reverting edits that you are WP:BURDENED to provide sources for. The article is mostly unsourced and some of the sources are non RS sources such as blogs and online shops. You should rather spend your time researching and finding reliable sources for the content I'm removing again rather than wasting both our times by imagining nationalist motives for legit edits. - Kevo327 (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Military Trophy Park

Hi. There is no any sources claiming that the war trophies in tha park were received by "allied Syrian mercenaries". Thus, this edit is firstly WP:OR and secondly is a violation of the WP:CONSENSUS. Looks like POV-pushing. --Interfase (talk) 19:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Interfase: there are no sources that they got the trophies, but as a confirmed combatant group it is common sense that they have. We don't need sources to say the sky is blue. As for the violation against consensus, please show me the consensus you are mentioning. Looks like you WP:Just don't like it. - Kevo327 (talk) 22:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is not common sense that some trophies in the park were captured by some Syrians. So, we need a reliable sourse for that. The parricipation of the Syrians on Azerbaijani side also is reported but not confirmed yet. And please stop edit warring. You POV pushing will not stay on the article unless there is consensus. Interfase (talk) 12:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Interfase: We might as well argue that some of the trophies just appeared there one day and weren't seized by the Azerbaijani army, As we don't have a source that says they got them ALL BY THEMSELVES. The Syrian militants participation is confirmed by several high quality sources. Feel free to open an Rfc on the 2020 war article page to move the participation status from confirmed to "alleged " to conform your beliefs. You saying it isn't confirmed doesn't make it so. Till then I'm reverting YOUR POV pushing. - Kevo327 (talk) 15:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First, The Syrian militants participation is confirmed only on the Armenian side[2], not Azerbaijani. Secondly, you cannot argue that Azerbaijani army did not seize these trophies because there are reliable sources claiming that these trophieses were seized by Azerbaijan[3]. But there is no any source claiming that some of them were seized by myphic Syrian militants. Till there is no consensus on that disputed information I will revert your POV pushing because it is clear violation of WP:CONSENSUS amd WP:EW. --Interfase (talk) 18:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Please note that returning the disputed information without a consensus is a violation of WP:CONSENSUS. In our case the disputed information is the information about "allied Syrians" added by you. Interfase (talk) 18:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Interfase: I know what's wrong now, please kindly read the part about the syrian militants on the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war article and then return and reply to me whether it's still only Armenia that made these statements. The french and syrian presidents also did.. as well as other foreign officials and newspapers. I'll stay here and wait untill you reply. Also, if they are combatants (as we shall see) they have to be added to article as they did have an active combate role, you are giving the Azerbaijani sources WP:UNDUE weight. I wish you would try and see my point from a neutral POV as well, CuriousGolden was good at that and we often got along for it. - Kevo327 (talk) 20:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First, the statements of the french and syrian presidents, the social media users and the incognito person's interview cannot confirm the participation of the mercenaries on Azerbaijani side. Secondly, even if there was some combatants we need reliable source confirming that there are some trophies at the park captured by them. Untill that the statement "seized by allied Syrian mercenaries " is typical WP:OR. And, by the way, I did not give "Azerbaijani sources" yet. Interfase (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Interfase: you still haven't read the war article or the sources. It is the consensus on that article that the Syrian militants participated, they are fully listed with numbers and casualties in the infobox as a full belligerent and not "alleged" (compare with Turkey on the same page) I can write a full list of sources and agencies and intelligence services that have reported the Syrians, but please read them from the article instead of forcing me to write them one by one. If you still aren't convinced we can ask for 3O. - Kevo327 (talk) 20:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Interfase: while we're here -and by the looks of it we'll still be here for a while- we could do with some refreshments, how do like your coffee?20:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know that there is a consensus between some users (not all) on English Wikipedia that there was Syrian merceneries on Azerbaijani side. But it does not confirm that really there was Syrian merceneries. For example in Russian Wikipedia there is a consensus that the involvment of Syrian mercenaries is only allegation and they even are not mentioned on article's infobox. On the other hand the determention of the main article's topic is that this war is "an armed conflict between Azerbaijan, supported by Turkey, and the self-proclaimed Republic of Artsakh together with Armenia, in the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding territories", not between Azerbaijan together with allied Syrian Army. This is a consensus. On the other hand we have enough sources and confirmed videos and photos showing Azerbaijani Army with the captured Armenian war trophies, but there is no any documentaion showing some Syrian millitant with Armenian trophy from Karabakh. So even if some Wikiusers had a consensus about participation of Syrians in the conflict, it is original research to claim that some trophies of the park were captured by them. If you disagree and still want to add Syrians to the article plase ask for the third opinion. Interfase (talk) 14:25, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Interfase: We can't say that there is some consensus, there either is or there isn't, which in this case there is, and the Russian Wikipedia is another project that is independent, decision and policies and blocks and consensuses there don't apply here. The consensus on the english Wikipedia is that they participated, you are free to challenge this on the article's talk page - Kevo327 (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, there is a consensus that the main article's topic is that this war is "an armed conflict between Azerbaijan, supported by Turkey, and the self-proclaimed Republic of Artsakh together with Armenia, in the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding territories", not between Azerbaijan together with allied Syrian Army. Also there is NO ANY CONSENSUS that some trophies of the park was captured by Syrian millitants. Untill there is no any consensus and no any reliable sources claiming that we cannot add this information to the article. Interfase (talk) 15:34, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting and Guiding in Azerbaijan tagging

