This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Salam,

I need your help and support under Shah Ismael discussion. Hope you will see my message.

Sincerely,

Mirhasanov (talk) 21:23, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Rally in support of political prisoners, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

An article you recently created, 1st Infantry Division (Azerbaijan, 1918), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. ... discospinster _talk 18:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello there! I saw that you moved an article that was created by me to a draftspace, despite me adding the ((Under construction)) template. Well, it is ready now. You can check it out here. I hope that you can review it soon. Good luck! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:05, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

It's fine now that it has sources. ... discospinster _talk 23:10, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at 1st Infantry Division (Azerbaijan, 1918) instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft is either essentially the same as the article with the same name, or a subset of the article with the same name. The draft will be replaced by a redirect from draft space to the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:1st Infantry Division (Azerbaijan, 1918) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:1st Infantry Division (Azerbaijan, 1918), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "((Db-g7))" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Solavirum. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rally in support of political prisoners".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the ((db-afc)), ((db-draft)), or ((db-g13)) code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi. such [1] edits are not appropriate even if you believe you're citing a partisan source. Please read WP:NPOV. GevHev4 (talk) 10:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@GevHev4: please check the discussion in Talk:2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes. Cheers! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 11:15, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

[2] Who added, where? GevHev4 (talk) 18:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @GevHev4:, please check the casualties section, you can find it there. And I was the one to add that info. Cheers! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

No, you're not right. The info you mention was added by me and then moved by you. You used this action to delete the other part of information (about the awarded living servicemen). Please read the text carefully, before taking actions. GevHev4 (talk) 19:11, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@GevHev4:, then please move the info to the causalities section. Also, I didn't removed that part knowingly. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:DONTGETIT is about editing not knowingly. GevHev4 (talk) 19:36, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@GevHev4:, you removed statements by Turkish political leaders and Mike Pompeo here, which is an unreasonable edit. Why is that? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:49, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Your tireless updates and edits on 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani skirmishes‎ are fascinating. Good job on your work. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 18:55, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

On 17 July 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani skirmishes, which you created and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:47, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani skirmishes 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.. GevHev4 (talk) 20:03, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@GevHev4:, being a claimant, you have to get consensus before making any edits on the issue. Not me. Thus, you are the one to engage in an edit war. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Partial block from 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani skirmishes

You have been blocked from editing certain areas of the encyclopedia for a period of one week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~)).

El_C 20:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tovuz. 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) 07:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid your new edits on 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes are dubious. So please discuss and achieve consensus before pushing august events to the article. Best, GevHev4 (talk) 11:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

GevHev4, see the talk page. Also, I'm not obliged to beg you permission for the edits I may or may not publish. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stepanakert pogrom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stepanakert pogrom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GevHev4 (talk) 11:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

[3] [4] Resapp (talk) 07:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello. There is an Arbitration Enforcement request concerning you: [5]. GevHev4 (talk) 10:19, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

The article Return (2018 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable documentary, all citations are about the film being released and shown but not about the actual film. No independent reviews found in a WP:BEFORE search. Tagged since May 2018.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 12:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

It is updated from 100 to 200 https://tass.com/world/1205791 can you update the infobox thnx. Resapp (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

In Armenia's claims drones are written as "shot down" and tanks as "destroyed" but for Azerbaijan claims it says drones are "lost" and tanks are "lost" can you make it same for both? I prefer shot down and destroyed for both thanks. Resapp (talk) 14:15, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Sure. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:25, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you add this to the Azerbaijan statement regarding territory? I've made the code which includes the reference here:

Azerbaijan captured Fuzuli city, Mt. Murovdag and 7 villages (per Azerbaijan)^[1][2]

I also changed the mountain into its proper name with article, Murovdag. Resapp (talk) 16:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Resapp, only Turkish news agencies like A Haber and TRT World have published these information. No confirmation from the ministry of defence. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:45, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hmm you are right we should wait for official announcement. But can you change the mountain name to Murovdag? Its important to know that its this strategic mountain. Resapp (talk) 16:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh and another request, can you remove the word "Purporting" from under 4 images released by Azerbaijan? It is a non allowed word per MOS:ACCUSED. A user added it and did not revert despite warning. Resapp (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe add this somewhere in the article ? https://en.trend.az/scaucasus/armenia/3307046.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Resapp (talk • contribs) 19:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe add Turkey flag under Azerbaijan flag? Resapp (talk) 08:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Neither of the sources you keep using do not support the claim that there are Armenians from Syria fighting in the conflict. The only reference you use is some Azeri news agency. If they do, please use a quotation, but I just don't see it. Read it three times. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Governor Sheng, I've commented on the issue here. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Replied. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Governor Sheng, here are some quotes:

Defense Ministry spokesman Anar Eyvazov said in a statement that some of the dead bodies found among the casualties of the Armenian army were determined to be mercenaries of Armenian origin who came from Syria.

— Anadolu Agency.

