Revision as of 18:06, 23 November 2007 editVartanM (talk | contribs)6,453 edits →"De jure": reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:18, 23 November 2007 edit undoVartanM (talk | contribs)6,453 edits →Cultural life: offendedNext edit → | ||
Line 492: | Line 492: | ||
:::::::: Here's the source for you: If we were covering Kuwait occupied by Suddam, would we present the authorities appointed by him as the legal ones? It does not matter that separatist forces appointed a mayor in the occupied territories, it still is not a legitimate authority there. ] (]) 12:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | :::::::: Here's the source for you: If we were covering Kuwait occupied by Suddam, would we present the authorities appointed by him as the legal ones? It does not matter that separatist forces appointed a mayor in the occupied territories, it still is not a legitimate authority there. ] (]) 12:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::::::::They regret the elections, I see nothing about them being illegal or illegitimate. (The full press release may say that; however, their press site is presently down). You are making a point with the Kuwait comparison, but I would offer in exchange, what if the state of Virginia changed its flag while seceded from the union? Would you insist its pre-secession flag be given top or equal billing, even though it was the states right to change it? That's how I see the coat of arms thing. I's been nearly 15 years - at some point, you have to start accepting local decisions, if not the greater context of Nagorno-Karabakh. Regardless of whether or not NK is legal, cities and towns still exist and still have decisions and elections. --] (]) 14:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | :::::::::They regret the elections, I see nothing about them being illegal or illegitimate. (The full press release may say that; however, their press site is presently down). You are making a point with the Kuwait comparison, but I would offer in exchange, what if the state of Virginia changed its flag while seceded from the union? Would you insist its pre-secession flag be given top or equal billing, even though it was the states right to change it? That's how I see the coat of arms thing. I's been nearly 15 years - at some point, you have to start accepting local decisions, if not the greater context of Nagorno-Karabakh. Regardless of whether or not NK is legal, cities and towns still exist and still have decisions and elections. --] (]) 14:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
::::::::::Grandmaster your comparison is offending and I expect an apology. Are you really comparing the local population with Saddam having invaded Kuwait? And you are wrong, the Azerbaijani government is NOT recognized as the authority there by any nations. Had the US, World Bank or any nation recognized as only authority the government of Azerbaijan, they'd handle the aid packages to the Azerbaijani government. They do not. Official recognition does not amount to a recognized authority of the Azerbaijani government. Also your offending language like 'separatist' is out of place. The Coat of Arm is decided by those who represent the population there, a Coat of Arms has nothing to do with international recognition or anything of that sort. ] (]) 18:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:18, 23 November 2007
Azerbaijan Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Armenia B‑class | ||||||||||
|
Archives |
Edit this box |
Shushi Coat of Arms
The coat of arms on this articel for Shushi should be changed with this one, because that is the new coat of arms of Shushi. ROOB323 03:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- It is illegal, as NK does not exist de-jure. Grandmaster 17:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Coat of arm or gerb of Shushi has nothing to do with NKR international recognition. If inhabitatnts of Shushi decide that this is going to be their arm of Coat then who are you Grandmaster to decide which coat is legal and which one not. When Azeri inhabitants come back to SHushi they can revert back the coat to previous one. As you always do, sitting and reverting people's notes in discussion page which is none of your business.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ArmenianNY (talk • contribs)
- Doesn't matter. We have the flag on the NK page don't we.-- Ευπάτωρ 20:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
This whole part is so strange and weird!
Conflict with Persia
In less than a year after Shusha was founded, the Karabakh khanate was attacked by Muhammed Hassan khan Qajar, one of the major claimants to the Iranian throne. During the Safavid Empire Karabakh was for almost two centuries ruled by the clan of Qajar (of Turkic origin), and therefore, Muhammed Hassan khan considered Karabakh his hereditary estate.<
As far as we know Qajars and Safavids are different dynasties from different time persiods. This inconsistency needs to be checked. Otherwise I am going to remove it.
- There's no inconsistency. Read carefully. Karabakh was ruled by Qajars of Ganja during Safavids, until Nadir shah took that territory from them. And when Karabakh khanate emerged, Qajars considered themselves offended, as they considered Karabakh their heriditary land. Grandmaster 07:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- However, user ArmenianNY's point is valid when we consider the fact that, from the first days of founding of the khanate, the Azerbaijani Qajar dynasty, which since the 1790s became the ruling dynasty of Iran, has been unsuccessfully trying to bring Karabakh khanate under its control once again. On two occassions in 18th century they failed, on the third one (1797) only temporarily and partially succeeded, and on the fourth one in 19th century succeeded temporarily before being defeated by Russia. Hence, this statement, along with many others facts, such as the 1805 Kurekchay Treaty and testimony of other Azerbaijani khans, show that Karabakh khanate was independent. This contradicts the statement currently on the page: "of the initially Persian ruled and later semi-independent Karabakh khanate (1748-1822)". The khanate was not ruled by Persia, and could not have been, not only because of who Panah Khan was -- he defeated the Qajars on Iranian territory, i.e,. south of Araxes -- nor was it semi-independent, as such khanates cannot sign treaties on their own behalf with Russian tsar or mint their money. So ArmenianNY is correct that based on this fact about the Qajar feud in the article, we should make the whole article more consistent and reflect the realities of the era, which was that the Karabakh khanate was fiercely independent from 1747 until 1805, and then from 1805 to 1822 was fully dependent on Russian Empire. --AdilBaguirov 19:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- That line was a later addition to the article. Of course Karabakh khanate was independent, otherwise why would Aga Mohammed shah invade his own province? Grandmaster 19:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting -- I wonder who added this mistaken information? It should of course be changed ASAP, to reflect the facts and truthful state of affairs. --AdilBaguirov 19:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- That line was a later addition to the article. Of course Karabakh khanate was independent, otherwise why would Aga Mohammed shah invade his own province? Grandmaster 19:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- However, user ArmenianNY's point is valid when we consider the fact that, from the first days of founding of the khanate, the Azerbaijani Qajar dynasty, which since the 1790s became the ruling dynasty of Iran, has been unsuccessfully trying to bring Karabakh khanate under its control once again. On two occassions in 18th century they failed, on the third one (1797) only temporarily and partially succeeded, and on the fourth one in 19th century succeeded temporarily before being defeated by Russia. Hence, this statement, along with many others facts, such as the 1805 Kurekchay Treaty and testimony of other Azerbaijani khans, show that Karabakh khanate was independent. This contradicts the statement currently on the page: "of the initially Persian ruled and later semi-independent Karabakh khanate (1748-1822)". The khanate was not ruled by Persia, and could not have been, not only because of who Panah Khan was -- he defeated the Qajars on Iranian territory, i.e,. south of Araxes -- nor was it semi-independent, as such khanates cannot sign treaties on their own behalf with Russian tsar or mint their money. So ArmenianNY is correct that based on this fact about the Qajar feud in the article, we should make the whole article more consistent and reflect the realities of the era, which was that the Karabakh khanate was fiercely independent from 1747 until 1805, and then from 1805 to 1822 was fully dependent on Russian Empire. --AdilBaguirov 19:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Name
Artaxiad, stop moving the Azerbaijani name. The city was founded as a capital of Azerbaijani khanate and had Azerbaijani population at the start of the conflict. So Azerbaijani name goes first. Grandmaster 18:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
stop political propagand!
Sorry, but some things are not right in your article and you dont give opportunities to other people to improve it. 1. you wrote- "Shusha is a town in Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, next to the rayon of the same name". Maybe yes in de-jure meaning, but never de-facto. Maybe its dont make you happy but de-facto its a center of an Armenian region of a de-facto Nagorno-Karabakh republic so anyone needs permition of NKR authorities to visit that town. If a tourist read your article he can by mistake ask for it to Azerbaijani embassy... 2. When the city was founded in the middle of 18th century (citation needed), it had predominantly Azerbaijani (citation needed) population. Dear author I believe you never was in Shushi of 18th century so pls add some (maybe falsified azerbaijani) references. I know surely these things: in the place of Shushi was a town founded by Armenian Tigran the Great king (called Tigranakert) and also some armenian Khachkars and monuments of miggle ages are founded there. See for example http://www.golos.am/2000/april_2006/18/st03.html or www.karabakh-online.narod.ru So pls dont lay and dont use WIKI for political propagand! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.118.95.4 (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
Citation tags
Golbez why were citation tags removed? Vartanm 22:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- They were manual ] tags instead of proper ones. --Golbez 23:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I saw that, I just wanted to know if there was another reason. Didn't want to add them back without clarifying first. Vartanm 23:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Those tags are absolutely irrelevant. If you read the article, you'll find detailed statistics on population at various times in the history. So please remove them and read the article further down the intro. Grandmaster 05:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- The other reason was the commentary added by the IP. --Golbez 11:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why not search and find whats being asked for? I'm leaving it to you to decide if its reliable. Vartanm 06:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- That's not a reliable thrid party source, it is a propaganda website. Grandmaster 06:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Those tags are absolutely irrelevant. If you read the article, you'll find detailed statistics on population at various times in the history. So please remove them and read the article further down the intro. Grandmaster 05:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- I saw that, I just wanted to know if there was another reason. Didn't want to add them back without clarifying first. Vartanm 23:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh come on, Vartanm has a very good point there. And Grandmaster, here too like all the other articles, we have a clear example of who starts and end edit warring. "Shusha within the Russian Empire" Is an entire section with one thing. The said resettlement of the Armenian population. Had this been the other way around you would have revert warred until being able to remove it just like you did remove quotations from Nakhichevan article about the resettlement of Tartars until changing the demography of the region. More notable than your source about the 1 million out of 1.3 million. I have attempted two interloaning to get that work, two times without results when it was a success for a work dating in 1894. The same single non notable author having written in 1911 placed in every given occasion, while the official Russian records of Armenian resettlements are totally excluded. Would you have ever allowed Nakhichevan having such a section when there are various works on ISI, Jstor and various databases and not a single work in those same databases for this entire section which you like to support so much? That you place so much weight on a single not notable author which has so much of a limited numbers of copy that a notable two major institution placed on the interloaning have attempted to locate it weren't even able to find it. Also, still after three attempt and requesting your answer about AdilBaguirov edit on NK which you reverted yourself to his version when in the past has been discussed various times, you have totally remained silent speak much of it. I'm pretty much confident you would have revert warred until getting an article locked had I introduced something such by attepting to pass a figure for what it is not. But guess what, you and I know that they are not accurate, but for the sake of the integrity of the article (NK) I refrained reverting. Fad (ix) 06:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't really understand what you are talking about, and you are again taking the issues to personal level. This user requested info on population of Shusha at the time of foundation being predominantly Azeri. It is in the article. Shusha had predominant Azeri population until tsarist Russia started resettlement of Armenians to the region. Check the quotes and see for yourself. Both Russian statistic info and English traveller Keppel attest to that. So the tags should be removed. Grandmaster 06:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the sources have actually nothing to do with Shushi, Shushi was an exception. There are quotes there which have nothing to do with it. An entire section under the banner of Russian rule is "stravestided" to be about the said Armenian resettlment. The 1 million out of 1.3 million has absolutly no place here on wikipedia. That source is nor notable nor supported by any single Russian records. The work can not be traced by inter loaning system, a Russian friend has attempted to find it too to not avail even from Moscow. You have requested the deletion from NK history of the claim about the Meliks a source from a modern notable author, who's work could be found on most major libraries here in Quebec but throw a non notable author who wrote a non notable work which has been published in a so limited edition, that the work is not accessible by instituional interloaning systems. 