What were you thinking tagging the above article as WP:A3? Empty is empty with very few exceptions, and that article, even after you inappropriately removed material because of a dead link, was not empty.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, I am not experienced with speedy deletions and thought that was the right tag, could you please explain what was I wrong in and what I should have done instead? - Kevo327 (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First, please read what A3 says (I linked to it above), and tell me what you think was wrong with using that tag.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23, this catched my attention After reading, surely this is where I was wrong. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion. I'm truly sorry I wasted your time. - Kevo327 (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Self revert

Kevo327, you made 2 reverts within 24 hours on 2020 NKR war article. Do you want to self revert to avoid violation of 1RR? Thanks. --Armatura (talk) 00:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Armatura, thank you for notifying, I am fully aware that the article is under 1RR restrictions.
I think you are mistaken as the first one of my edits is a manual deletion, and not a reversion, making my edits one ordinary edit and one reversion. - Kevo327 (talk) 05:21, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Azerbaijani medical tourism

Hello Kevo327. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Azerbaijani medical tourism, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I know this is not going to make me popular, but: Talk:Azerbaijani medical tourism created 30 Jan 2018, nothing happening there since that date. History of this article contains numerous WP:FRINGE claims and possible WP:COPYVIOs. That can be fixed. Who would be the benefactor of the "it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea"? WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP would appear to apply here. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

added Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
removed Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Lider TV

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Lider TV, which you proposed for deletion. The reason is the article is actually still notable. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! BengkelBerkah05 (talk) 06:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BengkelBerkah05, i seem to have reverted before seeing you message here, sorry for that. But as I have written in the revert summary the article doesn't have a anything that shows notability, with first one being a dead self-published source and the second one is a superficial ref about it going bankrupt, none of these make it pass WP:GNG even remotely. I'd rather have you or someone improve it before removing the PROD tag, I would be okay with you removing it if you plan to improve it though. - Kevo327 (talk) 06:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Kevo327: I've found a source about the closure of Lider TV from the Azerbaijani version of the same article: [4]. I will remove your addition of proposed deletion template, also improving the article with the link that I share. BengkelBerkah05 (talk) 06:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
BengkelBerkah05 Good work, thank you, I would have removed it myself but then again it's the same. - Kevo327 (talk) 07:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

(removed) I'm really sorry about that - I accidentally ticked the "block" box on my script when dealing with the sockpuppet investigation concerning you. I've unblocked you and explicitly noted in the block log that this was an incorrect block. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GeneralNotability, no worries mate, accidents happen. It was a really confusing 3-4 minutes for me. This made me remember the time I patrolled recent edits for about 2 hours but forgetting to check off the "watch article" box on twinkle, had my watchlist cluttered for weeks. Have a nice day. - Kevo327 (talk) 23:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:26, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About Deproding

Came to leave you a deprod note from the Mamirli waterfall (Azerbaijan) but saw you noticed already, and I saw you asked the user whom deprodded the article why it was done. I wanted to let you know I attempted to address this issue with him and I walked away thinking he's operating in bad faith. Note he deleted my message off his talk page which is why it is an edit link. Personally, I wouldn't waste your time as it will go nowhere. --Tautomers(T C) 20:06, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of 4 Articles