Azerbaijan's chief of press services, Col. Vagif Dargahli, said in a statement on Monday that the Armenian Army has enlisted Armenian mercenaries from Syria and other Middle Eastern countries. Basing his remarks on the intelligence information, the colonel stated that using mercenaries enables Armenia to hide the real number of losses. "Since they (the mercenaries) are not officially registered in Armenia, the enemy easily hides these losses," Dargahli expressed.

— Daily Sabah

"There are mercenaries of Armenian origin from Syria and different countries of the Middle East among the losses of the enemy," The Chief of the Press Service, Colonel Vagif Dargahli said, APA reports.

— APA.az

I hope this is enough. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:21, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it seems to me you keep missing the point. The claim itself is not a problem, however, misusing the sources that do not even mention such a claim is wrong. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Governor Sheng, I will edit accordingly. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi there. Per the policy about images in signatures, images are not allowed to be used. Can you please remove the Gadsden flag? --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 20:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Guerillero, sure thing. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Please add next to 85 killed that it is between 27-28 september like this (27-28 September) Resapp (talk) 10:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Resapp, I don't think that really matters. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 10:24, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe add this under alleged combatants in the infobox? Ref:[6] Resapp (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Resapp, will do. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 11:50, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, it looks like the flag is wrong tho heres the right code: PKK Resapp (talk) 11:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, you should add Iran and Russia under a bold title saying Supported by: Since they are not alleged to have troops on ground but are alleged to be providing equipment. Resapp (talk) 11:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe add this to the article? :) [7] Resapp (talk) 12:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Resapp, not 100% sure if "supporting the territorial integrity" means supporting Azerbaijan for the clashes. Please, apply to the article's talk page. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Although the image is really small, that's fine. But why did you revert my edit (sourced to the BBC) which updated the number of Armenian civilian dead [8]? I would ask that you cancel your revert. Thanks in advance! EkoGraf (talk) 13:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Saw your edit, thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 13:58, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

EkoGraf, cheers! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 13:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

There is clear consensus for inclusion of the 3 countries, 5 users support vs 1 opposed at the talk page. Resapp (talk) 07:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Resapp, I have added this made two times, and it was then removed. Clearly, there is no unanimous support for the inclusion of this map. Please, refer to a different editor on this issue. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 08:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

The editors removing it are sockpuppets there are at least 7 Armenian socks right now. I suspect there are up to 12. Please ignore the socks. Resapp (talk) 08:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add the two leaders statements in the "political figures" section. Armenians have added leaders' statements only critical of Azerbaijan to section and it is POV. These should balance it. Resapp (talk) 09:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

• Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan called Armenia the 'biggest threat to regional peace' and lamented the international community's "double standards" by not condemning Armenian aggression.^[3]
• Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan said that he supported Azerbaijan right to self defense.^[4] Resapp (talk) 09:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

A user has removed the statement which called for Armenia to leave the occupied territories. [9] Resapp (talk) 09:29, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

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.

Cabayi (talk) 20:38, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Your recent edit is wrong. It says: "... from May 12, 1994, when the ceasefire signed until today, 398 Azerbaijani servicemen". Not this conflict. Beshogur (talk) 13:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Beshogur, yes, I saw it and immediately reverted. But still thanks for the heads up. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 13:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Bunu "other sources" per Armenia bölümüne ekle. ^[5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by BakhtiyarRamazan (talk • contribs) 10:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Bild'in WP:RSP'de güvenilir kaynak olmadığı belirtiliyor. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 11:18, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Be good. Johncdraper (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Your removal of the description text relevant to the picture displayed was not justified sufficiently, you merely described it as "spamming". Please do not remove relevant information that increases the readability for readers regarding the events of the conflict on the article. AntonSamuel (talk) 13:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. AntonSamuel (talk) 16:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

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, as you did at Imamzadeh (Ganja), you may be blocked from editing. The claim by the Azeri government regarding damage to the mosque has not been confirmed, yet you readded the sentence on the page that presents it as a confirmed fact. You've participated in the discussion on the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict talk page regarding the mosque before - the pro-Azeri source has not been re-reported and the event has not been confirmed by third-party sources yet. If you find neutral and reliable sources that report that the mosque was hit - that is another matter. AntonSamuel (talk) 15:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Why remove the info as a whole? You can ce that text to imply that it is a claim by the local authorities; but you insist on removing such a vital information. And also, don't try to act liek an admin for Pete's sake, you're still a contributor with disputed edits that have been reverted before and spamming warnings to someone's talk page ain't going to help anyone. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 01:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I believe that I've followed the standard procedure for dealing with disruptive editing on Wikipedia, and I'm prepared to defend my reverts/edits - I believe they were quite justified. Even though there has been a debate on the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict talk page regarding the mosque that you've taken part in, and users have been asked to provide neutral and reliable sources to confirm that the mosque was indeed targeted, this has still not been provided. I've rewritten the passage now on the page instead of removing it completely to reflect that it's a government claim and removed it from the lede as such material is inappropriate there per WP:LEDE. If you can find sources that substantiate the claim, please provide them, otherwise I think the removal of the claim is appropriate per WP:NPOV. I would also ask you to maintain civility, if you have a problem with my edits and actions - go ahead and criticize them, show good faith and focus less on me as an editor please. AntonSamuel (talk) 06:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I was wondering if there any way I can contact you outside of Wikipedia? (e.g. discord (preferred), mail and etc.) — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 14:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@CuriousGolden:, hi, I've emailed you my Facebook account. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I would advise to have a skype conversation, please add me @CuriousGolden: @Solavirum:

Hello Solivarium, could you care explaining why you errased and dont moved the edit made here. Im really getting tired of your POV editing and Bias. You have been warned before and blocked but this is really insultant. Your edits are simply IDONTLIKEIT.Mr.User200 (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, okay. First of all, WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH and WP:CIVIL. Secondly, I've literally explained my edit here. As you saw in the "Civilian causalities section", we are not detailing info on civilian causalities. Seriously, putting "a mother and his son with a disability" in the forefront is to victimize a party. There are kids dying from the both sides, but foreshadowing Armenian civilian deaths are more important? We've discussed this before in the talk page. Also, if I was biased, and edited accordingly to the WP:IDONTLIKEIT, I wouldn't have added statements from the Armenian side too. Before accusing someone of being something, and using a mentoring tone on someone, get your stuff together and reconsider it before publishing. This is not the first time you're doing this, and it is getting ridiculous. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 08:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes but you reverted instead of moving to civilians losses. Its obvious you want to promote a point of view and you use some guidelines to play your game.I will only tell you that there are sanctions and try to keep your personal beliefs out of this and other articles.Mr.User200 (talk) 12:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

You also claimed that the sources provided are not official ones. But this is not true since both are Armenian official media and have been used to report other events regarding civilian casualties on the article content and have not been errased by you or other editor. So what are you talking about??. You simply errase what you dont want or like and use stock argumemts at your will.Mr.User200 (talk) 12:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

"Its obvious you want to promote a point of view and you use some guidelines to play your game". This line is enough for me to understand that you are not interested with leveled and well-formed discussion, and still continue to accuse other editors of being biased or POV-pushing, and violate guidelines. I'm still adding them though, if you haven't read them yet, WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH, and WP:CIVIL. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

P.S. you've added that there where REPORTS from the media, that's not an official statement. You can check report.az and APA.az for reports by 'Azerbaijani official media', which I haven't been adding for the same exact reason. "You simply errase what you dont want or like and use stock argumemts at your will", you still won't end your stagy and accusative rhetoric. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, this will be my last response to you, as you won't end your uncivil remarks. If you have a problem, check the administrator's noticeboard, where I should have reported you in the first place. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Armenpress is the main state media of Armenia so all you speak about Official sources, is once again, not true.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, do not distort facts here. Check every single Armenpress reference I've added to the article, you can see that EVERY SINGLE REPORT cites a governmental body's official statement, whether it is the President of Artsakh, the Armenian MoD, or any other. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:09, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Same goes for APA, Report, and Trend from the Azerbaijani media. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:09, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Solavirum and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: ((WPMILHIST Announcements)).
• Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
• If you would like to receive the project's monthly newsletter, The Bugle, please sign up here.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:43, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Sincerely, --Alex662607004 (talk) 21:11, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article International reactions to the July 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International reactions to the July 2020 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Vici Vidi (talk) 06:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, I would kindly ask that you please undue your edit here [10] and join the discussion at the talk page here [11]. Your edit undid my compromise proposal, taking into account Staberinde's insistence that the figure should not be included as an additional Armenian claim, plus in a separate section, for which I myself had also already voiced reservations earlier in the discussion. A source has also been added for the "documented" figure as "per Armenia". Not seeing how its redundant if its a totally different figure from the one "claimed". As can be seen, after I made the compromise proposal, Staberinde made no more attempts at removing the info. EkoGraf (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@EkoGraf:, ah, here we go again. Staberinde did not join the discussion in the talk page so stuff that happened between you two was not concluded with a discussion. "Staberinde made no more attempts at removing the info" is just your own assumption. As for why I removed the "documented" part, I have never ever seen such style of infobox in my three years of active work on Wikipedia. Try to reach to a consensus, then work it out there. For now, I will remove the "documented" thing from the infobox, because it is redundant. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh shoot, just read the edited variant. Yeah, I will join the discussion. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:52, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Said everything I had to say at the article's talk page. I think I'm done now. EkoGraf (talk) 19:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Please check the Ceasefire section and ceasefire violations timeline for accuracy on this page. Johncdraper (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I would like to know more about "see the attack on Nakhchivan which could also trigger Turkey's 100 year old agreement over the region's defense". Would you oblige? Johncdraper (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Johncdraper:, the status of Nakhchivan was determined by the Moscow Treaty of 16 March 1921. With this treaty, it was decided that Nakhchivan (under the protection of Azerbaijan) should be an autonomous region. In addition, the Soviet Union and Turkey, the countries have been the guarantors of Nakhchivan. Which means that Turkey has legitimate right to retaliate. In 1992, Azerbaijani leadership were divided between Azerbaijan proper (Abulfaz Elchibey) and Nakhchivan (Heydar Aliyev; who would later overthrow Elchibey). The Armenian forces attacked Nakhchivan, which caused a political crisis between Armenia and Turkey. At the end, with the meditation of US, a ceasefire treaty was signed between Nakhchivan and Armenia. So, yeah, that is what I was talking about. Here are some sources: 1, 2; and a news article by Yeni Şafak. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Surgical strike, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Artsakh.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

