User talk:Hedikupa Parepvigi

September 2023

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BerkBerk68. Thank you. (t · c) buidhe 05:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just note what looks like a SOCKBLOCK on TRWIKI. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BerkBerk68/Archive was inconclusive. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Extended-confirmed required

It has come to my attention that you have recently started to edit in articles related to Armenia and Azerbaijan. This editing area is under a community imposed extended-confirmed restriction, specifically "Politics, ethnic relations, and conflicts involving Armenia, Azerbaijan, or both—broadly construed and explicitly including the Armenian genocide—are placed under an extended confirmed restriction." Your number of edits is below the threshold for editing in the area, thus you cannot currently edit in articles and content under the scope of WP:GS/AA. Please refrain from doing so, any edits you have done since this restriction was implemented should be reverted, I will take the liberty of reverting wherever it's appropriate. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 13:15, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Additionally editors must be logged-in have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Doug Weller talk 14:54, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Hedikupa Parepvigi. Thank you. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for dog-whistled genocide denial, followed by denials of that denial that carefully avoid saying the Armenian genocide actually happened, all of that in violation of WP:GS/AA after being notified of it. See also WP:hate is disruptive. This block is community sanction enforcement and will be logged as such.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 20:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Hedikupa Parepvigi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I do not want to and will not edit any articles related to Armenia. It is not a country I am interested in. I will also be careful not to edit articles tangentially related to Armenia. I love Armenian people and their culture. They are an industrious nation. I respect the effort they put to defend their honor and sympathize with their suffering. Kind regards. Hedikupa Parepvigi (talk) 21:16, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address your dog-whistled genocide denial, etc. Yamla (talk) 21:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Hedikupa Parepvigi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

In addition to my previous statement, I will not edit any genocide related articles. I condemn all forms of genocide denial and hatred. I also condemn the terrible crimes inflicted upon Armenians. I will work cooperatively with other Wikipedians to ensure a safe and fair working environment for everyone. Kind regards. Hedikupa Parepvigi (talk) 21:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There's no way you will be unblocked to edit in a designated contentious topic area, if at all, so you will need to tell us what topics you will edit about instead. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Hedikupa Parepvigi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Reply to @331dot: I want to edit articles like alum, spoon, steam engine, common marigold, cell membrane, numerical analysis, bison bison bison, macroeconomics and non-contentious Turkey related topics such as Evliya Çelebi and Yunus Emre. Hedikupa Parepvigi (talk) 8:24 am, 9 November 2023, Thursday (2 months, 3 days ago) (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

per #Unblock discussion Your denials of racist views are not sufficient.. Please reflect on these concerns and how you would address them. I was going to suggest 500 edits over six months on a different Wikipedia to allow you to reflect adequately and demonstrate renunciation of these views. A review of discussions on your TRWIKI talk page (tr:Kullanıcı mesaj:Hedikupa Parepvigi) however, supports the block rationale here and casts doubt on the likelihood of you adequately addressing the reasons for your block. Thanks.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You addressed this to me, but my last review brought an end to my involvement here. Someone else will review your request. 331dot (talk) 13:26, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock discussion

@Tamzin: Does this suffice? Will need a WP:TOPICBAN on WP:GS/AA (particularly Armenian genocide) if that's not already in place. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BerkBerk68/Archive noted. So, single account restriction is de rigueur -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:00, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: I still see, above, weasel-y refusal to acknowledge that the Armenian genocide was a genocide. While yes, as the essay I wrote says, we block people for hateful conduct, not hateful views, and so the case could be made that a TBAN suffices to remedy that conduct, I'm not convinced. An Armenian editor should not have to work with someone who has said, in the context of this very unblock discussion, I condemn all forms of genocide denial and hatred. I also condemn the terrible crimes inflicted upon Armenians, which to me reads as a pointed choice of words to avoid calling it a genocide, same as what I indeffed for. So I am not convinced that there is a benefit to the encyclopedia in allowing an unapologetic genocide denier to return, even if it's not to the same topic area. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 23:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Can you explain why we're using WP:GS/AA rather than enforcement of the relevant CTOP here? I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding why this is marked as a community sanction when WP:GS/AA only seems to be about applying ECR to the page; unless I'm missing something in my reading, we don't have standard discretionary sanctions available in this area from a community sanction perspective. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: They continued to violate the general sanction regime after being notified of it. Per ECR point C, blocks are one tool available to enforce extendedconfirmed remedies, and the circumstances of their conduct led me to choose an indefinite block over a tempblock or warning. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 06:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Thank you for clarifying. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Welp, if he stays out of Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, perhaps it will be OK. This has set open for > 2 months. Perhaps I can carry it to WP:AN for disposition. Alternatively, we can defer another four months to make it a six month thing under WP:SO -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've never believed in six months as a magic number. There is no reason to expect that in May they'll have stopped being a genocide denier. If you'd like to take this to AN, then by all means, but I'll register in advance my strong opposition to any unblock when the user has not clearly disavowed their hateful views. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 01:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]