13 years following the 1823, an excess of Tartars of 19,271 families, and for the Armenians of 14,634. Those are from the official Russian records. Where are the Armenian resettlements in Karabakh? Shushi was an exception, the phenomen was not due to any resetlement policy but rather to a volontary movement of the Armenians from villages to cities, which was done in a more massive way in the case of the Armenians than Tartars. Fad (ix) 04:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- How would you feel if I called this a propaganda website. "History of terrorism dates back to the 1st century A.D., when the organization of zealots-sikaris began to function in Judea." Jews started the terrorism. Blame Jews for everything. Thats propaganda coming from Azerbaijan's foreign ministry. I mean how could you even take anything serious after reading that? Vartanm 07:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- If you noted, I never use any Azerbaijani websites to support my edits. Azerbaijani and Armenian sources are biased and engaged in a propaganda war. Therefore we should use neutral sources, as required by the rules. Grandmaster 07:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Vartan, before you groundlessly accuse and try to incite ethnic animosity, study history, as even the US State Department and Encarta (need I say more?) are in agreement with the Azerbaijan MFA author, not to mention many books on the subject by Jewish authors: , , , , and . --AdilBaguirov 00:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- If you noted, I never use any Azerbaijani websites to support my edits. Azerbaijani and Armenian sources are biased and engaged in a propaganda war. Therefore we should use neutral sources, as required by the rules. Grandmaster 07:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't really understand what you are talking about, and you are again taking the issues to personal level. This user requested info on population of Shusha at the time of foundation being predominantly Azeri. It is in the article. Shusha had predominant Azeri population until tsarist Russia started resettlement of Armenians to the region. Check the quotes and see for yourself. Both Russian statistic info and English traveller Keppel attest to that. So the tags should be removed. Grandmaster 06:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Don't play this with me again, you know of what I am talking about, and specifically. The entire section about Russian rule is nothing more than a disguised section about Armenian resettlement. Shavrov work is nowhere to be found on the two interloaning orders I have placed while I even were able to retrace 1890s works, even one vanity. And the title of Shavrov work speaks volume of the content. As it would not be the first time that Armenians were accused of "stealing" other people job everywhere they go, it isn't much harder to guess what was the purpose of such a claim at all. I have also asked a Russian friend to retrace the work for me to not avail. You have removed similar quotes, which were contained in reputable books or papers much more reputable and cited elsewhere such as they were cited on the ISI, or even found on Jstor and unlike this bogus 1 million figure were republicated in various other works. You haven't even permitted few lines about the much more cited referenced and reputable event, but yet an entire section is allowed about an event, which neither Jstor covers neither is there a work covering it listed on ISI or other databases. And days have passed for a long time I have requested you to comment about AdilBaguirov additions on NK, which you know he has fabricated the sense. But you have never reverted him and even reverted to his version which you knew and know is not true. Shusha is such an example of the sort of article which shows that it is not Eupator, TigranTheGreat, me nor the other editors which you consider your opponents who starts the trouble. As you know that there are documented Tartaro/Azeri resettlements for centuries, some I have already quoted(and you have reverted) and that we both know that if anywhere it were to be added it would have generated an edit war, which the result would have been its removal. Oh and Shusha, yeh, Tartars were a majority, it was an exception, no Armenians have ever denied that. Fad (ix) 15:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Fad, stop your constant barrage of senseless attacks and grounless claims. Be constructive and friendly. My NK additions are the only fair and right way to show the population dynamics in Karabakh, by using all available census and population data in the West. Meanwhile, privided a link to the Shusha 1989 census data, which testifies about the 92% Azerbaijani majority in that city. Even though the article is written by an Azerbaijani (but published by Harvard), it balances out the citation of Richard Hovanissian, an Armenian, that someone inserted towards the end of the article. --AdilBaguirov 20:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- I removed your addition to NK article because, I'll say it again Karabakh is different than Nagorno-Karabakh. And for the majority I don't deny that Azeris had majority in Shusha. You just need to find a neutral source. Just like I didn't add the Armenian source that supported Shushas establishment in 1750's Vartanm 21:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Actually the question was not addressed to you, since you don't know the subject very well and didn't participate in the discussions at all. Of course the censuses are relevant to NK -- it's the case not only with the Hovanissian's 1917-1919 statistics, which he points out is specifically about NK, but 1897 and others, considering that the unreliable 2001 "census" is used, not to mention the 1923 figures (which, as Russian ethnographer Yamskov testifies to, undercounted Azerbaijanis). So removing the table, whose stats are all reputable and verifiable, is not right. Meanwhile, once more, since as Armenians themselves often point out, ethnic Armenians of Karabakh were mostly living and settling into Mountaneous parts of the former khanate, then all the figures showing their population in Karabakh is pertinent mostly and specifically to NK. That's what Prof. Cornell points out too on the same page of his book as cited in the table: "...nevertheless certain that the overall increase in Armenian population was due to an increasing migration of Armenians to Mountainous Karabakh or an exodus of Muslims from the region." Therefore, again, removing that information is against the Misplaced Pages rules.
- This is a discussion page, and open for everybody. Secondly who are you to tell me if I know a subject well or not at all? This is the second time you insulted me. If you cant stay civil than maybe you should read some of the Misplaced Pages rules. Vartanm 01:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Actually the question was not addressed to you, since you don't know the subject very well and didn't participate in the discussions at all. Of course the censuses are relevant to NK -- it's the case not only with the Hovanissian's 1917-1919 statistics, which he points out is specifically about NK, but 1897 and others, considering that the unreliable 2001 "census" is used, not to mention the 1923 figures (which, as Russian ethnographer Yamskov testifies to, undercounted Azerbaijanis). So removing the table, whose stats are all reputable and verifiable, is not right. Meanwhile, once more, since as Armenians themselves often point out, ethnic Armenians of Karabakh were mostly living and settling into Mountaneous parts of the former khanate, then all the figures showing their population in Karabakh is pertinent mostly and specifically to NK. That's what Prof. Cornell points out too on the same page of his book as cited in the table: "...nevertheless certain that the overall increase in Armenian population was due to an increasing migration of Armenians to Mountainous Karabakh or an exodus of Muslims from the region." Therefore, again, removing that information is against the Misplaced Pages rules.
- I removed your addition to NK article because, I'll say it again Karabakh is different than Nagorno-Karabakh. And for the majority I don't deny that Azeris had majority in Shusha. You just need to find a neutral source. Just like I didn't add the Armenian source that supported Shushas establishment in 1750's Vartanm 21:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Fad, stop your constant barrage of senseless attacks and grounless claims. Be constructive and friendly. My NK additions are the only fair and right way to show the population dynamics in Karabakh, by using all available census and population data in the West. Meanwhile, privided a link to the Shusha 1989 census data, which testifies about the 92% Azerbaijani majority in that city. Even though the article is written by an Azerbaijani (but published by Harvard), it balances out the citation of Richard Hovanissian, an Armenian, that someone inserted towards the end of the article. --AdilBaguirov 20:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Meanwhile, the citation of Amirbayov article from Harvard University is fine as long as there is a Hovanissian citation in the article. You can't have an ethnic Armenian author cited there for some time now, yet complain about an ethnic Azerbaijani one. If Hovanisian is removed, then certainly Amirbayov should be removed -- and I will easily find replacement, perhaps even going as far as scanning the actual 1989 census page or getting it from CD-ROM next time I get an opportunity to get it. Again, double-standards are not acceptable -- either both are removed, or both remain. That's fair. --AdilBaguirov 23:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
No they are not relevent, and stop claiming others are ignorant. I have covered all of this. First they are the figures of 1921 not 1923, they were printed in 1923. We've been there but you still haven't corrected this yet. Cornel say: This information is only of limited use, as the census included the entire Karabakh Khanate, that is including lower Karabakh. Hence the figures for Mountainous Karabakh remain unknown;… p.68 The official records show, The 13 years following the 1823, an excess of Tartars of 19,271 families, and for the Armenians of 14,634. I have all discussed this in detail. But you don't want to even listen. Fad (ix) 01:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Fadix, what are you actually disputing here? The figures for the whole of Karabakh are relevant here, because Shusha was the capital of Karabakh khanate. And we can find official census figures from non-Azerbaijani source, however third-party sources say the same. Azerbaijanis were 90% of population of Shusha at the beginning of the conflict:
- Yet Nagorny Karabakh was not only an Armenian region. Roughly a quarter of the population – some forty thousand people – were Azerbaijanis with the strongest ties to Azerbaijan. This sudden upsurge of protest in the mainly Armenian town of Stepanakert, however peaceful its outer form, could not but antagonize them. You had only to tilt your head in Stepanakert to see the neighboring town of Shusha – 90 percent of whose inhabitants were Azerbaijani – high on the cliff top above.
- Thomas De Waal, Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War. NYU Press, 2004, ISBN 0-8147-1945-7
- Read what I have said carefully another time. This is actualy not what I have said. What I have said was that the official records are as follow for Karabakh. The 13 years following the 1823, an excess of Tartars of 19,271 families, and for the Armenians of 14,634. There are no records of any resetlment policy for Karabakh, for anything, there has been more Tartar population increase and this from Russian official records than Armenians. I have all discussed that. There was no resettlement for Karabakh. I have repeated this and have also provided official records. I also said that the quote on 1 million out of 1.3 million does not fit in any articles here on Misplaced Pages. And I have plainly explained why above. The entire section is about an Armenian resettlement while it is supposed to be about Russian rules. I do not dispute anything about Shushi or Shusha call it what you want. But Shushi is Shushi, and the Armenian increase of population there has nothing to do with population resettlement, it was a city, Armenians have left villages for cities, this happened not only there but elsewhere, including the Ottoman empire, many Armenians even left for Europe and America during that time. The section is thosefor is original research. Fad (ix) 15:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- How is this original research, if it is sourced info:
- This limited population may be ascribed to frequent wars which have long desolated the province, and to the emigration to Persia of many Mohammedan families since its subjection to Russia, although many Armenians were induced by the Russian government, after the peace of Toorkmachay, to emigrate forms Persia to Karabagh.