What's the situation re the draft? Johncdraper (talk) 07:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Johncdraper, I'm thinking to merge Hadrut, Jabrayil, and Fuzuli into one. Because the Azerbaijani MoD generally refers to that front as the "Fuzuli-Hadrut-Jabrayil direction of the front", while the Armenian MoD refers to it as the "Southern front". --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Johncdraper, boom! It's done. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I have been kind with you, from day one, but you keep answering me with antagonistic comments (lying). I wasn't aware that Tolish media was an Armenian owned site, I rely on google translate to render foreign words to search for, it does not cross my mind that hits I get on google in foreign languages that I don't comprehend have to be doublechecked from Facebook accounts from that languages, when most of the time, I have manually copy past the sequences to get them translated on Facebook. Besides, how can you claim proper burial, when there wasn't any proper ceasefire to recover bodies? And I wasn't only talking about families being left in the dark, but for the conscripts and the population who have no information on the cost of the war. Hemşinli çocuk 19:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ermenermin, there are bodies within the territory controlled by Azerbaijan. Either killed by artillery, landmines, or the territory was captured after the soldier went KIA. It is very public at this point that the government isn't keeping the people in the dark, as the Tolish Media shows. There have been multiple discussion threads about the usage of so-called third-party sources like Tolish Media that were traced back to Yerevan. I don't know what you think, but it is not okay to bash these stuff like legitimate sources. People are dying tragically, mothers are weeping. I saw those things, I can't just let people making Wikipedia a victim of the cold-blooded informational warfare. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that you're taking this way too personally, besides I only read what interests me, if Tolish media was mentioned in those long discussions that I have not read, I then missed that. Hemşinli çocuk 19:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey- I have just added a 20th century map on the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict page. That map can be clipped to focus in on specific contested areas like another map I uploaded was here: [12]. Let me know if you need a better map or a map of a different area to "bring to life" the geography on the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict page. Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Geographyinitiative, thank you for your contributions! I will try to find better use of that map if possible. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:2020 Ganja bombings.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Solivarium, sorry for my edit on 2020 Nagorno Karabakh regarding the Human Rghts page, I compared pre - cur rversions and restored without reading your edit summary. Also on the Azerbaijani Coronel killed dont read your edit summary since the page was moved. My apologies.Mr.User200 (talk) 15:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, alrighty. Things happen sometimes. Anyways, so, about the colonel. Yes, he got KIA. But not during the operations along the Aras River. There is an offensive to Laçın from Qubadlı, along the southern Armenia–Azerbaijan border. He got killed in during those operations, not Aras. The article needs more splitting, and once Aras is done, I will head over to split the Qubadli–Lachin too. Cheers! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Solavirum:. As per John's suggestion, here is the edit that I am suggesting this:
On 4 October 2020, Arayik Harutyunyan's, the de facto Republic of Artsakh's president, issued a warning to the Azerbaijani army and civilians for the latter to leave Ganja, claiming that military facilities permanently located there have been targeting civilians in Stepanakert using Polonez and Smerch missiles (sources 1,2,3,4,5)
I would like to add this in the Background section, if not in the intro section of the Ganja article, and in the timeline of the Conflict article. You have said it has no place in the Background section here without explaining why.
The question of the warning is very important, as I'm sure you know there is a controversy about it in relation to the Khojaly massacres

Could we also agree to talk, discuss and engage with each other's arguments/sources as usual on Wikipedia before you go and revert any of my edits? I'm open to discussing anything. Also, if there is a discussion about a certain topic, please don't unilaterally make edits before agreement is reached. Thank you--Sataralynd (talk) 02:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd actually I have explained it twice. I've removed it from the background and added to the first attack. Because his "warning" came right after New Bazaar was bombed in Ganja. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 10:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum:Understand. Why it cannot be included in the background? There were as per the article 4 attacks in total. Why is it just because it happened after the first attack in cannot be in the background section? Would you also care to address the rest of my comment?--Sataralynd (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd because the background section covers the stuff happened before the attacks, not after it. Also, I don't think it is too major of a thing to include in the lead, as you see, the lead section is concise. Plus, we're already trying to reduce the timeline section of the main article (but it seems like nobody is doing the first move). --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

First and foremost, I have added the edits back in. Please don't remove before this discussion is concluded. I have also added a sentence in the lead, again given the importance of the topic. Anything to discuss, we first do it here before you unilaterally change the page.

