User talk:Beqabai

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please help with Maranuli[edit]

Hi Beqabai. I see that you are a native speaker of Georgian. Could I ask you for some help? Please be so kind and take a look at the article Maranuli. If you could add some extra references and contribute to its notability, please, go ahead. Thank you and regards. --Fadesga (talk) 11:18, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Fadesga: Hi from Georgia! I add some information and external links. Please visit and chek! — ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Beqabai. Thanks for adding some extra information. But, please, let's go further. The information you added comes from the company website, so this could be eventually considered "self-promotion of the company". There is some extra need: that you add, at least, a short paragraph with information from an independent source. Maybe this could do. Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 13:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Fadesga: I add some info, but I don't know is the grammer correct... Please correct you... Thanks... And... I haven't more info... in Georgian is same and same in any sites... — ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 14:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kelly Alexandra Hyman[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Kelly Alexandra Hyman, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:04, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019[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).

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

Request reason:

@Yunshui: I do not know that my action was illegal. please unblock my user. I will not do illegal actions more. please :( ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2019 (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. Yamla (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2019 (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.

@Yunshui: I am not sock, please CU first. I have over 12k edits in kawiki.— ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 14:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crossover on drafts and articles relating to Storage King, Stevie Alexander Thomas and Kelly Hyman, plus the timing of your edits, makes it very difficult to believe that you are not a sockpuppet. Yunshui 雲水 15:13, 2 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

@Yamla: I think the block is no longer necessary because I understand what I have been blocked for, I will not continue to cause damage or disruption and will make useful contributions instead.— ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 15:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

So sorry. I cannot unblock you at this time. You claim on the one hand to not be socking, on the other to understand the reason for your block. You cannot have it both ways. You must describe what you have done to be blocked, tell us all accounts you have used or coordinated with, and if you are WP:paid disclose your employer. You must affirm that you will no longer edit directly the pages in question and any other pages for which you receive compensation, even if not in the form of money. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2019 (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.

@Yunshui: I understand but please Believe me... — ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 15:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why? There are two plausible explanations for your recent edits: either you are part of the same paid editing ring that has been recreating these articles, or you are an independent undisclosed paid editor who has coincidentally picked up the jobs for these articles on Upwork or Freelancer.com. Either way, the English Wikipedia community takes a very dim view of both behaviours, making this a necessary block. Unless you can come up with a very convincing alternative, I see no reason to believe you at all. Yunshui 雲水 15:22, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yunshui: What you say was Offensive for me. I worked for fee? Please belive me I was work for days. I was searched informations about this persons. Edited texts in word document. Is Offensive and Disappointing... OK — ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 15:28, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taking offense is a long way from being a convincing counter-argument. Yunshui 雲水 15:31, 2 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

@Dlohcierekim: I made a mistake... I am so sorry... I promise I will not do same in other time. I helped my friend and can not consider mistakes. I have only one, this account. Please give me other chance. I will not disappoint you. And If I do, you can block me. Everyone has 2nd chance, has not it?— ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

In that case, it will be better to just leave you blocked, then we know you won't continue to violate policy. It seems to me that your only pathway back would be the standard offer; wait six months with no edits or socking before making an unblock request, in which you disclose any and all accounts you have used. I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 10:38, 10 January 2019 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi! It is more than 6 month I had blocked. I made mistake and I know it. Please unblock me. Thanks! — ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 15:19, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

For an unblock request to be remotely convincing, you'll have to explain what the mistake you made was (to make sure you do understand the problem), and what you'd do differently if unblocked. Huon (talk) 15:46, 1 August 2019 (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.

Request again[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).

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

Request reason:

Two years ago a friend asked me to write a few articles on the English Wikipedia. Unfortunately, these articles were found to violate Wikipedia principles and have been deleted before. Because of this I have blocked and understand my level of guilt. Please note that I understand the complexity of the issue and give me a chance, and remove the block. I will not make a similar mistake in the future. I have plans to enrich several articles about Georgia with information and I promise to strictly follow all the rules. thanks! — ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 16:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Decline as unresponsive only; you may make a new request when you are able to respond to Yamla's comment below. 331dot (talk) 14:44, 6 March 2021 (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.