- The Penny Cyclopædia of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, 1843
It is about time you understand what NPOV mean, I have carefuly tried to explain this to you, 1, 2, 3, 4, no over. Providing a source does not justify presenting a position as fact. The official Russian records are the following. The 13 years following the 1823, an excess of Tartars of 19,271 families, and for the Armenians of 14,634. Those are the official Russian records. The records also state that there is no place in Karabakh for Armenian resettlement, the Armenians who were resettled were redirected elsewhere. The Muslim population of Shushi in fact decreased a little bit, but reincreased later. The absolute figures and excess population for Karabakh point to more Muslim immigration within Karabakh than Armenian. Your position is a fringe, a fringe, it does not justify covering a fringe position in an entire section and when it is contradicted by official records. I have enough source from notable publications to start an entire long article on the settlement of Tartar populations and eviction of Armenians for a very long period of time, yet you have deleted quotes and found few lines about it worth deleting from Nakhichevan. Also, Penny Cyclopædia does not mean anything at all we don't know of which resettlement it is talking about, as the only recorded significant Armenian immigration in Karabakh was those Armenians who returned under Russian rules, those same who escaped Ebrahim Khan opressions. Also, Shavrov N.I. is not notable at all to even be considered here or anywhere else. You haven't still addressed my criticism. The title of the work alone speak volume of its credibility. The German in WWI have printed various such pamphlets on the Armenians having "stolen" every jobs within the Ottoman Empire and who would immigrate everwhere like like rotten worms will eat what is of worth. General Bronsart had this to say about the Armenians: "Namely, the Armenian is just like the Jew, a parasite outside the confines of his homeland, sucking off the marrow of the people of the host country. Year after year, they abandon their native land like the Polish Jews who migrate to Germany to engage in usurious activities. Hence the hatred which, in a medieval form, has unleashed itself against them as an unpleasant people, entailing their murder." At the beginning of the 20th century this sort of allegations have found echo in the Russian Empire too, in which the Russians would stire Tartars to spark a conflict and "control" the Armenian alleged "threat" (purely commercial). Let give a try, why don't you quote the entire paragraph from where that quote comes from? Afteral you wanted the deletion of Walker, who is notable, but replicate this author in every given article. Fad (ix) 22:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- First of all, I cite my sources, and they clearly say that Armenians were settled in Karabakh. Second, you cite no sources whatsoever. Third, Shavrov is notable as a source of info, he was a Russian official, known for his chauvinist views. He was opposing to settlement of people other than Russian in the Caucasus and claimed that Muslim population should have been replaced by Russian people. Nowadays his views are of no interest, but the statistics he provided are, since he was a person well familiar with the situation due to his position. Grandmaster 17:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, unless Ebrahim Khan opression is indicated, this is simply POV pushing. And no, there is no official records about resettlement in Karabakh, the official records clearly show more absolute Tartar population increase. As for Shavrov, you have just confirmed what I have been saying and discredited to source yourself. I am waiting you to translate the entire paragraph where this figure is provided. Thanks. Fad (ix) 21:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I am still waiting Grandmaster. Fad (ix) 16:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- The paragraph is way too large to translate, maybe you can use some online translators:
- Конечно, колонистам были отведены лучшие земли казны и даны различные льготы. Затем с 1828 по 1830 год мы переселили в Закавказье свыше 40.000 персидских и 84.600 турецких армян и водворили их на лучшие казенные земли Елизаветпольской и Эриванской губерний, где армянское население было ничтожно, и в Тифлисском, Борчалинском, Ахалцихском и Ахалкалакском уездах. Для поселения им было отведено более 200.000 десятин казенных земель и куплено более чем на 2 млн. рублей частновладельческих земель у мусульман: Нагорная часть Елизаветпольской губернии и берега озера Гокчи заселены этими армянами. Необходимо иметь в виду, что из 124.000 армян, официально переселенных, переселились сюда и множество неофициальных, так что общее число переселившихся армян значительно превышает 200.000 человек. После Крымской кампании опять вселяется некоторое число армян, в точности не зарегистрированное. Период с 1864 по 1876 г. ознаменовывается нашей усиленной деятельностью по заселению Черноморского побережья армянами и греками, привозившимися на казенный счет из Малой Азии, а затем эстами, латышами, чехами. Новоселам отводились лучшие казенные земли. Счастливо окончившаяся турецкая война 1877-1879 гг. одарила нас целым потоком малоазиатских новоселов: в Карсскую область вселено около 50 тыс. армян и около 40 тыс. греков, и сразу пустовавшая область получает довольно многочисленное инородческое население. Кроме того, генерал Тер-Гукасов выводит в Сурмалинский уезд 35 тыс. кибиток турецких армян, которые остаются у нас. После этого начинается непрерывный поток армян из Малой Азии, переселяющихся сюда семьями и отдельными лицами.
- Also, the article in Britannica also supports the info on setlement of Armenian population in Karabakh after the Russian conquest:
- The Russian campaigns against the Persians and the Turks in the 18th and 19th centuries resulted in large emigrations of Armenians under Muslim rule to the Transcaucasian provinces of the Russian Empire and to Russia itself. Armenians settled in Yerevan, T'bilisi, Karabakh, Shemakha (now Samaxi), Astrakhan, and Bessarabia. At the time of the massacres in Turkish Armenia in 1915, some Armenians found asylum in Russia. A number settled in the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh within the neighbouring Muslim country of Azerbaijan. Armenians now constitute about three-fourths of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh; since 1988 there have been violent interethnic disputes and sporadic warfare between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in and around the enclave. Grandmaster 08:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see the quote in that paragraph, you must have given me the wrong one. As for Britannica, NK during the massacres. Fad (ix) 16:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Grandmaster, I am waiting the paragraph which contain that quote. Fad (ix) 16:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- The full context can be found here: Grandmaster 14:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Grandmaster, I am waiting the paragraph which contain that quote. Fad (ix) 16:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see the quote in that paragraph, you must have given me the wrong one. As for Britannica, NK during the massacres. Fad (ix) 16:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
In addition to Amirbayov's more detailed quote, Tom de Waal says the same about 90% Azerbaijani Shusha, per Grandmaster's above quote: "Yet Nagorny Karabakh was not only an Armenian region. Roughly a quarter of the population – some forty thousand people – were Azerbaijanis with the strongest ties to Azerbaijan. This sudden upsurge of protest in the mainly Armenian town of Stepanakert, however peaceful its outer form, could not but antagonize them. You had only to tilt your head in Stepanakert to see the neighboring town of Shusha – 90 percent of whose inhabitants were Azerbaijani – high on the cliff top above." Thomas De Waal, Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War. NYU Press, 2004, ISBN 0-8147-1945-7 --AdilBaguirov 02:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Pre-Turkic (Armenian) History of Shushi Should Be Included
The article completely disregards 1000 years of Shushi as a major Armenian fortress and populated bastion (Syghnakh - Սղնախ). It belonged to Melik Shahnazarians of Varanda, and – as depicted in details in Mirza Jamal Qarabaghi’s book on Karabakհ Khanate – was delivered to Panakh Khan as a token of bilateral political alliance. Before that - when the Turkic nomads ("Azerbaijanis") had not entered the Armenian-controlled highlands of Karabakh - Shushi played a significant role in Armenian resistance to Ottoman occupation during the Turkish-Persian conflict of the 1720s. This should be included in the history of the city. Shushi was a pivotal part of the so-called Lesser Syghnakh that defended the southern part of the five united Armenian principalities of Karabakh (Hamsai Melikutiunner). There is an extensive set of West European primary sources on the subject. Zurbagan 03:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Mirza Jamal states that Shusha was built in an empty space. According to him, there was nothing there before the city was built. And I restored a quote deleted by anon. Grandmaster 13:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Exactly. Agree with GM. What 1000 years are you talking about? Plus, who are these anons, does anyone know? --Ulvi I. 10:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- there are a lot of anons and new users taking out content en masse. I placed back all the content that has been there for months and was due to extensive deliberations. --adil 06:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I removed recent edits by anon accounts. No reliable sources were cited in support of the claims made. Grandmaster 07:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Panahabad
Sources for the name of Panahabad:
Abbas-gulu Aga Bakikhanov. Golestan-i Iram
Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast.
Please update the article with those links. Grandmaster 12:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Per above two references, the article was correct, and the name Panahabad should not have been removed by new user Shaloun (whose name is translated as "Joker"). --adil 14:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the great soviet encyclopedia. Read the articles about USA, Germany, Austria, Japan: do you aggree with all that you read? I don't think. Although it has some percentage of objectivity, it is not 100 % reliable, because it was a source of soviet propaganda. Meanwhile, it is interesting, what is the source of GSE? I'm sure, the souce is your other link - Abbas-Kulz-Agha Bakikhanov. I have read it - Gyulista-i Iram. This writing is dated one century after the foundation of Shusha, and is mentioning about Panahabad only once, but not as the initial name. Furthermore, in the writing of Mirza Djamal Djavanshiri Karabagi, the personal vesir of the son of Panah-khan, a contemporary of the founding of Shusha, the name Panahabad has never been mentioned. The link for the russian translation is here. http://zerrspiegel.orientphil.uni-halle.de/t1154.html I am sure, that the evidences of a contemporary are much more heavier than the subjective oppinion of GSE and a hundred-year-later written Gyulistan-i Iram. Please be first objective, and than Azerbaijani, and remove the name Panahabad as the "initial name of the town". Or you can bring me more evidences. In case of convincing ones I capitulate, I promiss. I am not a stubborn one. Respect --shaloun -- PS: my nick is 9 years old, and I have also forgotten, what does it mean, thank you for reminding.
- GSE is biased when it came to certain issues, but I see but I see no reason for bias with regard to the name of Shusha at the time of foundation by this source, whose second editor in chief was the son of Stepan Shaumian. Grandmaster 06:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Also, Mirza Jamal does not say that the town was not called Panahabad at the time of foundation, he simply says nothing about it. However the fact can be establshed thru other sources. Grandmaster 06:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Also, Bakhikhanov’s book was written in 1841, and Mirza Jamal’s book was written in 1847. They both wrote their historical accounts at the request of the Russian authorities about the same time, and I don't think that such a knowledgeable person as Bakikhanov was not familiar with the facts. Grandmaster 06:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Another source, which hopefully will put an end to this dispute. Please see the article about Ibrahim Khan Javanshir by the Armenian scholar George A. Bournoutian, which is not a neutral or pro-Azerbaijani source:
- In the second half of the century, Panah Khan built a strong fortress in Shushi/Shusha, which was referred to, during his lifetime, as Panahabad (idem, p. 72).
- There’s a typo in the online version, as it says Ebrahim instead of Panah in the above sentence, but I think it is simply an error by the person who did the typing. The town was founded by Panah, of course. Grandmaster 07:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry, but it was not convincing (for me). The second or seventh editor in chief of GSE is not too important: the GSE is for me a major tool of soviet propaganda. More, if based on GSE, many articles in Misplaced Pages should be re-edited with major changes. But that is not our theme. Mirza Jamal is still the most important sounce for me in this topic, because he was in the heart of the happenings, and he knew the person, who at your account, has renamed the town. Mirza Jamal could not run off such an important fact of rename of the town, when he is mentioning very many other, less important facts (channels from Araks, the water supply at the place of the future fortress, etc.). Bournoutian: again and again I say, that the silence of the contemporary, who knew the region and the time better, than anyone else, must be much more important than the words of others, for an online Encyclopedia. It is not too important, if Shusha wear the name Panahabad in the first 8-10 years of its history. My headache is that Misplaced Pages is bringing not reliable sources, avoiding really reliables. Respects. -- shaloun
- If you look at Bournatian’s article, he refers to the same Bakikhanov and Qarabagi, i.e. Mirza Jamal. The online version of Mirza Jamal Qarabagi’s “Karabakh-nameh” is shortened for publication in a magazine, however Bournatian refers to Qarabagi (p 72) as a source for Panahabad, i.e. the full version of "Karabakh-nameh". I provided many different sources to support the info about Panahabad, so I consider this issue to be settled. Grandmaster 10:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
You provided not reliable sources, avoiding really reliables. The statement not proved. Discussion closed. Respects. -- shaloun
- sorry dude, but just coming in and saying "not reliable sources, discussion closed", after being presented with 1) two primary sources, Mirza Jamal and Bakikhanov, and 2) two encyclopedia's (GSE and Iranica), is too commissar-like and hardly reasonable. Panakhabad is also mentioned in the letter of the Azerbaijan SSR leader to Moscow in 1945, by the way, but what is better, are the coins minted in Karabakh, and specifically, in Panahabad at the time: Panahabad was a historic fact, and since it is verifiable, and it is from authoritative and reliable sources, it stays. --adil 15:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Adil, have you read the "presented sources" - Mirza Jamal and Bakikhanov? Read them, although there is only one word in two works about Panahabad. Its enough, I have already said what is to say. Read my posts. All the best. -- shaloun.
- We also said what we had to say and presented tons of info from various sources. Please read above. Grandmaster 05:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Shoushi
The giant sign entering the town says Shoushi. I'm not registered. Can somebody make that spelling redirect here please?