Who says the background sentence should only include information that precedes the start of the attack? Any sources or policies? And even if we suppose so, as I said before, the warning preceded the 2nd, 3rd and 4th attacks, so your (non)argument doesn't apply. Please refrain from vague statements like "too major of a thing". As I told you before, there is a huge controversy about the topic of warnings in the case of Khojaly (read about it in the Wikipedia article of Khojaly massacres if you please), and it is key information. Thanks for reminding me to include it in the lead as well.

I reiterate, no change in the article on the warnings topic before we discuss here. I am happy to take this to a larger forum if you don't comply. Thank you--Sataralynd (talk) 16:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

It preceding the other attacks has no value here. It literally happened during the given period of attacks. That edit is basically "look, Armenia warned them". No, shooting someone with a gun and saying that "you should have run" isn't a warning. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 02:10, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

What you mean by "It preceding the other attacks has no value here. It literally happened during the given period of attacks." is beyond me. The warning needs to be mentioned if not in the Background Section, then in the lead. Suggest where, or I will take this to a larger forum--Sataralynd (talk) 23:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Solavirum, we need to get organized to edit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_conflict as most of information there is bias and not including Azerbaijani side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirhasanov (talk • contribs) 18:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Mirhasanov, aleykum salam. I don't know what do you mean by "organized", but you can always ask for edits in the article's talk page here. But I'd like to remind you that providing reliable sources and factual arguments are necessary. Have a good day. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum Sure, therefore I need your help to get organized. I tried edit things several times in Wikipedia. Tried follow all rules but somehow admins act bias and protect only those who wrote in Wikipedia for a long time. I saw your discussion with CuriousGolden. Can we have a skype meeting?

I split the article per WP:TOOBIG which states that articles which are over 100kb of readable prose (which this article is) virtually certainly need to be split. The content is duplicated in another article, and if you want to re-add a summary you should feel free to. Otherwise, please note that reverting a change completely simply because you are unaware of it being split, or simply because you put effort into content that no longer has a place in the article is not appropriate. Sincerely, TheEpicGhosty (talk) 22:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

TheEpicGhosty, I understand that. But the timeline section needed to get trimmed. Not fully removed. There, it contains vital information. If you would provide assistance, we can try to bring back the section with much shorter context and a better running prose. My sandbox is free for that. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 00:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

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. Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Lul what? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 05:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I wanted to start a thread about @Solavirum: so I'll add my comments here @EtienneDolet:

To avoid making this a very long thread, I would highlight the following episodes by the user Solavirum, which to me are a clear violation of WP:5P2 and WP:5P4

• Reverting an edit here 7 days after it has been agreed by a consensus where he took part, but obviously didn't agree with. There was an earlier discussion here as well that he took part in and didn't agree with the change. Things change we understand, but Solavirum should have started a talk before reverting such a contentious topic as per WP:BRD instead of unilaterally reverting a change
• Not engaging in discussion (see no answer after 26th of October) and reverting an edit on the 28th when discussion is still open. When I pointed out this, he added his answer which still didn't address any of my discussion points on 29th of Oct
• Complete breach of WP:CIVILITY with comments such as "don't spam everywhere" or "images from kindergarten" (see this thread). Or "if footage ain't enough for ya, nothing is" in this thread. And, such heavy handed comments like "I'm not going to let anyone push a particular point of view on this article" here when I repeatedly asks for sources that claim a certain information doesn't belong to the Background, and he refuses to engage.

We are here to uphold the WP pillars, but I see a clear abuse of WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH as soon as someone challanges Solavirum's behaviors--Sataralynd (talk) 18:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the nonarguments. I've answered after 26 October, because I didn't see your response, you could have blamed me if I had never ever responded. Also, I've seen worse stuff during my activity on this site. Those are not big deals. I've stated before, if someone is going to accuse of anything, they're going to get a decent answer. What's next is not a thing to say to another editor, especially you Sataralynd, you've been talking in accusative and mentoring tone with others. How are we supposed to just digest that? This is WP:BOOMERANG at best. Furthermore, I'm not going to let anyone push a particular point of view on this article, this was not targeted to someone specific. The user above said that I just leave this place, and that was my response. Do not quote someone out of context. I repeatedly asks for sources that claim a certain information, see the definition of background. I've stated this before, you don't get to shoot someone at the foot, then say that you should've left, and say that you warned the guy before hand. So, if your allegations have ended, let me do my stuff. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

