User talk:MosMusy

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, MosMusy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Consider joining the Wikiproject Armenia Let me know if you need any help. VartanM (talk) 21:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Georgia map...

...was popular with a number of editors....one just asked me what happened to it when he tried to use it...Can you reload it or fix it? (You said on 8 April that it "wasn't working" at first)...(From 8 April, your map: "A neutral map, showing the country in the centre, format that fits established standards, supported by a few senior editors who have no POV, see talk page for more.") Thanks.DLinth (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

It seems like it was deleted, I have no clue why. I will try to re-upload it as soon as possible - I'm away from the computer where I made it so could take several days. But it seems to me all the Caucasian countries have switched to the Orthogonal Zoomed Out Map. MosMusy (talk) 16:56, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Good point....all three should be similar, all three have the Orthogonal Zoomed Out Map, and those maps have the country in question somewhere near the middle, and are not "maps of Europe" for countries in the South Caucasus, so, even though I'd have a slight preference for more zoomed in, they seem fine to me as is.DLinth (talk) 23:37, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Controversial edits without consensus

Hey, I appreciate you trying to help out with the 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests article. But we've had several big discussions over the inclusion of Armenia and Azerbaijan, and there is no consensus for changing the page to remove one or both of them. Please don't remove them without getting that consensus first on the Talk page. Thank you. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

You're entitled to your opinion. Please don't make a potentially controversial edit to the article again without obtaining consensus. Thanks. -Kudzu1 (talk) 08:06, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid it is an opinion. Different organizations have different takes. Armenia and Azerbaijan can be considered Middle Eastern under some of those definitions, and because the situation there is pertinent to the article and quite closely related, we have elected to consider those countries Middle Eastern in adding them to the article. Please don't remove them without consensus. Thank you. -Kudzu1 (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. The EU has its own motives, like any organization. I know some Armenians consider their country to be European, and some consider it to be Asian, and some consider it to be explicitly Middle Eastern as well as Asian. That's fine. It's an arbitrary boundary anyway, when it really comes down to it. Suffice to say we have different opinions, and I'm sorry that you're not happy. -Kudzu1 (talk) 08:54, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

First of all, calm down. Second of all, there are also editors who agree with my position on this. If you want to argue about Armenia's inclusion in the article Middle East, please go there to do that. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Armenia has been considered Middle Eastern in some quarters since long before George W. Bush became president. Please refer to the UN definition of Western Asia, as well as to dictionary definitions of the Middle East and the Associated Press's rule stating that "Near East" (which always includes Armenia) and "Middle East" (which does not always include Armenia) are synonymous and the latter term is preferred, as well as to the history outlined in the article Middle East. I hope this helps. Thanks. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you're going to have to take up your complaint with the editors of Western Asia, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and Greater Middle East and the WP:RS they cite. We did debate changing the name of the article to be more expansive, but this was rejected in favor of using a liberal, inclusive definition of the Middle East instead of a less commonly used name like Western Asia or Greater Middle East (which was, I should note, popularized but not coined by the Bush administration; the term, as it includes the former SSRs in the Caucasus, does predate Bush's presidency). -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Quoth the Wikipedia article for Europe: "Armenia is physiographically entirely in Western Asia, but it has strong historical and sociopolitical connections with Europe. The population and area figures include the entire state respectively." Those connections are noted in the article. It is also included as part of the Middle East under the "Greater Middle East" definition, which you may not be happy about, but reflects the crossroads status of Armenia. I'm not anti-Armenia in any way, I just don't want to leave out and neglect this country where protests are happening as part of this regional wave even though it has at least as much claim to being Middle Eastern (being geographically in Western Asia and included in expansive definitions of the Middle East both at present and historically) as it does to being Eastern European. And if there were a wave of protests happening in Eastern Europe, I would probably argue for Armenia's inclusion in that article as well. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

As I previously said, Greater Middle East was not "coined" by the Bush administration: this academic source notes it was already coming into common usage circa 2000, when President Clinton was still in office. I have no great fondness for the term especially, but we need to be consistent, and Middle East gives Armenia and Azerbaijan as examples of countries that are sometimes considered Middle Eastern by credible, verifiable sources. On a side note, unfortunately the "Impact" article is not well developed and has a very, very low level of editing activity compared to the main article. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:15, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't include Georgia because there are no protests in Georgia. It would be interesting if there were, as Georgia is geographically and culturally part of Europe although considered part of the Middle East under some definitions, but there aren't. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:26, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Um, no. Novikova and others include Georgia, part of which is geographically European as per the standard transcontinental boundary, in the Middle East. But that's an entirely off-topic discussion, as there are no relevant protests in Georgia that I know of. Similarly, a sliver of Azerbaijan is inside the geographic definition of Europe, but the vast majority of both Georgia and Azerbaijan are in Western Asia (sometimes the Middle East). If there were protests in Georgia, I would probably want to include them. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

about inclusion of Armenia in the article 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests

I've posted a reply, I wish you all the best to your struggle!  :-) Schwarz Ente (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I hope this error can be fixed soon, so Armenia is no longer shown in a false light. MosMusy (talk) 17:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring

That's three times you've deleted a part of the 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests despite a clear and present lack of consensus to do so and an apparent understanding of that rule on your part. That constitutes edit warring, which is a violation of Wikipedia editing policy. -Kudzu1 (talk) 13:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of how much you think you're right, it's edit warring. What's more, you've removed a plethora of WP:RS on the basis of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which is not an acceptable rationale. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

It wasn't me who put those countries in the Middle East. It was multiple reliable, verifiable sources, which were accepted by editorial consensus before I added those protests to the article in question. Look - we seem to be talking in circles, so hopefully an admin will see fit to help out here, because I don't think you're listening to me and I've listened to you say "I don't like it" literally about 70 times now. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:23, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

• I have closed the above report without action, as you bring sources and a willingness to compromise to the discussion and have not technically violated WP:3RR. Continually reverting the same material without sufficient discussion does, however, constitute edit warring, and I urge you to be more careful to reach consensus at the talkpage before continuing. The tone of some of your talkpage posts also indicates that you should be made aware that the topic area relating to Armenia has historically been contentious enough that the area is subject to special discretionary sanctions, and that you may be blocked or banned without further notice. - 2/0 (cont.) 09:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Armenia-Azerbaijan and related conflicts. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2#Final decision section of the decision page. Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page.