- Done. --Golbez 06:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Undo
I did undo because the city in Armenian was removed, but all the other languages were left. ROOB323 19:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted Artaxiad's edit, which he marked as "clean-up", but in fact undid all my recent edits to this article. I also reverted his vandalism of some user pages. Grandmaster 15:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Tourist and historic sites/Prominent people
Grandmaster do you a have any sources or proof that this sites survived the NK war? Vartanm 03:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Parishan do you have any sources confirming that these people were from Shusha? VartanM 06:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just look in the respective articles, next to their dates of birth. Parishan 06:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Exactly. There are detailed articles about most of them. Grandmaster 06:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, will do. How about tourist and historic sites? How do we know that the buildings have survived the war? VartanM 07:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Exactly. There are detailed articles about most of them. Grandmaster 06:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- We don't. We only know that all those historical monuments existed before the war. Grandmaster 07:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I just went thru the list, most of them don't site sources and some of the people are not even from Shusha. VartanM 07:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- We don't. We only know that all those historical monuments existed before the war. Grandmaster 07:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Raise the issue with particular articles. The only one who was not born in Shusha is general Mehmandarov. His parents were from Shusha, but he was born in Lenkaran, where his father worked in Russian customs. Grandmaster 07:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Molla Panah Vagif - born in 1717 in the village of Salahly in the Qazakh district of north-western Azerbaijan,
- Uzeyir Hajibeyov - born on September 18, 1885 in Agjabadi near Shusha. Agjabadi is closer to Martuni
- Samedbey Mehmandarov - born on October 16, 1855 in Lankaran. I wonder what people from Lankaran think about him being on this list.
- Bulbul - born in 1897 in the village of Khanbagi, near Shusha. I live near the Pacific ocean. Also the article is in violation of copyright --VartanM 02:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- All those people (except for Mehmandarov) grew up or lived in Shusha. For example, Vagif, who was vezir of khan of Karabakh, spent in Shusha most of his life and was killed there. I'm not sure whether Mehmandarov should be in the list, as he did not live in the city for long, but he was Shushavian by origin too. So were Rashid Behbudov and Fikret Amirov, who were born in Tbilisi and Ganja, but their parents moved to those cities from Shusha. But other than Mehmandarov, all other people were the residents of the town. Grandmaster 05:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed the tag from Prominent people section, because it does not need references. References are respective wiki articles. Grandmaster 10:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Roofless Buildings?
Google Earth images show numerous buildings in Shusha appear to be without roofs. Can anyone who is familiar with Shusha comment on this? Beefcalf 22:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Good question; I'm looking at it now and I see what you're talking about. Perhaps they're ruins from the war? The population of Shusha now is 1/10 what it used to be, so they don't need most of those buildings. --Golbez 22:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to thank you for suggesting I look at Shusha on Google Earth, as I had never taken a look at it; the geography of the region is amazing. That is a perfect location for a fort city. --Golbez 22:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Here are some pictures I found on Picasa(all the way in the bottom) ] VartanM 00:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I reverted unsourced additions by anon. Grandmaster 12:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted another anon. Please discuss the changes first. Grandmaster 08:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted the edit that changed the name of the town from standard spelling. Grandmaster 05:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
anon
I am reverting anon user who does not explain the rationale behind his edit.--Dacy69 14:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC) Admin should pay attention to this article. Anon removes improtant imformation--Dacy69 18:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
List of names
I moved the list of names to List of Azerbaijanis from Nagorno-Karabakh. suggestions? criticism? VartanM 18:25, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- I added back the image of Azeri girl from Shusha, as the title of the page suggests, it's relevant here. I don't see why a simple picture of Azeri girl from Shusha is causing revert warring and disruptive reactions from User:MarshallBagramyan. Or perhaps, the attempt is to prove further that no Azeri soul resided in this city built by Azeri Panah-khan? Atabek 08:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- Atabek, your accusation that MarshallBagramyan is racist against Azeris is an Assumption of Bad Faith. No one can dispute the fact that Shoushi was an important Azeri town and many of the prominent Azeris were from Shousha. Now can you please tell us what does this picture add to the article. --VartanM 16:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I fail to see the relevance of it on the page. I'm growing sick and tired of your revolting accusations that I hold some racist grudge against Azeris in your attempts to stir up another nationalist/ethnic war; you level a charge like that on me again, and I'm reporting you straight to the ArbCom for failing to uphold civility on this website.--Marshal Bagramyan 18:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the picture is relevant, because the girl from Shusha is in authentic national dressing. Besides that it also reflects the cultural heritage of Shusha in the 19th century. As for your accusations, go ahead report me, I am not the one removing images of Azeri girl from Karabakh here or pictures and videos of maimed Azeri children from Khojaly Massacre, it's yourself and VartanM doing and advocating that. Assume good faith. Atabek 22:45, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Authentic national dressing? If that is the reasoning of the argument, your "logic" would also justify adding pictures of Azeris from Baku, or Ganje, or anywhere else from the region where Azeris lived on to this article. It doesn't reflect anything about the town of Shushi in the 19th century. If this is how Azeri girls dressed in the nineteenth century, then the picture isn't exceptional at all; if this is how Azeri girls from Shushi exclusively dressed (which would require a credible citation to say the least) then that's a different story, otherwise, a picture of an Armenian from Shushi would be almost equally as useless because nothing is being said about the town.--Marshal Bagramyan 23:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- The Nagorno-Karabakh page has this image, and it doesn't seem to bother anybody. They both tell about the kind of people that lived in the given location, in terms of their attires. Parishan 10:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
That's Nagorno-Karabakh as a region, as a whole. Are you saying that an Azeri girl's clothing in the 19th century was any different than say, one from a nearby village?--Marshal Bagramyan 00:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Coat of Arms
I restored the de jure coat of arms of Shusha back to where it should be. As current status of Shusha, occupied by unrecognized NK separatists, is not de-jure recognized, the de-jure coat of arms should be on the top. Atabek 11:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- MarshallBagramyan, pls. discuss your edit here before removal of legitimate info. I restore info as well.--Dacy69 18:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Coat of Arms belongs to history section, as it is the historical coat of arms. VartanM 00:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Armenian coat of arms is illegal, so it cannot be included as a legal symbol of the town. It was created by legally none-existing state. --Grandmaster 08:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
By Wiki practics: its easy to find any coat of arms by any unrecognized republic for ex. that of Prednestrovia or Turkish Cyprus. Wiki just provides information! Andranikpasha 08:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I restored the removed images. Girl from Shusha is relevant to the article, the rules do not prohibit adding pictures of people who lived in the city. The coat of arms arragement was made by the admin Khoikhoi, we can contact him if necessary. And fact tags are not relevant either, the sources are there. Grandmaster 10:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Baki66 perhaps you would like to explain why the historic coat of arms belongs in the template, and what the azeri girl picture adds to the article. Looking forward for your response. VartanM 19:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- I ment de-jure. either prove me wrong by proving that its de-jure coat of arms or leave it in the history section. As for the girl picture it adds nothing special to the article. Why is that girl special? why not another? or another? why not include every Azeri and Armenian girls pictures to this Article. VartanM 04:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Unless a source is provided that the de-jure coat of arms is official. I'm going to move it back to the history section. Thank you. VartanM 21:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
This article uses an excerpt from a pamphlet by the Russian racist polemist Shavrov. Besides being an unreliable source because of the author's chauvinist bias, Sh.'s argument is not directly relevant to the issue of Shusha's demographics. It should be removed. Verjakette 01:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Shavrov was indeed a chauvinist, but that does not make him unreliable, as he was not pro-Azeri. He was a Russian official well familiar with the settlement policy of the Russian authorities, and he claimed that the Muslim lands in Caucasus should be settled with ethnic Russians, and not Armenians. The statistic info presented by him is relevant here, as it shows how come that the Armenian minority became a majority in Shusha after Karabakh became a part of the Russian empire. Also I removed biased sources that Andranikpasha tried to use in another article and which are still disputed. Let's settle the dispute in the article "Shusha pogrom" first before spreading it here. Grandmaster 08:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
The sources are not biased! And noone disputted them. If you disputted some parts of the article "Shusha pogrom", no reason to add "not biased" partisan Armenian source (are you calling its deletion... a vandalism??) and OR and delete famous Italian historian (its surely not a vandalism... as he is obviously pro-Armenian extremely biased one:)... only for you)!Andranikpasha 15:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Grandmaster: Chauvinist Shavrov does not need to be pro-Azeri in order to be considered anti-Armenian. He is anti-Armenian and therefore not a reliable source. A similar case with Vasil Velichko, oft-quoted by Azeri POV sources. Remove them. But even if he were NPOV observers, still Sh.'s comment is not germane in the discussion of Shusha's demographics. It DOES NOT show how "Armenian minority became a majority in Shusha after Karabakh became a part of the Russian empire." Verjakette 15:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
see my comment - Shavrov discusses South Caucasus and "Lake Gokcha" but not Karabakh or Shusha specifically. Do not attempt to put this POV back in the text. Verjakette 15:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Shavrov is not anti-Armenian, he is anti-everyone other than Russians. His political views are not of any interest here, of interest are only his statistics about resettlement policy of the Russian empire that he cites in his book. As a Russian official he was well informed about that. Also, Shavrov is not the only source here, it is enough to compare the Russian statistics of 1828 with the later data to see that the number of Armenian population in Karabakh and Shusha significantly increased, while the number of Azerbaijani population did not. It is undeniable fact, with or without Shavrov. Grandmaster 10:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think you began hard pushing a totally OR-based, baseless, POV. Shavrov's passage does not discuss demographic situation in the town of Shusha. As a chauvinist, he cannot be trusted, too. Your inference that because there was a small migration of Armenians from Persia into the larger Caucasus the population of Shusha was affected necessarily is a baseless OR. The number of Armenians in Shusha increased because they came from nearby villages and other part of Armenian-populated highlands of Karabakh and Zangezur (neames of Armenian boroghs of Shusha indicate that - Jraberdsots (people who came from Jraberd), Megretsots (people who came from Megri), etc. Just FYI: Armenians who came from Persia and Ottoman lands never settled in the highlands of Karabakh, especially in Shusha. There are some records indicating that some Persian Armenians settled in lowland Karabakh (near Barda), temporarily. There are also two or three Perso-Armenian villages near Mardakert (e.g. Maragha) – but these people bear such striking linguistic and cultural dissimilarity with Karabakh Armenian natives. They speak a very, very different dialect. Verjakette 14:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Verjakette and Bassenius, please, discuss the references and come to a conclusive consensus before removing references from the article. There were also numerous Azerbaijani villages surrounding both Shusha and Khankendi (Stepanakert), such as Malibeyli, Gushchular, Karkijahan, Dashalti, so what? What you need is substantiated research and sources, not removing what's currently in the article. Thanks. Atabek 14:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Shavrov said that Armenian immigrants settled in the mountainous part of Elisavetpol gubernia, which is Karabakh. Encyclopedia Britannica also said that Armenians settled in Karabakh. There are many other sources, I can provide quotes if necessary. Grandmaster 14:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, provide verifiable sources (other than Shavrov) that Armenians from Persia or Turkey settled in Shusha specifically (not in the "mountainous part of Elisavetpol gubernia" - actually I do not believe sources like that exist at all, so I would doubt those as forgeries), and we will see if those can be used. I also think that Shavrov, Velichko and other chauvinists should not be quoted. I can provide Russian and European "sources" of this kind that Tartars (Azerbaijanis) are perfidious Muslims with pederastic proclivities. Do you want that kinda crap in Wiki in articles dealing with Azerbaijan? Of course not. Atabek's rv will be ignored because he simply did not understand the argument in the debate and engaged in edit warring. Bassenius 16:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Aynabend, the last time you edited Misplaced Pages was over a month ago, and you decided to revert for Atabek? thats called meatpuppeting. Shavrov is not an independent source. The work is about a so-called threat the immigrants represent to the Russians economically. It's a xenophobic piece on the anti-Armenian policies of the Russians, which was the same as Prince Lobanoff's policy who announced that Russians desire Armenia without the Armenians.