P.S. I advise you to read WP:CIVILITY thoroughly before citing it. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: even if you didn't see my answer, you made the revert without discussion despite there being an open one without consensus, becuase it suited your POV. See here as well you not engaging in a discussion and pushing your POV. Regarding your source from Cambridge, it doesn't even mention anything about time, which is your argument for reverting my edits (that the warning about Ganja Attacks should not be in the background section becuase it happened after the first attack - a chronological argument), and not sure why a Cambridge dictionary entry even applies in WP. As for your affinity to make claims without any sources, I could simply say that on the Talk Page you currently have 50+ comments, but provided only 9 sources. You need to do better than that for your claims and counterclaims to be taken seriously--Sataralynd (talk) 23:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Do not add personal information about other contributors to Wikipedia, as you did at 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3A2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_conflict&type=revision&diff=986040256&oldid=986039894 . Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has the right to remain completely anonymous. Posting personal information about another user is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's harassment policy. Wikipedia policy on this issue is strictly enforced and your edits have been reverted and/or suppressed, not least because such information can appear on web searches. Wikipedia's privacy policy is to protect the privacy of every user, including you. Persistently adding personal information about other contributors will result in being blocked from editing. "removing international organization reaction as POV is unilateral propaganda and vandalism" doesn't fit Wikipedia's guidelines on civility and personal attacks. Regards, Armatura (talk) 13:17, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Lmao what? Are you trolling my talk page now? Check the edit you linked, and point where I "added personal information." --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 13:38, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: Please refrain from abbreviations such as "laughing your ass off" when you are warned about improper action. Please adhere to WP:Civility and - there are no trolls here, but editors. Nationality is part of identity and a protected characteristic. Revealing it explicitly (potentially allowing targeting the carriers of that protected characteristic) is a breach of WP rules: Regards, Armatura (talk) 14:54, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Armatura, you've literally stated in your user page is that your native language is Armenian. What are you talking about? Omg, your behavior is really getting out of hand. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: Writing about myself on my page is my right. Announcing my identity to others is not your right. Armatura (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Lol. You are not here to give rights to users. Now, avoid spamming my talk page. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Armatura (talk) 13:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~)).  Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:31, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Please see my comments at WP:ANEW for some further background on the decision. Just to reiterate what I said there at the end, given this is your second block for edit warring / 3RR vio in the same topic area which covered by discretionary sanctions it is likely that any further 3RR vios or editing warring will result in a more robust sanction whether a longer or harder block, or a discretionary sanction such as a topic ban, tighter revert restriction or something similar. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I noticed you have edited several times about the restrictions on journalists in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Please refrain from such editing. There are no restriction in both places till now. This also was discussed. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 16:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Գարիկ Ավագյան, we've literally got sources on that. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:39, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, well, at first, the source you have provided and which was published on 8 October is Opinion piece. Secondly, neither Armenia nor Artsakh have any restrictions (until now). There was a discussion about this, where you did take part. So, please, do not edit this information for the third time. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 17:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

On 30 October 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Aegean Sea earthquake, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:13, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Nice work, keep them coming! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:13, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Beshogur (talk) 17:54, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:2020 Ganja bombings.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 10:20, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:2020 Ganja bombings.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Solavirum, are there any reliable, neutral sources confirming that Shusha has been captured? I have been unable to find any. Announcements by the Azerbaijani government are not good enough, if the city really has been captured I'm sure there will quickly be coverage in independent news outlets. Jr8825 • Talk 09:29, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Jr8825, third-party sources geolocated Armenian forces outside Shusha yesterday. Here's one. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 09:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

This is original research and Twitter is not an RS. If this is correct, there will be reports in RS newspapers very soon, and we should wait for these. Jr8825 • Talk 09:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1325841818269982720 VladBelousov (talk) 18:29, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I ran into your request for page protection (which I'll be declining, since it only involves one user) as well as your report at the edit warring noticeboard. Since the user self-reverted themselves, I believe that they got the message - I'll be leaving them a custom warning after I finish with my message to you here. :-)

I wanted to drop you an informal note and advise you to be careful with edit warring in the future. I know that you started this article and I understand how aggravating it can be when someone just steps in and makes less-than-ideal changes to it. However, nonetheless, you were also engaging in edit warring as well as VladBelousov, since you were reverting this user's edits repeatedly. Just be careful in the future; I don't want to see you falling into the same pit as another user for edit warring if you can avoid it. I've seen admins "drive-by shoot" edit war blocks before, and had an admin with this habit saw your AN3 report, you might've ended up blocked as well. It also would've much easier for them to justify it given the fact that you have two blocks on your record from this year and both for edit warring.

