User talk:Hoeppala

Armenian genocide article[edit]

Hi, I noticed you created a new section, "Germany's possible role in the Tehcir Law". Germany's role is already covered in the "International reaction" section in proportion to coverage in reliable sources and the preponderance of scholarly views. The Armenian genocide article has to be concise, with additional details covered in Germany and the Armenian Genocide. I think your additions would be a better fit for that article. (t · c) buidhe 21:02, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

(t · c) buidhe 01:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021[edit]

Hi, I would like to thank you for your robust contributions to the Ottoman Empire page. However, if you don't mind, I would like to suggest you gather all your relevant thoughts regarding the changes you wish to make to that page and make all the minor edits at once, without filling the history list of the article as you do these days. Thank you!--Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 05:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Khirurg (talk) 05:11, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information. By removing the sources which speak of 1.5 million victims in the Armenian Genocide, you are introducing deliberate factual errors in wikipedia. Khirurg (talk) 05:47, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Khirurg, I am not at all sympathetic to this editor's POV but I don't think that providing a broader range of casualties is vandalism. Most recent sources are not speaking of as many as 1.5 million victims. As noted in the book The Thirty Year Genocide "Recent works, including by Armenian historians, have revised that figure [1 to 1.5 million] substantially downwards." (t · c) buidhe 05:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He is doing much worse than that though. He is removing every single mention of the 1.5 million figure and replacing it with the minimal 600k figure, and also adding loaded language about "Armenian collaboration" with Russia. These are standard denialist tactics. Khirurg (talk) 06:00, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Khirurg (talk) 19:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Shuppiluliuma per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shuppiluliuma. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]