User talk:Vahram Mekhitarian

Welcome! Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 04:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Armenian Eternity sign, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hittite, Stamps and Eregli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting[edit]

Vahram Mekhitarian edit reverting is not good solution of this problem. During the disscussion at AfD we agreed that most of text that you have added in this article is only your original researches and not directly related to the topic of the article, and it has been explained then content removed. So, if you disagree with it you can bring your antiarguments at disscussion. But you still don't bring any argument at discusion and only blaming me in vandalism and reverting the edits of other users.--Δαβίδ (talk) 19:44, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Galleries[edit]

Sorry, but that's just a mess. See WP:GALLERY "Wikipedia is not an image repository. A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the above paragraph or moved to Wikimedia Commons." That just seems to be a far too large collection of images you think are somehow related. Many of them are swastikas - why are they there? It should only have a handful that illustrate the symbol in different ways. Please don't keep trying to force this on the article.

On another point, the website "Welcome to People Of Ar! with a "Petition for Return of the Goddess" doesn't come near meeting our criteria for reliable sources at WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 15:54, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013[edit]

Hello Vahram Mekhitarian, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Armenian Eternity sign has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Note - you cannot restore this material unless you can show that it is clearly not a copyright violation and that the source meets our criteria at WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 16:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be ok on the copyvio issue, no comment on the rest though. Dougweller (talk) 11:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Armenian Eternity sign shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 20:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted you for the same reason as before, copyvio. If you replace this I will take you to ANI to be blocked. Dougweller (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't continue to repeatedly re-add the same content, or you will likely be blocked again. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting edits![edit]

Vahram Mekhitarian, stop reverting edits and readding the same text again. There is already been discussion at AfD, and at other wiki projects.--Δαβίδ (talk) 19:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:35, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Δαβίδ is IP vandal, you can see this look at the history page of the files

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Armenian_Eternity_Sign_Regular.png&action=history

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Azg_Handes_1908_17_1_Ezekian_Swastika.pdf&action=history

my talk page

commons:User_talk:Vahram_Mekhitarian#IP_vandalism

and history of page

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armenian_Eternity_sign&action=history

He is only concerned with the fact that in every way prevents the creation of articles on "Armenian Eternity sign" (Arevahach) in English, Russian, Armenian and other wikis. Therefore, puts on the removal of files from the Commons:Category:Armenian Eternity Sign, remove content of Armenian Eternity sign article. The editors of these articles are well aware of this vandal.

You are already the third administrator, he is trying to deceive and to block me. It is necessary to block the vandal who only removes article, playing to the rules of Wikipedia - WP:Gaming the system.

Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 21:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:41, 30 September 2013 (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.

Copyvio again[edit]

From [1]. And I can find no source saying this originated from the swastika. That's possible, but where's the source? Dougweller (talk) 12:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For Your comment.

Yerevanci edited of the origin of the Indian swastika is not correct. I fixed this part and you can see part about the origin of the sign of eternity from the first editions of the article's (Gallery). This sign originated by itself and is a part of of the culture of the swastika , which was in the ancient Middle East, and where originated the Armenian nation . There are swastikas on the stones and swastikas in cultural heritage Hittites ( Hittites swastika - SS).
In the future, i will be create the article " The swastika in the Armenian culture", a small part of which will be described in the article "Swastika". The materials for this article to be preparing (see category commons:Category:Swastikas in Armenian culture) . In sense, what is possible unification with the "swastika". The concept of the swastika in the Armenian culture (and in the culture of Hittites - SS ), and the concept of the swastika in the article " swastika " different, and merge them is not possible.
I do not often reacted and slowly worked, because I do not speak in English so well and Im new user (from May). And the other hand, the user Δαβίδ periodically remove the contents of the article, and we can't effectively discuss this article.

Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 13:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your detailed reply. As I said at WP:RSN, we have no source that connects the swastika with the eternity sign. The ISO working document is a reliable source for an ISO working document but not for history, and even it doesn't say that the eternity sign descended from the swastika. Hopefully you already understand this, but the Hittites aren't part of Armenian culture. Dougweller (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that I need a reference to what that academic work. But the difficulty in language - in Armenian lot of them, but I want to find a decent book in English. After 1-2 days the link will appear.

