User talk:Göycen#top

{{unblock reviewed |1=Please copy my appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard or administrators' noticeboard. I understand I was blocked after a series of reverts. Recently almost all my edits were re-reverts of material I believed to be inaccurate; I added no new content related to the ArbCom case and even replaced dead links with live archives to keep sources verifiable. My editing record on the Turkish Wikipedia (see contribs there) shows consistent, constructive work. I am currently on hiatus, preparing for my medical board exams, and only logged in briefly to address these disputed edits. My comment asking another editor to restore reliably sourced material was made in good faith and read more harshly than I intended, but I now see it can appear as canvassing; I accept responsibility for my wording and will be more careful. If unblocked I will: * limit myself to one revert per issue unless consensus is obtained; * open or join a talk-page discussion (or seek WP:3O/DR) before reverting again; * stay civil, assume good faith and focus strictly on content; * comply fully with all ArbCom and community sanctions in the topic area. I hope this demonstrates I understand the problem, will not repeat it, and can continue making constructive, policy compliant edits. Göycen (talk) 19:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC) |decline = Procedural decline only because it is unclear. When you say, "comply fully with all ArbCom and community sanctions in the topic area", are you firmly committing to avoiding editing entirely in the subject area covered by Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2? Your unblock request is not clear on that point and, obviously, there's absolutely no chance of an unblock without a firm commitment to avoid editing in that entire subject area. Yamla (talk) 19:52, 14 May 2025 (UTC)}}

{{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard or administrators' noticeboard.

I understand I was blocked after a series of reverts.

Recently almost all my edits were re-reverts of material I believed to be inaccurate; I added no new content related to the ArbCom case and even replaced dead links with live archives to keep sources verifiable.

My editing record on the Turkish Wikipedia (see contribs there) shows consistent, constructive work. I am currently on hiatus, preparing for my medical board exams, and only logged in briefly to address these disputed edits.

My comment asking another editor to restore reliably sourced material was made in good faith and read more harshly than I intended, but I now see it can appear as canvassing; I accept responsibility for my wording and will be more careful.

If unblocked I will:

• limit myself to one revert per issue unless consensus is obtained;
• open or join a talk-page discussion (or seek WP:3O/DR) before reverting again;
• stay civil, assume good faith and focus strictly on content;
• comply fully with all ArbCom and community sanctions in the topic area. I unconditionally agree to refrain from editing, commenting on, or otherwise participating in any page, discussion, or edit related to the Armenia-Azerbaijan topic area, broadly construed, as defined by ArbCom and community sanctions.

I hope this demonstrates I understand the problem, will not repeat it, and can continue making constructive, policy compliant edits. Göycen (talk) 20:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)|idletimestamp=20250514203419}}

Copied over. Please follow the progress at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arbitration_enforcement_action_appeal_by_Göycen. --Yamla (talk) 20:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Liz Rosguill and asilvering,

I respectfully request that you review the complaint that led to my ban. I apologize for not providing enough context in my appeal; I assumed Firefangledfeathers would clarify the situation, but no further explanation was offered on my appeal page. I would therefore like to supply the missing background and address any misunderstandings.Göycen (talk) 07:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Firefangledfeathers,

I would appreciate it if you could provide a more detailed explanation for my ban in light of following messages¹,² and the recent ban of the same sockpuppet from last year. I recognize that my reference to "Qajars" may have connections to Azerbaijan, and it's possible my comments regarding "kete" were perceived as canvassing. Göycen (talk) 13:05, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Rosguill,

Thank you for your last comment. However, I still haven’t seen your assessment regarding my appeal. Responding only by criticizing the tone and questioning my understanding is not, with all due respect, a sufficient response. Göycen (talk) 13:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Rosguill,

I know that time is the most valuable resource for both of us. This will be my final ping regarding my appeal.

With full sincerity, I kindly ask you to review it once more. I have already clearly stated in my original appeal that I unconditionally agree to refrain from editing, commenting on, or otherwise participating in any page, discussion, or edit related to the Armenia-Azerbaijan topic area, broadly construed, as defined by ArbCom and community sanctions. Göycen (talk) 14:31, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Firefangledfeathers, Thank you for your comment. I also do not want to take more time of yours. Perhaps I should be more open: I am not entirely appealing your decision. My messages are simply intended to demonstrate my goodwill. I understand that I should be banned; I only find it unfair to be banned from Wikipedia indefinitely. I would appreciate it if you could consider reducing the length of my ban. I did not intentionally edit hot topics related to Armenia and Azerbaijan. Although I acknowledge that I violated the topic ban, my actions were motivated by good intentions, particularly in response to edits made by a problematic IP address. Göycen (talk) 15:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)