Just be careful, and keep my words in mind. :-) Anyways, that's all I wanted to say. I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2020 Russian Mil Mi-24 shootdown is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Russian Mil Mi-24 shootdown until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Petebutt (talk) 03:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

An article you recently created, Rustam Muradov, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Akhiljaxxn (talk) 17:58, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Akhiljaxxn, he's extremely notable, see this. Also, he was appointed the commander of the peacekeeping forces in Nagorno-Karabakh. Just wait for me to finish. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:02, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war

added a link pointing to Economic Times

2020 Western Saharan clashes

added a link pointing to Pablo Iglesias

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#User:_Armatura

Can you expand this section? Would be good. Thanks. Beshogur (talk) 21:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Beshogur, sure, would take a look tomorrow. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:54, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

To explain to you my reasoning, when I learned Geography Azerbaijan was clearly Asian. Since apparently that has changed or is a gray area now, I understand where you are coming from. Someone needs to go update the European Maps on Wikipedia though, as they do not reflect Azerbaijan's transcontinental status. I don't know also how you ended up at WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH, there is also no mention of Azerbaijan being a transcontinental country in the Asian article, someone might want to go update that. Esw01407 (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Esw01407, this actually shows it. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:32, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

That's not constituting the whole county however. Barley a minor slice to even see I had to make it much larger. Esw01407 (talk) 15:35, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Esw01407, that's why its called transcontinental :D --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

I'd still recommend efforts be put in to clarifying the maps and articles, this topic is unclear unless you end up at certain articles. Have a nice day. Esw01407 (talk) 15:39, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Shusha, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. I've explained why I consider your removal of the Armenian name in the introduction for the Shusha article to be problematic on the Shusha talk page AntonSamuel (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Solavirum, could you let me know when you're finished editing this section of 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war? I'm trying to do some copy-editing but keep running into edit conflicts as you're still working on it. I'd appreciate it if you could let me know once you're done. Cheers, Jr8825 • Talk 19:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Jr8825, I think everything's done for my part at least, until Lachin gets handed over on 1 December. Unless, something turns downhill like Sotk mine incident. Cheers! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:54, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up :) Jr8825 • Talk 21:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, it would be good if you substantiate your addition of Azerbaijani place names for towns in Armenia, such as Goris, Sisian and Kapan with sources describing the previously prominent Azerbaijani communities/minorities/majorities in the relevant towns - then the inclusion of the names may be valid. It's also always good to discuss the addition of material on the article's talk pages if the matter is controversial - which it most likely will be, and certainly would be in the case of Baku and Yerevan for example, which have both had prominent Armenian and Azerbaijani populations in the past. However, I haven't seen any sources provided with historical demographics for the relevant towns so far.

I argued the case for including the Armenian name for Shusha [13] pointing to the large amount of sourced content substantiating the town's connection to the Armenian people.

I got the question on my talk page regarding the issue recently and I summarized my interpretation of Wikipedia guidelines:

Per MOS:LEADALT: "...Significant alternative names for the topic should be mentioned in the article, usually in the first sentence or paragraph. These may include alternative spellings, longer or shorter forms, historical names, and significant names in other languages. Per WP:OTHERNAMES/WP:NCPLACE: "The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses, Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted."

So - historical and significant alternative place names may be placed in the lede if either 10% of English language sources use the name or if it's used by a people that used to live in the locality - for example, the existence of a large diaspora community from the specific place. Historical context should also be taken into consideration - what significance/connection a city has for a people historically, culturally/religiously, while recognizing the various national narratives that exist and staying inclusive.

AntonSamuel (talk) 13:40, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

AntonSamuel, sure, I'll return with sources as soon as I can. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

AntonSamuel, hi. Sorry for the wait, I was busy with Shusha and my math class was a headache. There's no doubt^[6] that many Azerbaijanis had inhabited today's Syunik, Vayots Dzor and Gegharkunik provinces; until they were ethnically cleansed^[7] in the early 1900s, and deported throughout the Soviet era. Seems like the Tsarist era statistics lack clarifying some major towns, but this ethnic map of the 1880s should do the trick I think. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:26, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Can we make such an article if possible? Similar to Western Azerbaijan (political concept), in order to split it from Azerbaijan (Iran). Beshogur (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Possibly. We've got this too. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Please check the talk page for the Lachin article and discuss the alleged handover of the town before changing it again: [14] AntonSamuel (talk) 10:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

AntonSamuel, seems like the city would be administrated by Azerbaijan with Russia's supervision. Check the sources (and do some digging for yourself) I've given please. I'm going to join the talk later on. Bit busy atm. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

It's been discussed at some length now on the Lachin talk page, I've checked numerous sources and will continue to keep track now and again - from what I've seen this is the situation:

1) With regard to the ceasefire agreement the status of the settlements in the Lachin corridor remains unclear. Most Armenians do not want to live under Azerbaijani rule (partially or fully, which may be the eventual prospect) because of the enmity and mistrust that exist between the two peoples after the numerous massacres, wars and ethnic cleansing on both sides. So most have left to a large extent, but have they been ordered to leave per the treaty?

2) The Lachin district has been handed back today, but the Lachin corridor is to "remain under the control of the peacekeeping contingent of the Russian Federation" - so will Artsakh retain civil control openly as before, or unofficially through some type of "local self-administration" by Armenian residents of the town under Russian protection? Or will civil control be given to Azerbaijan under Russian military control or some form of joint Russian-Azeri military control? Joint military control would be unlikely because of the tense situation between Armenians and Azerbaijanis I would argue.