And Grandmaster, why is it that Britannica is only a credible source when it support your position? (forgot about Khachen???), and no, it does not support your position. It speak of Karabakh, which includes the lowlands, the only time it speak of NK, was when it covers the refugees during the Armenian genocide who did not remain in NK anyway. And beside what is the relevancy of this quote? How many articles do you guys think should be used to cover how Armenians were alien and how millions were brought there, even in subjects such as Shushi? I believe this sort of problem could only be fixed once conflict resolution start dealing with POV pushing. -- VartanM (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I also removed the tourist and historic sites list. Request to source the section was made in May '07. Trivia sections are discouraged and unencyclopedic. -- VartanM (talk) 21:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Coat of arms will also be moved to history section unless its sourced. -- VartanM (talk) 21:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- The fact that Armenians emigrated in large numbers to Karabakh is very well documented in Western and Russian sources.
- The penny cyclopædia of the Society for the diffusion of useful knowledge. 1833:
- The population of Karabagh, according to the official returns of 1832, consisted of 13965 Mohammedan and 1491 Armenian families, besides some Nestorian Christians and Gypsies. This limited population may be ascribed to the frequent wars which have long desolated the province, and to the emigration to Persia of many Mohammedan families since its subjection to Russia, although many Armenians were induced by the Russian government, after the peace of Toorkmanchay, to emigrate from Persia to Karabagh.
- Britannica:
- The Russian campaigns against the Persians and the Turks in the 18th and 19th centuries resulted in large emigrations of Armenians under Muslim rule to the Transcaucasian provinces of the Russian Empire and to Russia itself. Armenians settled in Yerevan, T'bilisi, Karabakh, Shemakha (now Samaxi), Astrakhan, and Bessarabia. At the time of the massacres in Turkish Armenia in 1915, some Armenians found asylum in Russia. A number settled in the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh within the neighbouring Muslim country of Azerbaijan. Armenians now constitute about three-fourths of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh; since 1988 there have been violent interethnic disputes and sporadic warfare between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in and around the enclave.
- So Shavrov, whether chauvinist or not, was saying pretty much the same thing. And sharp increase of Armenian population in Shusha was a result of the Armenian immigration to the region. Grandmaster (talk) 06:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Also, inclusion in this article of POV claims from a disputed article about "pogroms", when it is well documented that there was a fighting initiated by the Armenian militants is not acceptable. Let's resolve the dispute on the other article first, both title and contents of which are still disputed. Grandmaster (talk) 06:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I distinctly recall that this was already settled during the exchange between Fadix and Adil back in February. Perhaps this should serve as a refresher: Most of the Muslim population was in the lowland in 1823; before the “resettlement”, there were 59 Armenian villages but only seven Tartar in the mountainous region. According to official statistics, there were, in the Karabakh region, (which includes the lowlands) 15,729 Tartar families in 1923 but 35,000 in 1836. This means that the Tartar population nearly doubled in a period of 13 years, taking in account natural growth from both sides, there weren’t fewer Tartars moving to Karabakh than Armenians. Those are official records, and 1 + 1 = 2, last time I checked, is not OR. The 1832 figures were also probably mistypes. The 1810 statistics for the whole of Karabakh gave 9,500 Muslim families, and 2,500 Armenian families; the 1823 figures were 15,729 Tartar families and 4,366 Armenian families (observe the increase in absolute figures, more Muslims moving to Karabakh than Armenian). If your figures from Penny are accurate, this would mean that ‘’Armenians left Karabakh’’, not settled there, unless the work is comparing the number of Armenian families with the total number of Muslim.
As for Britannica, this is nothing new. You already posted it and it was answered by Vartan, so why post it again? It is talking about Karabakh, not NK; it only covers NK after 1915, but we already know that in NK, Armenians as far as official statistics could go, were a majority, not only ¾ of the population, but above 90%, which they maintained in 1921. The only shift in the relative value in NK was after 1921, and it was a decrease in the proportion of the Armenian population.
The only reason why someone will bring up a massive Armenian resettlement claim in every given occasion would be to mislead readers. We all know that Karabakh and NK are not the same, and we all know that in NK the Armenians were a majority and this before 1823. NK supported Peter the Great’s campaign while the Muslims opposed it; how could it support the campaign a century prior to if its population was Muslim? In sources of that time, they speak only of an Armenian army, Armenian generals, etc. There is no way in the world that someone will throw Shavrov in the picture by claiming that it is relevant information and continue the myth that Armenians never lived there. It is common knowledge that the Armenians were living there over a millennium prior the massive resettlement of the Turkic tribes. Should we start adding this too? Also, one million defies logic: where on Earth did those million come from? Persia? Impossible, it is at least three times the total Armenian population of that time. There would be records of vacated Armenian villages in Persia, the emptying of new Julfa entirely. The Ottoman Empire? Hundreds of thousands of people is not something insignificant, it would have been reported in sources, the Turkish government who is doing everything to minimize the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire would take the occasion to use every archive available which supports such a massive movement of Armenians outside of the Empire.
Let’s be realistic here: Shavrov is a xenophobic author and his claim is not supported by any credible source, but if you really want to go there by cooking up some massive Armenian resettlement, we should also include the massive Turkic resettlement which is much better supported by sources and at a much grander scale.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know where you took your figures from, but increase of Armenian population in Shusha is indisputable fact, supported by many sources. Initially a minority, Armenian population sharply increased and started prevailing in numbers over Azeris. This could not be a result of natural increase, as Azeris had a higher birth rate. And modern sources also support the fact of massive resettlement of Armenian population to Transcaucasia. This is from a modern Russian scholar:
- Появление значительного армянского населения в России относится к концу 20-х годов XIX века, когда в состав империи вошли армянские земли, до того принадлежавшие Персии или Турции. Эти перемены сопровождались массовыми переселениями персидских и турецких армян на теперь уже российские территории. До начала переселения в российском Закавказье было зарегистрировано 107 тыс. армян (а всего в России их насчитывалось 133 тыс. - примерно 6-7% всех живших в мире армян, тогда как более 80% их общего числа находилось в Турции). По оценкам, только в конце 20-х - начале 30-х годов XIX века в Закавказье прибыло около 200 тыс. армянских эмигрантов. Затем поток резко уменьшился, но все же не прекратился, и к 60-м годам XIX века в России проживало уже более 530 тыс. армян, из которых почти 480 тыс. - в Закавказье .
- Середина 90-х годов ознаменовалась трагическими событиями в Турции. В 1894-1896 годах вспышки геноцида унесли жизнь около 200 тыс. армян и подтолкнули их к новой массовой эмиграции в Россию. По оценкам, в 1897-1916 годах в Россию прибыло около 500 тыс. армян . Накануне Первой мировой войны в пределах Российской Империи жило 1, 8 млн армян - немногим меньше, чем в Турции (2 млн).
- This Russian scholar says that before immigration there were 107,000 Armenian people in Transcaucasia, and as result of immigration their number reached 1,8 million before the start of the World War I. And Britannica also mentions Armenian immigration to Karabakh, I don't understand what the problem is with this source. There was no Armenian population in lowland Karabakh, so the immigrants settled in the highland part of the region. These statistics are very well known, and supported even by the Armenian sources. --Grandmaster (talk) 07:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
The Russian "scholar" says nothing about Karabakh, much less Shushi. As for Shushi, it was a purely Armenian village called Shoshaberd, before Tatar warlord Panah settled Tatar nomads there and called it Shushi. So, actually it was the Tatars (or the so called "Azeris") whose percentage grew after migrating to Armenian lands.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 12:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Grandmaster has a problem with formal logic. He is told that there are no references about Shusha or Karabakh highlands specifically but he is pushing his POV with piles of completely irrelevant information. Shusha was established by Armenians - not by Panakh the Brigand (as Armenians call him) - and the Turks were an uninvited and unwanted element there from the beginning. Correspondence of Armenian meliks with Russian emissaries testify about that. Bassenius (talk) 17:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
"De jure"
I would think that coats of arms were not decided by national authorities, and rather chosen by each state or city. In this case, the city of Shusha - contrary to the desires of Baku - has chosen a new coat of arms. I'm not sure how NPOV it is to say it has two coats of arms - if the locals have changed the coat of arms, then the new one is de jure. You have to show evidence that there is a significant government-in-exile that retains the original. It's like if the U.S. state of Virginia changed its flag while it had seceded from the union during the American Civil War - we wouldn't include both flags, because flags are not dictated by Washington, they are chosen by each state; if there were a significant government-in-exile of Virginia that maintained the old flag, then we would mention that. I would think the same applies to coats of arms. So the question here is - is there a significant government-in-exile of Shusha? --Golbez (talk) 22:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thats what I'm asking for. I want to make sure the historic coat of arms wasn't added just because the de-facto one is there. There is no indications whatsoever that de-jure government exist or uses any coat of arms. Here is a source for the de-facto--VartanM (talk) 23:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
There is no de-jure Azerbaijani government in Shushi, and never will be. The coat of arms is misleading and merely represents the fantasies of those in Azerbaijan fooled by their government's propaganda. Hence, it has no place in the infobox.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 23:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Welcome back, Tigran. Could we please tone down the nationalist rhetoric on talk pages and edit summaries, everyone? --Golbez (talk) 00:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
i agree there is no such thing as de-jure Azerbaijani government in Shushi or its coat of arms; it is factually untrue. Hnarakert (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Golbez. I am sure we all miss the relatively civilized environment you were able to maintain on the Nagorno-Karabakh page a year ago. Unfortunately, as long as the Azerbaijani editors continue their disruptive rhetoric about "separatists," the environment is likely to remain contaminated. And again, I am in no way assuming bad faith on their part. I am sure they sincerely believe they are improving the quality of Misplaced Pages articles while disrupting them.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 00:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh come on GM, you know where I took those figures from, if you really don't, then you should read other contributors’ work; those records were provided and are official Russian figures. Azeris had a higher birth rate? Do you have any source for this? According to the King Crane commission, Armenians had a higher birth rate in the Eastern Ottoman Empire than the Muslim population. There is no rational reason as to why Azeris would have that much of a higher birth rate than the Kurds, both were nomads with similar social structures. Also, I'm afraid the official data and established history is more credible than what one or two obscure scholars say. The official Russian records of 1897 recorded in the 8 provinces 1,127,212 Armenians. The official records of Armenian immigration are more easily found than any other group in the region. The numbers just do not add up. For comparison purposes, from 1834 to 1914, 65,950 Armenians left the Ottoman Empire for the United States of America; in the 1897 statistics there was 72,967 Armenians in Kars; Kars was previously in the Ottoman Empire, so immigration there from elsewhere is excluded. Those are recorded in official documents.
Actually, the massive Armenian immigration is a known myth not supported by any archival material, not even Russian. Justin McCarthy who is known for his denial of the Armenian Genocide and hired by the Turkish Grand Assembly admits in his paper published by the Turkish government the following:
Except for major migrations resulting from wars, there is very little evidence on migration of Armenians from the Ottoman Empire to Russia. It is known that this migration existed, but no registration figures have been found. Most likely the Armenian migrants were never counted. This has not kept some from making fanciful estimations: Supposedly a yearly average of 10,000 Armenians went to Russia from 1845 to 1870, 15,000 a year from 1770 to 1900, and a total of 150,000 from 1900 to 1914.” Ignoring the fact that such a massive migration would have been mentioned in Ottoman documents and European consular reports, which it is not, statistical analysis proves it to have been impossible .
This is what he says in the next paragraph:
In order to analyze various statements on migration to Russia, a simple computer program projected the Armenian population of the Russian Southern Caucasus from the figures in the 1897 census back to 1826 (immediately before the Russians conquered the Erivan Province-'Russian Armenia'). The program assumed various rates of natural increase (i.e., without major migration). When the figures for migration estimated in this article (1828-29 War: 50,000; Crimean War: 50,000; 1877-78 War: 25,000; and yearly migration of 1,000 in other years), the resulting population for 1826 is reasonable-between 395,000 Armenians (.01 yearly growth rate) to 613,000 Armenians (0.005 growth rate) in the Southern Caucasus. The actual figures lay somewhere in between these two extremes. If the fanciful estimations of migration as given above are used in the program, there would have been between 26,000 (.01 rate) and 144,000 (0.005 rate) Armenians in the entire Southern Caucasus in 1826. These figures are absurdly small, far below any estimates, including those of Armenian scholars.