Yes, of course, the Hittites aren't part of Armenian culture. but part of the Hittites culture moved to the Armenian culture and the culture of other nations in the region (as sample, decoration of carpets).. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Հավերժության նշանի և սվաստիկայի միջև կապը[edit]

Move to hy:Մասնակցի քննարկում:Vahram Mekhitarian#Հավերժության նշանի և սվաստիկայի միջև կապը

October 2013[edit]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Armenian Eternity sign, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 20:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC) OK! Vahram Mekhitarian (talk)[reply]

Sign itself is not Armenian and originated from a swastika in this form. It is used by many people, and in Armenia is used as a Eternity sign. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 21:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You still need to stop removing citation requests. Have you even read WP:RS? Please do, and explain on the article talk page how the unicode proposal is an RS for history. Dougweller (talk) 05:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not removed citation, citation removed Yerevanci (see page history. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 08:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to your removal of it at [2]. Dougweller (talk) 10:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Armenian Eternity sign shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Please note, content can be removed during the AfD, what can't be done is blanking the article Dougweller (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know what to do and how to proceed with these wars. This page is under discussion at the Institute of Standards and the Government of Armenia. But we can not discuss any version of the page, because it changes all the time and looks contradictory. If possible, lock the page in my last edition for two weeks, until the end debate in Armenia. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 17:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Eternity sign[edit]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --Երևանցի ^talk 20:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of two weeks for edit warring, as you did at Armenian Eternity sign. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. Bbb23 (talk) 21:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Warning[edit]

Your recent editing history at Armenian Eternity sign shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --Երևանցի ^talk 04:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Armenian eternity sign, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Japanese. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Corrected. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 11:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Vahram Mekhitarian. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Vahram Mekhitarian. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Vahram Mekhitarian/Armenian Eternity sign[edit]

User:Vahram Mekhitarian/Armenian Eternity sign, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vahram Mekhitarian/Armenian Eternity sign and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Vahram Mekhitarian/Armenian Eternity sign during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 22:17, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Vahram Mekhitarian. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Borjgali[edit]

Hello Vahram Mekhitarian,
Please see the pictures in the following link showing some borjgalis :

link 1

As you can see the borjgali is not always represented with seven rotating wings.

You can also see that pre-christian borjgalis are also often represented with seven rotating wings (top middle and bottom right) but not always(bottom left and bottom middle) :

Please see also these examples of borjgalis with more or less than 7 branches :

So do not revert my contributions from Borjgali.

Thank you.
Van Gogia (talk) 20:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Borjgali is the name of only a sign with seven rotating wings.Vahram Mekhitarian (talk)

https://www.behance.net/gallery/80748061/GEORGIAN-NATIONAL-MUSEUM

Vahram Mekhitarian, Is it a joke ?? I am not ridiculing, honestly. But Your are embarrassing yourself.

Please open your eyes :

" Generally, borjgali is a seven-star symbol, which can be used to create various shapes and variations. "

It's in your link !

Please don't act as a vandal.
Van Gogia (talk) 08:29, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

stop this vandalism[edit]

Please stop destroying my sourced work like a vandal. You have not responded to any of my arguments and you keep repeating the same thing. Moreover, by providing me with references that go against what you say. I think this is a shameful attitude. I don't know what the administrators are waiting for to prevent such acts... --Van Gogia (talk) 18:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want ?[edit]

I don't understand what you want at the end. You're trying to erase sourced information. You're trying to force your way through by repeating the same phrases like a child. I am really ashamed for you. Have some respect for yourself, you're probably my grandfather's age and you behave like a child. Even in the street I never met a person who behaved like that.
I have given you sources, pictures, evidence and you can't answer my arguments. You try to force your way through. I started by talking to you with arguments, thinking that you were acting in good faith. But now, frankly, I find it very hard to believe that you are honest. I greatly regret that no administrator has intervened since then.
I am wasting time trying to monitor the article. I've already wasted a lot of time writing to you. That's already too much respect for you.
--Van Gogia (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Act up in French[edit]

Your sorry acts have been noticed on Wikipedia in French. You may stand up and explain your motives. The expectations are actually quite low, but who knows... Man up. --Charlik (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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.--Van Gogia (talk) 13:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Borjgali[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks 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 ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 15:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You continued the same edit war at Borjgali after your two-week block expired so I have now applied an indefinite block to your account. If you change your mind and decide to start following Wikipedia policy you can file a request using the {{unblock}} template. EdJohnston (talk) 14:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the Borjgali discussion page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Borjgali#Vahram_Mekhitarian_3RR , I gave a source where this sign is described, which is now used in sources and where it is clearly stated: "Generally, borjgali is a seven-star symbol, which can be used to create various shapes and variations", where it is also are examples of "various shapes and variations", which are variations of the seven-pointed character only. The opponent does not perceive the information written in the sources in any way, and the only goal is to unreasonably expand the meaning of the Borjgali sign and add an Oshk Vank image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Borjgali_and_Star_of_David_in_Oshki.jpg . The name of the Oshki file was corrected with the correction of the name of the sign on the wall and which was also changed by the opponent. All editions of this user are not substantiated and therefore have to be corrected. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk)

You are insisting you are correct about the content matter. This is unlikely to get you unblocked. We would need to become convinced that in the future you would respect consensus and not continue to edit war on contested articles. EdJohnston (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ArmSCII has been nominated for deletion[edit]

Category:ArmSCII has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Telecommunications standards of Armenia[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Telecommunications standards of Armenia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]