I am leaving this message to let you know that the articles Qələbin Waterfall, Baku Process, Lycée français de Bakou, and Kanan Yusif-zada, that you tagged for Proposed Deletion were removed by another user, and they failed to leave a note on your talk page about it. They also appear to not have given any reason for doing so. This can be seen in the articles edit history. As you were not informed, I have taken it upon myself to leave this here so you may consider either perusing Articles for Deletion, or improving and tagging the article with Edit Templates as adding a new PROD is not permitted. Kind regards, --Tautomers(T C) 19:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tautomers Thank you for notifying, I have read the deprod policy article and know that reproding is not allowed. I just want to ask your opinion about fast deprodings without explanation, as those 4 articles were deproded 1-2 minutes apart, which shows that no time was spent actually chekcing the article itself. This is stretching my AGF abilities to it's limits. - Kevo327 (talk) 20:37, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See the other deprod note I left for you a few days ago and the link I put in it. This was done by the same editor. I am quite certain this individual operates in bad faith, sadly. --Tautomers(T C)
Tautomers that's really sad especially since he's an experienced user and should know better, should we take this to ANI if he persists? - Kevo327 (talk) 06:47, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't intend to bring this up to ANI unless I emmass a considerable amount of evidence to support bad faith behavior over a long period of time. It's pretty obvious to me, but at the same time in order for something to be done you need a lot of receipts. That and I have doubts anything would be done even if it's agreed to be an issue. He does thankfully produce good articles and content in very good faith for stuff he is interested in and is knowledgeable on, so he's not a wholesale issue. I suspect he sort of hides behind that to justify the bad faith behavior. Basically I am keeping watch, and if it hits a tipping point I'll bring it up somewhere. He seems like a very effective rules lawyer so it needs to be extremely clear. If not I don't mind trailing the messes he leaves. --Tautomers(T C) 07:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan Jewish Media Center

Hi. I wrote about this to the user:Materialscientist. Sincerely, --TarPas (talk) 20:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nizami Ganjavi International Center

both users were blocked for actually being 1 user i.e. sockpuppetry, and were probably paid editing too. - Kevo327 (talk) 14:25, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello! Could you kindly explain why you deleted the details from the article, even if you might search from the website all details, instead of to adding unsourced details? Please check the website of the organization. Also, the article has been created as the format of the other International Organizations. But instead of an edition, and with unclear explanation some parts of the article (MISSION, INTERNATIONAL AWARD LIST(if you check the website, you might see), SPECIAL ADVISORS) were deleted by you. If you are a real editor, you should edit it, not delete it. --JahJacob (talk) 08:05, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JahJacob, Hello there, they were and still are unsourced, you need to source everything in the article with reliable and secondary sources or else it is considered unsourced, and per WP:BURDEN you should have provided sources before reverting me, now I'll be reverting you back because you still didn't add any, and I don't have to search any external websites, have a nice day. - Kevo327 (talk) 08:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

as a personal curiosity, are you related to the center in any way or work there? - Kevo327 (talk) 09:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JahJacob: can you answer? - Kevo327 (talk) 09:59, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Kevo327: Nizami Ganjavi International Center is a cultural, non-profit, non-political organization dedicated to the memory of great Azerbaijani poet, Nizami Ganjavi and to the study and dissemination of his works with a mission to build a dialogue and understanding between cultures and peoples for building functional and inclusive societies. Center is the well-known Global Organization, and also in Azerbaijan it is very popular. By the way I already have added the references for the Award section. Please kindly check it, if you have any edit on it, please let me know. Thank you for your attention.--JahJacob (talk) 10:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Dear @Kevo327: also I would like mention that, all the information have been added due the Azerbaijani version of the page--JahJacob (talk) 10:38, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JahJacob, I see that you refuse to answer my questions, I have seen that you have added some sources to the awards, but the rest of the article is still unsourced, and the Azerbaijani version in on az-wiki which is a seperate project with different rules and standards, en-wiki is a seperate project that doesn't mirror other projects, having said that, you can't say "Due to the Azerbaijani version" to circumvent sourcing, I'll remove the unsourced parts yet again. - Kevo327 (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Kevo327, I have checked your profile, you seem very experienced. But to delete so many symbols even the ones with the references seems very questionable. Also, your edits and tags are not understandable from my side. Knowing that the organization was created in Baku while looking through the history of your edits seems very bias, maybe you know what I mean. I have done very extensive research in many languages and some things you have deleted completely seem questionable, you can just add it is under construction for now, as I will be editing and improving it. Please, do not delete or undo or edit wholly, it really seems bias. Just a piece of friendly advice. All the best.

Adelebahmani, thank you for your advice, I'm grateful for it, while I respect your research, your edits don't meet Wikipedia standards, you might want to read these pages to understand me WP:RS,WP:V. I also want to ask you if you're related to the center in any way. - Kevo327 (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

IsmayilovAkif as a sockpuppet of EljanM

Hi, Kevo! :)

Could you open a sockpuppet investigation into IsmayilovAkif? I am not exactly certain how to do it myself, so I would appreciate such a deed indescribably.

Have a wonderful day/week! Sincerely, BaxçeyêReş (talk) 09:26, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kevo327&oldid=1034694029"