Now observe what he says next: The 1897 Russian census supports these conclusions: The census registered 10,187 of the inhabitants of the Erivan Province, 38,664 of the Kars Province, and 101,066 in the entire Southern Caucasus as born in the Ottoman Empire. Figures for Armenians alone are not available, and these figures include many non-Armenians.
Should I continue for the last paragraph about the issue? Kars like I said was part of the Ottoman Empire, so the Russians taking possession of it cannot be called Armenian resettlement. If anything Bournoutian’s provided data is even supported by a professional revisionist such as McCarthy who not so long ago was condemning Armenia for the Armenian-Azerbaijani war.
Now on Britannica, it covers Karabakh not NK, there was no more Armenian resettlement there than in Azerbaijan as supported by the official Russian records which also record as much, if not more, Tartar resettlement. Shushi’s Muslim majority was the exception. Now what do you say we also cover Turkic tribes’ resettlement when prior to that, in various regions the population was Armenian. Shall we?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- I just cited a few sources above, which provide very detailed info about immigration of the Armenian population to Caucasus. Note that British encyclopedia of 1833 specifically mentions "the emigration to Persia of many Mohammedan families since its subjection to Russia, although many Armenians were induced by the Russian government, after the peace of Toorkmanchay, to emigrate from Persia to Karabagh". And we have many sources about Russian sponsored Armenian immigration to South Caucasus. Griboyedov is one such source. A modern Russian scholar Vishnevsky whom I cited above is another. And Britannica also mentions Armenian immigration to Karabakh, and it means NK, because there were no Armenian villages in the lower Karabakh, while in NK immigrants founded new settlements, such as Maragashen, which was founded by the immigrants from Iranian city of Maraga. Of course there are no separate statistics for NK within the Russian empire, because the term NK did not exist before the Soviet times. But since Armenian population was lived only in the mountainous part of the region, it is obvious that the immigrants settled there, and not in lowlands. Grandmaster (talk) 05:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
You know, I admire the clever editing. Reverting the article and saying that your adding a section and then making an innocent little edit with 0 characters changed ... As if it never happened. Bravo, I applaud your courage and wittiness. Now to be more serious. I reverted your revert and additions for number of reasons. First as I mentioned before, you reverted the article without indicating that you reverted the article, thats not really "professional" if you will. Second you added sources that are unverifiable, I mean, I would AGF and trust you, but not after the magic trick you tried to present. Please present quotes from your sources. Regards --VartanM (talk) 09:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like you are not talking to me, but recent revert was perfectly justified, as it removed POV edits by new users and deletion of sourced info. Grandmaster (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Grandmaster, your suggestion is an unsubstantiated POV. 1. Armenians did live in lowland Karabakh. the last villages were removed in 1988. 2. Your sources do not demonstrate that Armenians migrated to the highlands of Karabakh or Shushi specifically. What you have a hypothesis that does not make any sense to me. Armenian sources of the 18th century show that at that time the population of Karabakh was 200,000 people. This number is supported by German and papal missionaries. Bassenius (talk) 17:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- 1. Which villages were they? Please provide info about their location, population, etc. 2. My sources specifically mention immigration of Armenian people to Karabakh, so it is not a hypothesis, but a verifiable info. Persistent deletion of it is a violation of Misplaced Pages rules. Grandmaster (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
He doesn't have to provide names of villages, because he isn't introducing a statement in the article that Armenians immigrated to those villages. Since you are introducing a statement that Armenians immigrated to Shusha or NK, it is your job as an editor to provide sources specifically mentioning Shusha or NK. Saying "Britannica says Karabakh, so it must be Nagorno Karabakh" violates WP:NOR and WP:SYN.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 10:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Here's another source for you:
- During the turmoil of World War I, Armenia and Azerbaijan briefly achieved independence. However, the complex demography of Transcaucasia made it impossible to create ethnically homogeneous states, and the focus of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict shifted from Baku to the area known as Nagorno-Karabakh where, at the time, Armenians formed the great majority (over 90%) of the population, although many of them had come to this area in the nineteenth century as immigrants from Turkey and Iran. This mountainous "island" of Armenians in an Azerbaijani "sea" was separated from the rest of eastern Armenia, and it was fiercely contested throughout the short period of independence of the Caucasian states.
- Niall M. Fraser; Keith W. Hipel; John Jaworsky; Ralph Zuljan. A Conflict Analysis of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Dispute. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 34, No. 4. (Dec., 1990), pp. 652-677.
Minus my recent conflict with E104421 I tried to stay away from this article, but what can I do? Willingly or not, I am now a full member to this party. Grandmaster where are this many sources you speak about? The claim of massive immigration wasn't even Russian, it was Armenian. The Armenians were making such claims to convince that Eastern Anatolia was their original homeland, because of territorial claims back in those years. There was no massive Armenian immigration. Armenians were well established elsewhere, and sedentary people need initiatives, unlike the Tartars who would just move.
For a nomadic tribes there are no boundaries or frontiers, season after season they change their places, this is the reason why they didn't build cities in the mountainous regions or have some major presence in the mountanous plains. Shushi of course was an exception, and it was build in the middle of an Armenian villages. Year by year the Muslims were populating various regions and there numbers were also growing.
The only way to keep the same proportions, is that the immigrants proportion of Armenians vs Tartars is the same as the population of that region. This is what happened in NK, it was over 90% Armenian before the Russians took it, it remained over 90% in 1921. The only time there was relative changes was after NK was made part of Azerbaijan.
Besides the region of Shushi was mostly Armenian up until to 1235. Thats when the Mongols came along and burned the entire region to the ashes. the the population shift only started happening after the 1235 when the Tartars started to settle there. I don't see why those informations should not go there.
Some of the history which should be included, is the way Shoushi was build. By force by the Khan:In the reign of Nadir Shah, somewhat more than eighty years ago, the Armenian chiefs, who had gained a sort of independence in its mountainous interior, were forced, by their own dissensions, and the power of that conqueror, to receive a moslem khan for their governor. He build the town of Shoosha, and called it Penah-ahad, or city of Penagm which was his own name. . Shushi was indeed build after that the Melik Nazer ceded a small region on Karkar to Pana.
Beside, Ebrahim Khan ravages and destruction was what forced Armenians to vacate read also the following chapters and see for yourself how far this spread at the end of the 18th century and how it affected the Armenian population in the entire region.
The fact is that it was the Tartars who settled in NK not the other way around, they forced Melik Nazer to cede land and then build a Muslim town in the middle of an Armenian populated region. You are assuming that Armenians have settled in the highlands because there was many Armenian villages, but this doesn't make sense. What will be the interest of the Russians to bring Armenians and populate them in a region where the Armenians were already the majority, it is logical that they'd prefer to settle them in the lowlands, with the Muslims were. After all, were you not claiming that they did it to change the statistics.
Also, it is obvious that Shushi's Muslim majority could not survive, it was a forcibly build town, an enclave surrounded by Armenians. Armenians always had a tendency to leave for cities, in dense area's, where do you think surrounding Armenians in villages would have left for? But still in those years Tartars were nomads, how natural was for them to remain in that city? Over the years an equilibrium was achieved by a gradual decline of the Muslim population in the rise of the Armenians.
And Grandmaster, Maragashen? You mean the myth of Armenian resettlement, there is only one site with that information on the Internet, it comes from a document called The Forgotten Genocide , I didn't know you liked to read conspiracy theories? The monument they build was similar to the one build in Spitak in 1978. Both representing the same thing, the 150 anniversary of the fusion between Eastern Armenia and the Russian Empire. Also, your uses of double standard is going out of proportion. It is OK for the Khan to forcefully build a Muslim town in the middle of an Armenian bastion, but it isn't OK to build an Armenian village in the middle of that same Armenian bastion.
You need to give up this myth of Armenian massive resettlement, Armenians have been a majority in what is now NK since centuries, and unlike the rest it resisted Shah Abas's resettlement of the population. Also, don't you think it sounds funny when you speak of Armenian resettlement when the entire region of Armenian Highland the population was overwhelmingly a majority before the Turkic tribes settled there. You aren't answering Marshall's questions, why is it that it should not be mentioned? Also, why is it that nothing is said about the fact that the reason why the Russians wanted to bring Armenians in the first place was to replace the Armenians who left for Georgia to run away from the brutal policies of Ebrahim Khan, who savaged and burned villages after villages. VartanM (talk) 18:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- So, VartanM, how do you feel about baboons? Do you find them quite disgusting creatures as well?--TigranTheGreat (talk) 03:09, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- You are forgetting to mention a few facts. 4 out of 5 Armenian meliks were not native to Karabakh, they moved there in various times from various parts of Southern Caucasus. The only natives to Karabakh were meliks of Khachen, descendants of aboriginal population of Karabakh, i.e. Caucasian Albanians. So both Armenians and Azerbaijanis were migrants to the region, Armenians assimilated the Christian Albanian population of the highlands, Azeris assimilated Muslim population of the lowlands. Saying that Turkic people did not live in the cities is also wrong, please explain who were the population of the largest cities of the Caucasus, such as Ganja, Shemakha, Baku, Erivan, etc? And the only city in NK, Shusha, was built by the people you call nomads, while there were no Armenian cities in the area. So yes, migration of Armenian population to the region is verifiable info, supported by many sources. The last one that I cited specifically mentions NK, and not Karabakh in general. As for Maragashen, it was named after the city of Maraga in Persia, where the population came from. I hope you are not going to deny that. Grandmaster (talk) 09:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Please stick to the topic. What is the relevancy of from where the Meliks came from? And your descendenc theories are outdated. The Meliks of Khachen were from the Jalalian branch, which is recognized even by Cornell to be an Armenian.
If you think that you are gonna be able to place the Armenians and Azerbaijani's as equally migrants, you won't be successful, we know that aborigines from America didn't just appear there on the American continent, they moved there, according to your logic we can just claim that Native-Americans and Europeans are both migrants and there is no difference between them. What matters is the association of the place historically with the people before the other group arrived. Armenians in what is now NK have monasteries and churches build there even before the Azerbaijani identity existed, predating that identity to several centuries. And I don't know of what assimilation you are talking about, as genetic studies don't support your affirmation. Your thesis would have been true had the Karabakh Armenians shown a shift on some of the gens compared to the Armenians from Armenia and the Diaspora, but this is not the case. The current Azerbaijani's depending of their location are mostly or Iranian who in the past have been assimilated by Turkic speaking people or Armenian. The Aghvans by their population when the Turkic tribes came were inconsiderable compared with the Armenian population. When the Turkic speaking people invaded the region in the thirteenth century, the region was already culturally Armenian, the South was Persian and there was still some Arabic influence since the Arabs rule.
Coming to the cities, what you say makes no sense at all, invaded people do not sustain cities they vacate them and build small bastillons(it was a new strategy by Armenians). Also, none of the cities you name were build by nomads, Ganja was build by Arabs, the Armenians sustained the city for a considerable time before Turkic tribes invaded the place. Yerevan was an Armenian city for 2000 years (build on the ashes of Erebuni) before Shah Abbas deported its population. The place was still vacated and the region used for storage by the Ottomans before nomads gradually repopulated it. Shemakha was originally build by Arabs and Persians, while it is true that under Shirvan Khanate a town emerged, but just like Shushi, nomadic towns were built only to serve as the rulers residency. If the ruler died and was not replaced or Khanate abolished, it gradually changed. Neither was Baku build by the nomads, Baku we know was build by the Persians, the population moved there after Shemakha was devastated by an earthquake. Because of constant Turkic invasion in the whole region, the languages and dialects changed. Even in Karabakh the Tartar population was semi-nomadic. They were only leaving for the highlands for 3 months in summer.