Two years ago, you went out of your way to falsely deny being a sock. You went so far as to say, "What you say was Offensive for me", trying to make us feel bad for seeing through your attempts to mislead us. I understand that time has passed, but can you please explain why we should trust you now, given that you clearly demonstrated two years ago that, back then, you could not be trusted? --Yamla (talk) 13:17, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Just please as a person to a person. Can you observe me, give me some trial period. If I didn't have a real desire and motivation, I wouldn't have asked so many times. I am late in replying because your message affected me psychologically at the time. Now I gathered strength and answered you. - ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 07:16, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You still haven't answered the question. --Yamla (talk) 11:10, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Yamla: Your question is, why should you trust me? As I understand it. - ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 11:44, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. --Yamla (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Yamla: Trust is a psychological and human issue. It is difficult to give a concrete answer to this question. I think there's nothing wrong with giving it a chance for a while, given that the leverage is always there to block me out again. I don't know how well you understand what I'm saying.- ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 13:01, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's not going to work for me, given that you went out of your way to demonstrate you can't be trusted. But you are very welcome to make a request and a different administrator will review it. You may wish to point to WP:SO, as this would support your request to be unblocked. --Yamla (talk) 13:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lapanquri[edit]

Lapanquri (ლაფანყური) is a village in the Telavi district of Georgia. It is located near the Alazani Valley. Situated on the left bank of the Lopota River, the valley under consideration is enveloped on three sides by the Caucasus Mountains of Kakheti. Notable peaks within this mountainous terrain include Didi Mukhatsikhe, Patara Mukhatsikhe, Sasantle, Nakoroghali, Didi and Patara Andarazani, among others. The valley's elevation ranges from an unspecified minimum to 3000 meters above sea level. The highest summit in the vicinity is Mountain Didi Andarazan, reaching an elevation of 3039 meters.[1]

History[edit]

Numerous ancient and distinct remnants in the village's vicinity attest to the Lopota Valley's historical habitation, extending nearly to the alpine zone in antiquity. Within the valley's depths are locales with names strongly indicative of their past function as settlements rather than purely geographical features. These locations include:

  • Sasantle ("სასანთლე", Candlestick)
  • Mukhatsikhe ("მუხაციხე", The castle-fortress, which was named after a tree, specifically oak)
  • Nakalovari ("ნაკალოვარი", a place that was used for processing wheat)
  • Chkhinkuri ("ჩხინკური")
  • Gonjakhevi ("გონჯახევი", a place intended for physically disabled people)
  • Namarnevi ("ნამარნევი", A place where Qvevris must have been in ancient times)
  • Tornisi ("ტორნისი")
  • Churiskhevi ("ჭურისხევი")
  • Nosorna ("ნოსორნა", in conjunction with Chkhinkur and Mukhatsikhe, constituted a township-type settlement).[1]

Nevertheless, the extensive invasions compelled the inhabitants of Lopota Valley to vacate the settlement. The present-day settlement emerged in the early 20th century, primarily comprising individuals from the Aragvi and Iori communities. The residents of Ivri were intimately acquainted with the Lopot Valley, having traditionally wintered their livestock in this region.[2]

Toponymy and the present[edit]

Presumably, the nomenclature of the village, "Lapanquri," is derived from the Pterocarya plant (Georgian: ლაფანი, lapani), exclusively found in the outskirts of the Lopoti Valley settlement. Currently, the village is home to approximately 450 families and is 36 kilometers away from Telavi. Lafankur hosts essential community facilities, including an outpatient clinic, a public school, a kindergarten, a library named after Gia Gortashvili, and a church dedicated to the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, where monthly services and prayers are conducted.

The primary livelihood of the local population revolves around agriculture and, to varying extents, animal husbandry. Small-scale cultivation of vines and other perennial crops is prevalent in the area. Economic challenges have led to emigration, with residents relocating to urban centers and other countries. According to the 2014 census[3], the village's population is 620 individuals, comprising 323 men and 297 women.

Demography[edit]

Census Year population
2002 904[4]
2014 620[3]

Gallery[edit]

Will be added in article after unblocking.

External links[edit]

Will be added in article after unblocking.