These questions have not been answered as far as I've seen, so for now we can only speculate. All in all, the situation remains unclear until there is a clear statement from all sides or a clear depiction of the situation from a neutral and reliable third-party source about the situation.

AntonSamuel (talk) 15:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

AntonSamuel, looking at Aliyev's speech, it seems that Laçın city itself won't be administrated by Azerbaijan for some 3 years, until a new corridor is built. Currently, there's an Azerbaijani flag waving over the city's main building. So, de jure Azerbaijan, but controlled by the Russian peacekeeping force? Maybe not. Another interpretation would be the city getting administrated by ethnic Armenians who are Azerbaijani citizens. Early to say I guess. Seems like more info would came later on. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:28, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I have opened a discussion at the talk page. Just get involved. Turkism doesn't exist as a page and is associated with Turkism Day which is celebrated in memory of racist ideologues. I don't think this is a good name for a template. The template needs a fix.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:24, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle, I don't really care much about your feud with the other user. Just respect the WP:CONSENSUS. Also, avoid remarks like Turkism doesn't exist and in memory of racist ideologues as they mean you've engaged in WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH and WP:RGW respectively. If you need help with the guidelines, ask right away. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

There isn't any Wikipedia article/page called Turkism, to this I referred. And I have created the article Turkism Day now, so you and others know as well in which memory this is celebrated.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle Turkism and anti-Turkish are, terminologically, two different things. Another term for Turkism can mean Turkish nationalism, or Pan-Turkism. In any case, that isn't a case for deletion. There are many reliable sources supporting the current name. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 23:11, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and greetings.

I've been working on an article about racism towards Turks and Azerbaijanis in Armenia on my sub-userpage User:Saotura/Anti-Turkism in Armenia (the name Anti-Turkism in Armenia is just experimental, it can be changed), and even though the article is pretty long so far with around 92 thousand bytes, i believe that i might be needing help. I would be happy if you could check the article to see if it's missing any information (especially the First Nagorno-Karabakh War section) and if possible, expand the article to include this information. Thanks, and warm regards. -Śαǿturα^💬 22:48, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I will try my best. Thank you for the article. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 09:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! -Śαǿturα^💬 14:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey, could you please explain the source you've cited here? It doesn't seem to be related to the Dadivank (aka Khutavank) monastery but is refering to an Albanian monastery apparently named "Khudavan", which i couldn't find on Google by the way. LevonAUS9 (talk) 17:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

LevonAUS9, the Azerbaijani government and historians claim that Dadivang is a Caucasian Albanian monastery. That might cause the confusion. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:07, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, i'm aware of that. Is the name "Khudavan" a new one among the media as well? Because a search for "Khudavan" on Google literally gets you this aznews.com piece you'e cited in the article. I'm sure you can do better with the sources, please avoide citing sources using non existent names next time. Have a good one. LevonAUS9 (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

LevonAUS9, its just a misspelling. You can find many sources about that development. Here's one without the misspelling. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:00, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. PhJ (talk) 21:18, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--Steverci (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Solavirum. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

--HistoryofIran (talk) 15:08, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nakhchivan Garrison, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nakhchivan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

There seem to be a pattern of disruptive editing by you in articles related to Armenia

• [[15]]
• [[16]]
• [[17]]
• [[18]]

Addictedtohistory (talk) 08:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

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.

Addictedtohistory, and who are you to call them disruptive? See our discussion at Shusha talk page. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 10:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

No reason for biing WP:PA. I'm WP editor. It has nothing to do with Shushi. You've been adding azeri names to cities in Republic of Armenia, under pretext that at some point it had also azeri population. There are cities in Russia, with significant azeri population, so what? Addictedtohistory (talk) 12:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Again, see the discussion we had about Shusha. You'll get the idea. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:17, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

[[19]] [[20]]--Addictedtohistory (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Addictedtohistory (talk • contribs) 12:35, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

[[21]] Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Addictedtohistory (talk • contribs) 15:00, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Why am I even trying to explain? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Misusing the guidelines and falsely giving warning to others is also against the rules, let me remind you that. None of the comments by me referred to your personal life, or anything personal actually. In every comment, I've referred to your worrying edits. If you feel like your publicly published edits are somehow personal to you, that's your problem, not ours. If anything bugs you out, you can always ask for a third opinion. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Solavirum, rather than continue to revert the changes regarding the number of casualties please only engage in discussion on the talk page so that blocks aren't necessary. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I did that though --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 11:37, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I know, I'm saying keep doing it until there's a solution. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Link to the dispute Regards, Armatura (talk) 23:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Shusha (2020) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Haydar Pamuk -- Haydar Pamuk (talk) 14:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

. Direct link about the discussion on Operation Iron Fist Regards (Armatura (talk) 00:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)).

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team