Returning to the migration, you are ignoring any prior discussion as if all this discussion never happened. Actually, I wonder why I am arguing when you answer as if nothing was said. When searching for Maragashen this is what we find], you didn't even bother to change the errors when you copied it from The Forgotten Genocide a racist piece. Migration in the Armenian case only decreased their numbers in those regions, migration for the nomads overal only increased their numbers. This is an undisputed fact that no serious historian would deny. Yet you guys throw that in as many articles as you can. When in reality we can use reliable source in a dozen of articles about the vacating of Armenians and the migration of Turkic tribes on those regions. And again I repeat, the monument in Maragha was in the commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the fusion between Russia and Eastern Armenia.VartanM (talk) 22:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Vartan, that's wrong interpretation of history.
- The Aghvans by their population when the Turkic tribes came were inconsiderable compared with the Armenian population.
- Who says? I already quoted contemporary Muslim sources of the 10th century, that's a few decades before the migration of the Oguz Turks in the 11th century. They all say that Arran was populated by Albanians. And when Turkic Oguz tribes moved into the region, the Albanian population of such cities as Barda, Ganja or Beylagan did not disappear, they mixed and assimilated with Turkic people. So lowland and highland Karabakh had Albanian population, but while people of lowlands were mostly Muslim, people of highland were mostly Christian. Only a part of Turkic population of Transcaucasia was nomadic, and not the bigger part. But whatever, we can return to this later. Speaking of population shift, the migration of Armenians to Caucasus and Karabakh is well documented, I cited more than 1 source. I will replace Shavrov with other references if it makes you happy. And I never read "Forgotten Genocide" or mentioned any monument, I just said that Maraga was named after the city in Persia, where the founders of the village came from. Grandmaster (talk) 07:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeh right! First, I'm intrigued to see a source where it say that Turkic tribes significantly populated the place before the 13th century. It is a fact that before the 13th century there was no significant Turkic population there. Second you have to document that there was any significant number of Abanians in Ganja, this is simply not true, the city build by the Arabs perpetuated as culturally Armenian and Georgian. In October 1723 when the Ottoman tried to capture it, it was stopped by a joint Armenian, Georgian and Dagestani's . The only significant Nomadic penetration in Ganja for a long time was Kurdish and perhaps maybe Circassian.
Also, Arabic sources don't mean anything, Armenians from the East starting from Artsakh have a different and particular dialect, one of which reason why Armenian was classified as a Persian dialect for a very long time. Such dialects include Machkalashen language. Not only is this true, but some even have claimed that Artsakh Armenian dialect is the only surviving example of the Thraco-Phrygian language(which is believed to be the origin of the Armenian language). (Nations Without States: A Historical Dictionary of Contemporary National Movements, by James Monahan p. 38). Mark Malkasian in his work admits that a form of the local Artsakh dialects is virtually unintelligible to other Armenians. Even Cornell writes: some evidence that the area was inhabited by Armenians in the eight century, as a 'peripheric dialect' of Armenian called Artsakhian is mentioned in contemporary dialect.' Those Armenians have long considered themselves as Avghan, two century ago, their patriarchate was still claiming to be the one of the Aghvans. So you could provide countless references about an Aghvan language in Arabic sources, but it's very unlikely to be true, since a significant part of the Armenian population could (and still) barely understand Artsakh dialects, but considered them to be Armenian.
Also your claim that only a part of Turkic population was nomadic doesn't make any sense. This view is not supported by any published material, Turkic culture became sedentary only when the ruling elite spoke Turkic dialects and the sedentary Persian population was assimilated. This was in Azerbaijan, South of Arax, in the North further from Persian influence. In fact only the cities that were formed by the rulers had a sedentary Turkic population. Even in the beginning of the last century the Tartar population in Karabakh was semi-nomadic and had to move in the highlands in the Summer.
Also, you claim that both lowland and highland Karabakhs had Albanian population doesn't make sense, neither the unsubstantiated theory that Azeris are assimilated Albanians. Like I said, when there was significant Turkic influence on the region, it was to replace the Armenians. Your theory that Artsakh was Albanian as in different than Armenian when the Turkic hordes arrived has still to be supported. Also, you are so fast to assume that Muslim means non-Armenian, after the Arabs rule a significant number of Armenians became Muslim, in fact some of them moved North, others on the Black Sea and intermarried with the Hemsheni Armenians, but most of them were assimilated by the Turkic population.
And funny that you still keep talking about migration, when you guys have been suppressing any references of Armenian deportation outside of that region with assumed equal treatment against others. And also when nothing is said about the fact that it was the Turkic population who has the youngest history in that region, but yet you guys seem to have such good time interjecting that Armenians settled there while the Turkic population was a majority.
You claim that you have never read Forgotten Genocide, yet you spelled the place the exact wrong way and on google it is the only link which writes it this way. This is quite similar to the incidence where you have found a link from a White extremist website, don't you think so? And for your information, we have Ararat in Armenia too, does it mean that people from Turkey settled there to form it? Maragha in Iran had a heavy Armenian heritage and the word's etymology is shard in Persian and Armenian. The monument which the Azerbaijani Academia of science distorted in 1988 was build in 1978 the same year as other monuments were build elsewhere including in Armenia for the 150th commemoration year of the fusion between Eastern Armenia and Russia.
And don't present your exclusion of Shavrov as if you are giving me anything, we have established that his figures were statistically impossible, that he was a xenophobe, writing about how immigrants were stealing Russians job. If you really want to speak of Armenian resettlement, I think it will be reasonable to speak of the Turkic resettlement too, of a much, much larger scale in a much longer period of time. VartanM (talk) 18:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Cultural life
I introduced a new section on cultural life. Here are the quotations:
Encyclopædia Britannica, Academic Online Edition, 2007. Azerbaijan article, Cultural life: "... The people of Azerbaijan have retained their ancient musical tradition. For example, the art of ashugs, who improvise songs to their own accompaniment on a stringed instrument called a kobuz, remains extremely popular. Mugams, vocal and instrumental compositions, are also widely known, the town of Shusha being particularly renowned for this art. ..."
Encyclopædia Britannica, Academic Online Edition, 2007. sileh rug article: "... sileh from the Caucasus may have been woven in the vicinity of Shusha. A similar eastern Anatolian type usually shows a different range of colours."
I also cited the Turkic origin of Qajars: Encyclopædia Britannica, Academic Online Edition, 2007. Qajar Dynasty article: "... In 1779, following the death of Mohammad Karim Khan Zand, the Zand dynasty ruler of southern Iran, Agha Mohammad Khan (reigned 1779–97), a leader of the Turkmen Qajar tribe, set out to reunify Iran. ..."
The new section is really informative, i hope you enjoy. Regards. E104421 (talk) 09:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- The new section is ok with me, but you keep adding stuff that was removed earlier. Controversial stuff for which 3 users are being checkusered right now.
Let me go over the sources your provided
- Lets remmember that because of the war there are almost no Azeris living in Shushi
- The key words for the rug references are may have been eastern Anatolia different range of colors
- For Qajar, I don't see anywhere where it mentions Karabakh, Nagorno-Karabakh or Shusha. That information would be useful in Qajar article. This article is already long enough.
Please explain the revert. VartanM (talk) 11:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Revert of POV edits was fine for the reasons, discussed in much details above. There's no reason to add to this article claims that are disputed in the article "Shusha pogrom (1920)". Even the title of that article is being disputed, so duplicating POV claims across multiple articles is not acceptable. Grandmaster (talk) 11:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, i've already explained here, but i'll also write couple of words to this talk page. I reverted yours, since you deleted the cited references. Please, do not delete them. You can always add any previously removed, but referenced material, into the article (i do not know the article history in detail but just checked the last few versions including yours, too, of course, at the end i decided to add the new section into a more referenced one.), but do not delete the other sourced material. On the other hand, WP:AN/I is not a complaints department. Be civil and try to communicate with the other side at first, since Wikipedians define incivility roughly as personally targeted behavior that causes an atmosphere of greater conflict and stress. Regards. E104421 (talk) 14:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I shall answer your objections one by one:
- First one (Lets remmember that because of the war there are almost no Azeris living in Shushi): It does not matter, since both the article and the "Cultural life" section covers the whole history of the town.
- Second one (The key words for the rug references are may have been eastern Anatolia different range of colors) : The complete quotation from Britannica for "sileh rug" is "also called zili pileless floor covering from the southern Caucasus and parts of eastern Turkey. Formerly the term was used to refer to a type of flatweave whose name in its area of origin is vernehor verné, but it has now come to be used for a group of flatweaves, which may or may not be woven in two pieces and joined on the long axis. The design often consists of large square compartments, usually with small geometric figures diagonally arranged, bounded by stripes of smaller squares which contain lozenge figures. The design may be in weft float with portions of extra weft wrapping. Those sileh from the Caucasus may have been woven in the vicinity of Shusha. A similar eastern Anatolian type usually shows a different range of colours." Shusha is an important region for sileh rug.
- Third one (For Qajar, I don't see anywhere where it mentions Karabakh, Nagorno-Karabakh or Shusha. That information would be useful in Qajar article. This article is already long enough.): You deleted the wikification for the Turkic origin. There is nothing wrong in addition of references, since Qajar period is related with the city.
- Are these answered your questions? More questions, comments, ... ,etc. Regards. E104421 (talk) 14:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok let me go over your addition one by one.
- You reinserted the CoA. It was discussed above that it has no source and no clear indication if its the current one being used by the de-jure government. You reverted without saying a single word on why you think it should be there.
- You wikified the names. Thats good, thank you.
- You changed the location of the city from NK to Azerbaijan. I know you like to believe that the city is officially part of Azerbaijan, but the fact is its not. By changing it you are introducing POV.
- You added a source for the Qajar family being Turkic, but forgot to mention that the dynasty was Persian. Thats again POV.
- You readded Shavrov which was discussed above (discussion you weren't part of) and proven to be unreliable.
- You readded a unsourced POV statement
- You removed a sourced information
- You readded a POV section that was removed because it has no sources
- You readded the POV terms I fixed before.
- Again readded a section that was proven to be unreliable.
- You readded the tourist and historic sites section that was removed because its trivia and had no source since May.
- You removed a see also link that was recently added.