See also[edit]

  1. ^ a b "Telavi Municipality Official Web-site". Telavi Municipality. Retrieved 14 February 2024.
  2. ^ Gonjilashvili, Teona (2015). "ლაფანყური: ისტორია და თანამედროვეობა". Analitical Bibliography of Kartvelological Books and Collected Works: 16–22. Retrieved 14 February 2024.
  3. ^ a b "General population census 2014". National Statistical Service of Georgia. November 2014.
  4. ^ 2002 წლის აღწერის მონაცემები

~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 10:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Chance[edit]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

In my previous review, I discovered the opportunity to demonstrate an article that I have enhanced as a means to rebuild trust. I have provided an example above this request (see User_talk:Beqabai#Lapanquri), and I kindly ask for a second chance.

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=In my previous review, I discovered the opportunity to demonstrate an article that I have enhanced as a means to rebuild trust. I have provided an example above this request (see [[User_talk:Beqabai#Lapanquri]]), and I kindly ask for a second chance. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=In my previous review, I discovered the opportunity to demonstrate an article that I have enhanced as a means to rebuild trust. I have provided an example above this request (see [[User_talk:Beqabai#Lapanquri]]), and I kindly ask for a second chance. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=In my previous review, I discovered the opportunity to demonstrate an article that I have enhanced as a means to rebuild trust. I have provided an example above this request (see [[User_talk:Beqabai#Lapanquri]]), and I kindly ask for a second chance. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 11:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that considering the socking, I would like a check user to check first. Blocking admin is no longer among us. @Huon and Yamla:. What do y'all think? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:25, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Deepfriedokra thank you, for your answer! I have never utilized a different account on Wikipedia. I am using a work computer, and I trust that it does not display any inaccurate results linked to the IP address (as I believe my colleagues have not engaged in Wikipedia editing). Please check my account. ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has been many years, and the user is trying to get it resolved in the way we'd like to see. No objections from my side. Huon (talk) 21:28, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Deepfriedokra: I see no evidence of recent block evasion, based on checkuser data. The blocking admin is, unfortunately, no longer active. I therefore think you've done your due diligence and are free to lift the block if you see fit. --Yamla (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From what I recall, you were hired to create the page for Kelly Alexandra Hyman, which has since been created by another paid editor under Draft:Kelly Hyman. I recall discussing this with Yunshui, who then found some more linked accounts and blocked you for socking. I'd like to know if you are still involved in paid editing. Thank you. GSS 💬 15:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welp, that's an interesting development. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not involved because I know that paid editing is not acceptable for Wikipedia. ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 05:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In your previous comments, you made two different statements. In one of your replies to Yunshui, you claimed, "Please belive me I was work for days. I was searched informations about this persons. Edited texts in word document. " Later, you mentioned helping your friend.
I still have the screenshot of the job for "Storage King" that was marked completed after it was created, and a known paid spammer was hired for that task. If they hired you to create the article on their behalf, that would constitute a serious violation. Additionally, I noticed that you are using Wikipedia for promotional purposes and have violated WP:COI on the ka-wiki by creating ka:GEC Consulting. Furthermore, I observed that an article on the same company was created here on the en-wiki (GEC Consulting) a month after you published that article on the ka-wiki. Therefore, I would be interested to know if you have any relation with the user სოფო კვაჭაძე. GSS 💬 06:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have not any relations with that user. And this is not promotional article. I created more than 600 articles on ka wiki from 2014 and I am not using Wikipedia for promotional purposes. ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 07:16, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not suggesting that the article is promotional. However, it's important to address the fact that you, as the author have a conflict of interest that has not been disclosed. GSS 💬 07:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Huon, Yamla, and Deepfriedokra: I'm hesitant to trust this user due to their involvement in promoting subjects where they have a conflict of interest as well as link spamming on ka-wiki, and their lack of clarity regarding their intentions upon being unblocked. While I'm unable to disclose specifics to avoid violating WP:OUTING, I'm available to provide further information privately if necessary. GSS 💬 13:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Intrigued. And hesitant. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Regardless of the decision regarding my case, kindly refrain from acquiring any of my personal information from sources other than the details I currently provide. Thank you. ~ბ.ბ.~ (talk) 17:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beqabai&oldid=1210647994"