You see I had you did not just added a section that was informative. You coming out of nowhere and reverting to an older version and not saying a single word on why it should be reverted is an insult to all of the users here, in this talkpage, who are working hard to improve this article. This "My way or no other way" attitude of yours is unacceptable, thats why you were reported to ANI. You need to learn to read and understand the talkpage discussions and not blindly revert others work. You clearly didn't like it when I reverted you. How do you think Andranikpasha, Verjakette, Bassenius MarshallBagramian and I felt when you reverted and didn't even had the simple courtesy to explain why. Unless you start editing respectfully and in a constructive manner, expect to be reported to administrators. VartanM (talk) 18:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I recommend you to read WP:Verifiability: The threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Misplaced Pages has already been published by a reliable source. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. What you are doing is against Misplaced Pages policy. You're deleting the sourced information. You're exceeding that threshold, that's why i reverted your edits. As i already stated above, i started editing from a more referenced version. Among your complaints, the one related with the see also link is ok. You're right (btw, you can always remove unsourced material, firstly placing a "fact" tag, and giving editors time to provide sources, if they do not, you can remove them), but all others seem to be artificial reasons to overshadow your removal of sourced information. The new "Cultural life" section is based on world wide recognized Encyclopedia Britannica. You're trying to play with the words. In Britannica, it's written that "sileh rug" is "also called zili pileless floor covering from the southern Caucasus and parts of eastern Turkey." You replaced Turkey with Anatolia. In addition, you removed the Britannica reference to Qajar Dynasty article. There is no reason to delete Turkey and the Britannica reference, but, i guess you're so concerned with Turkic peoples, this bothers you. WP:AN/I is not a complaints department. First, enjoy reading the basic Misplaced Pages policies and stop deleting the referenced material. Regards. E104421 (talk) 19:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm familiar with the Wikipeida policies and have read them numerous times. I don't see where you're going with that, are you suggesting that its not verifiable that Shushi de-facto belongs to Nagorno-Karabakh Republic? I can provide many sources for that, if thats what you mean. Out of 11 points reaise you choose to answer only 1. The removal of the see also link is the proof that you blindly reverted the article. I was reasonable enough to allow the "Cultural life" section, I don't see why you're still complaining about that. Your additions would have been fine if you didn't mix them with a controversial revert. VartanM (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I did not noticed that the see also parts were different but i realized that there were deleted sourced information in your version. That's why i decided to add the new "Cultural life" section into the other. All sourced materials should stay. That's fairly trivial. You are keeping your favorite ones but deleting all the others. That's the problem. You never answered why you deleted the sourced material but tried to change/defocus the topic. Regards. E104421 (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- You didn't notice that the CoA and the historic section had no sources, also that Shakov is a chuvanist author and is being disputed. Again my problem isn't with your additions, but your revert, which you are still trying to disguise under addition of sources. VartanM (talk) 20:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- FYI i have no problem with the CoA being in the history section. VartanM (talk) 20:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think you meant "Shavrov, N.I. (1911) New threat to the Russian affairs in the Transcaucasus: forthcoming sale of Mughan to strangers ("Novaya ugroza russkomu delu v Zakavkazye: predstoyashaya rasprodazha Mugani inorodcam") St.Petersburg". I do not know whether he is a chuvanist author or not, the work was published. Unless it's falsified, it should stay. For this reason, i re-added them again. You can add extra information on that source into the notes section. As you might remember from Sabiha Gökçen article, there is nothing wrong in requesting quotations or adding quotation as "according to x" in case of the author/material being controversial. For CoA, there is already citation needed tag, so no problem. I might be quickly/roughly reviewed the last versions, but i just concerned with the references. Regards. E104421 (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Golbez, please explain why did you delete the historical CoA and included one that has no legal grounds whatsoever, as it is made by a de-jure non-existent state? How encyclopedic is that? Also, what's up with stating that NK is a disputed territory, while it is legally part of Azerbaijan and is internationally recognized as such? Don't you think that such changes are too POV and should be based on a consensus with other editors, considering that we have discussed that many times in NK article and that one has a different wording? Grandmaster (talk) 09:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
NK has seceded from AsSSR legally, there are full legal grounds for the CoA. And which also means that legally, NK is not part of Azerbaijan. Just because the UN and US state that it's part of Azerbaijan doesn't affect its legality. There is no de-jure Azerbaijani government of Shusha--these officials are now holding other positions after being thrown out of the city. So, the historical CoA cannot be a de-jure CoA. That only leaves the current, true, legal CoA--the Armenian one.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 10:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- It did not secede legally, and the legitimacy of the separatist authorities has not been accepted by anyone (even Armenia). So presenting illegal and illegitimate CoA as something it is not is not right. It is no more valid than the historical one. Grandmaster (talk) 11:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- I wonder why the Britannica references and quotations are constantly deleted. These are all informative. Please, do not remove the sourced material. They are from reliable sources and informative. I'm in favor of restoring the introduction section. Regards. E104421 (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- If you mean the ones from the intro, the first wasn't remotely needed, and the second had nothing to do with the referenced text. --Golbez (talk) 17:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Quotations from the deleted references: The first one is from Britannica: "also spelled Nagorno-Karabach , Azerbaijani "Dagliq Qarabag", Armenian "Artsakh" region of southwestern Azerbaijan. The name is also used to refer to an autonomous oblast (province) of the former Azerbaijan S.S.R. and to the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, a self-declared country whose independence is not internationally recognized." is informative at the intro, the second one is also from Britannica should be moved to the "Cultural life" section "The people of Azerbaijan have retained their ancient musical tradition. For example, the art of ashugs, who improvise songs to their own accompaniment on a stringed instrument called a kobuz, remains extremely popular. Mugams, vocal and instrumental compositions, are also widely known, the town of Shusha being particularly renowned for this art." There is no reason to delete them. Regards. E104421 (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think we have an article on N-K that removes the need for such a non-reference. You aren't referencing with that - you're adding information. I didn't touch anything from culture, I don't think. --Golbez (talk) 18:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- I see no reason for deletion of the info that NK is legally part of Azerbaijan. That's not how its done in the NK article, and Golbez knows it. I'm restoring the original version, let's agree on a compromise first before deleting well known facts from the intro. Same goes for other deleted sources. Grandmaster (talk) 09:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- The reference is cited to clarify the encyclopedic statement of the dispute. The Encyclopedia Britannica quotation is given for this purpose. There is no need to delete the informative quotation and the cited references. Regards. E104421 (talk) 12:55, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
1. Stop restoring Shavrov - no one has so far explained how his insinuations about general demographic picture of the South Caucasus are relevant to the demographics of Shusha specifically. 2. Gobez: the article does not mention the reality of NKR; either state that it is in a disputed region or if you want to mention "Azerbaijan," say that Shusha is part of NKR. Verjakette (talk) 14:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- What? I say it's in a disputed region (and if people want more information on that there's a helpful link), and Azerbaijan claims it but Armenians control it. What more do you want? --Golbez (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Period (aka Verjakette), Golbez merely reverted to his last version, the one prior to recent edits. The restoration of Shavrov's racist book was not deliberate.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 06:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Golbez, NK is legally part of Azerbaijan, and we provide a different description in the article about NK. Why do you change it here? Grandmaster (talk) 07:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Instead of making a statement, how about pointing out specifically where my edit is false or biased? It states Shusha is in the disputed region of N-K, that Azerbaijan has it as one of its primary divisions but presently has no control. What part of this is false or biased? --Golbez (talk) 09:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Also, why do you persistently delete the historical coat of arms, which is still in use in Azerbaijan, and leave illegitimate coa? Can you please explain? Grandmaster (talk) 08:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- We discussed this above; if it's the historical CoA, put it in the history section. There is no evidence that the national government controls what coat of arms a city uses. You may not be happy that Armenians are in control of Shusha, but they are, and changing the coat of arms is as much in their ability as naming a mayor - which we have mention in the infobox as well. As stated above, unless you can prove that a significant government-in-exile of Shusha maintains the old coat of arms (or has another mayor named, for that matter), it does not belong anywhere outside of the History section. --Golbez (talk) 09:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- First, old coas are still in use in Azerbaijan, see coa of Baku, for example. Second, there's no such state as "NKR", therefore their symbols are not legitimate. Neither US, nor EU, OSCE or UNO recognize such a state. The only internationally recognized authority there is Azerbaijani government. Therefore you cannot include separatist coa as an official symbol, as it has no legal grounds and no recognition. Grandmaster (talk) 10:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- The NKR didn't choose this symbol; the present government of Shusha did, didn't it? The same one that chose the mayor? And make sure you are choosing the right terms - are you saying the only municipal government in Shusha is controlled from Baku? Or isn't it possible an Armenian municipal government exists, regardless of the greater geopolitical context? If they can choose their own mayor - regardless of the greater context - they can choose their own coat of arms. Instead of, again, passionately arguing against Nagorno-Karabakh in general, how about focusing on the municipality here? Unless there is a significant municipal government-in-exile of Shushua maintaining another mayor and coat of arms, there is only one mayor and here is only one coat of arms, chosen by the local population, which at present is Armenian. --Golbez (talk) 10:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- There's no legitimate municipality there, may I remind you that any elections in NK are considered illegitimate by the international community? How could it be legitimate if it does not represent Azerbaijanis, who constituted more than 90% of population of the city and were expelled from their homes? So illegal symbol of illegal municipality has no place in the article, let alone replace the historical one. Even if you include such a symbol, it should be in the body of the article and explain who it belongs to. Grandmaster (talk) 11:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Even local elections, carried out by the local electorate? I'm going to need a source saying local elections are illegitimate. As for the fate of the Azeris, it's very unfortunate, but that doesn't change the fact that, unless there is a government-in-exile, the old coat of arms is historical, not present. If we include the mayor in the infobox, we should include the coat of arms - both or none. And it would make no sense to say the city has no mayor, wouldn't it? So I guess my question to you is - who is the mayor of Shusha? --Golbez (talk) 11:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- There's no legitimate municipality there, may I remind you that any elections in NK are considered illegitimate by the international community? How could it be legitimate if it does not represent Azerbaijanis, who constituted more than 90% of population of the city and were expelled from their homes? So illegal symbol of illegal municipality has no place in the article, let alone replace the historical one. Even if you include such a symbol, it should be in the body of the article and explain who it belongs to. Grandmaster (talk) 11:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- The NKR didn't choose this symbol; the present government of Shusha did, didn't it? The same one that chose the mayor? And make sure you are choosing the right terms - are you saying the only municipal government in Shusha is controlled from Baku? Or isn't it possible an Armenian municipal government exists, regardless of the greater geopolitical context? If they can choose their own mayor - regardless of the greater context - they can choose their own coat of arms. Instead of, again, passionately arguing against Nagorno-Karabakh in general, how about focusing on the municipality here? Unless there is a significant municipal government-in-exile of Shushua maintaining another mayor and coat of arms, there is only one mayor and here is only one coat of arms, chosen by the local population, which at present is Armenian. --Golbez (talk) 10:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- First, old coas are still in use in Azerbaijan, see coa of Baku, for example. Second, there's no such state as "NKR", therefore their symbols are not legitimate. Neither US, nor EU, OSCE or UNO recognize such a state. The only internationally recognized authority there is Azerbaijani government. Therefore you cannot include separatist coa as an official symbol, as it has no legal grounds and no recognition. Grandmaster (talk) 10:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Here's the source for you: If we were covering Kuwait occupied by Suddam, would we present the authorities appointed by him as the legal ones? It does not matter that separatist forces appointed a mayor in the occupied territories, it still is not a legitimate authority there. Grandmaster (talk) 12:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- They regret the elections, I see nothing about them being illegal or illegitimate. (The full press release may say that; however, their press site is presently down). You are making a point with the Kuwait comparison, but I would offer in exchange, what if the state of Virginia changed its flag while seceded from the union? Would you insist its pre-secession flag be given top or equal billing, even though it was the states right to change it? That's how I see the coat of arms thing. I's been nearly 15 years - at some point, you have to start accepting local decisions, if not the greater context of Nagorno-Karabakh. Regardless of whether or not NK is legal, cities and towns still exist and still have decisions and elections. --Golbez (talk) 14:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Here's the source for you: If we were covering Kuwait occupied by Suddam, would we present the authorities appointed by him as the legal ones? It does not matter that separatist forces appointed a mayor in the occupied territories, it still is not a legitimate authority there. Grandmaster (talk) 12:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Grandmaster your comparison is offending and I expect an apology. Are you really comparing the local population with Saddam having invaded Kuwait? And you are wrong, the Azerbaijani government is NOT recognized as the authority there by any nations. Had the US, World Bank or any nation recognized as only authority the government of Azerbaijan, they'd handle the aid packages to the Azerbaijani government. They do not. Official recognition does not amount to a recognized authority of the Azerbaijani government. Also your offending language like 'separatist' is out of place. The Coat of Arm is decided by those who represent the population there, a Coat of Arms has nothing to do with international recognition or anything of that sort. VartanM (talk) 18:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Template:Ru icon Abbas-gulu Aga Bakikhanov. Golestan-i Iram.
- Template:Ru icon Mirza Adigezal bey. Karabakh-name