Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:57, 14 December 2020

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Current events This article is part of WikiProject Current events, an attempt to expand and better organize information in articles related to current events. If you would like to participate in the project, visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.Current eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Current eventsTemplate:WikiProject Current eventsCurrent events Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Azerbaijan High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Azerbaijan-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Artsakh Mid‑importance 2020 Ganja missile attacks is within the scope of WikiProject Artsakh, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Artsakh and Artsakhians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArtsakhWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsakhTemplate:WikiProject ArtsakhArtsakh Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Armenia Low‑importance 2020 Ganja missile attacks is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Death Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Disaster management Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Discrimination Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Human rights Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. International relations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Russian & Soviet / Post-Cold War This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force Post-Cold War task force Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Third-party copyediting

Can someone help me out with this? It surely needs some copyediting. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 22:12, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Just one question, who operates Tochka missiles, solely Nagorko Karabakh (Artsakh). I mean the second and thrid attacks are more than likely to be carried out by Armenia. But did Armenia also operate Tochkas?Mr.User200 (talk) 00:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, well, Armenia had denied any responsibility, some state-affiliated journalists are even claiming that Azerbaijan had rocketed itself (how ridiculous it sounds). Armenia has about 40 Tochka-Us officially, dunno how much more they received during the conflict (as Aliyev implied that many more arms, including rocket systems, were sold/given to Armenia during the conflict) --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:52, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

ADA

How many attacks have the ADA admitted? Johncdraper (talk) 12:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Johncdraper:, they confirmed the first attack on 4 October, and the Artsakh Defence Ministry published a list of military targets in Ganja (apparently) after today's strike (Armenia denied responsibility though). --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:54, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: I am interested in that list. May we talk about it here? Johncdraper (talk) 16:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Johncdraper:, I can't access Twitter with my PC (which doesn't open any VPNs), and connection on my phone is unstable. I bet you can find their tweet. I advise checking out Artsrun's account and Armenia/Artsakh MoD's official accounts. In the meanwhile, I'd check some Russian sources. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, found it. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:39, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: I trust you will know what to do with it. Johncdraper (talk) 17:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Johncdraper:, yeah, but personally don't know how to word it. They just made a list without explaining much. Is it taking the responsibility? An excuse? Does that mean that Artsakh accepts killing civilians as a result of military mistakes? Is it really related to the 17 Oct. attack? Questions, questions. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: That's why Misplaced Pages has sandboxes and Talk pages. Johncdraper (talk) 17:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Johncdraper: Here is a map with the military targets shared by the Spokesperson of the Armenian MoD

Armenian neighborhood

Well, I don't think we can find lotsa sources about it. But the 4 October attack struck Aziz Aliyev Street, which was known as the Armenian quarter before Azerbaijan's independence. They even found an ethnic Armenian among the injured civilians 1 2. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:00, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The map

Alright. I was able to use official and third-party sources (Bild, Hikmat Hajiyev etc.) to geolocate where the missiles hit. Here is the list:

• 4th October: Aziz Aliyev Street (ex Armenian quarter); 40.665082, 46.365987.
• 4th October: Təzə Bazar in Ganja; 40.6878621, 46.3701426.
• 8th October: intersection of Parviz Samadov Street and Hasan Aliyev Street, just near M. Mehdizadeh 4th School; 40.680022, 46.350865.
• 11th October: Shah Ismael Khatai Avenue; 40.701093, 46.367114.
• 17th October: Mukhtar Haji Street; 40.690617, 46.355310.
• 17th October: Suleyman Rahimov Street; couldn't identify.

Can someone help with converting these to the map? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum

@Johncdraper:, any thoughts? The map is misleading atm, and the coordinates don't show the real locations here, but does in Google Maps. Might be something wrong with the module? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 22:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm having the same problem, on two different browsers, the coordinates seem to be displaying wrong. Hemşinli çocuk 00:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a one sided Article

I am placing POV tag until issues resolved. Almost all articles refer to allegation by Azerbaijan. Have there been any independent news agencies that have provided proof of these claims? Armenia has denied almost all of these allegations. Expertwikiguy (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

What's the "issues"? There are many western sources present if that's the problem. Beshogur (talk) 22:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

There are many Western sources provided in the article. And you can't add that tag to the article without providing arguments that have a base. The article clearly states that Armenia had denied responsibility. What else do you want? This is a human tragedy, not a toy. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 22:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

As I stated all articles simply say it was alleged that this happened. Can you point out to any articles from independent reporters on the ground that have verified the bombings happened on the stated dates have happened. How do we know it was several bombings and not just one. Can each one be independently verified by any sources other than Azeri sources and sources that say Azerbaijan alleges it happened? As the creator of the page you seem to be pro-Azeri and your edit history also shows that, so in what way is it not biased?? You also should not revert a POV as the creator of the page. This needs to be discussed. Expertwikiguy (talk) 23:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

France24, BBC News, RIA Novosti all have confirmed previous attacks. CNN confirmed 17 October attack on one site, while RIA Novosti confirmed the other site. Now, don't take my time and see the sources for yourself. As the creator of the page you seem to be pro-Azeri and your edit history also shows that, if you don't stop with your accusative and mentoring rhetoric, I'm just going to report you to the admins. If you want to discuss, discuss it properly. Not just bash people with accusations. This isn't the YouTube comments. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 00:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

If I see you violate WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH one more time, you're getting reported. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 00:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion this article's main issue is that a lot of news are not first hand from foreign news reporters, but they state what Azerbaijan stated, for example the BBC article. We all know that each country is likely to provide false and exaggerated reports. Every country is going to report facts to their benefits and not tell the truth. I am sure this happens with Astsakh & Armenia too. It is a war. I propose that either POV or DISPUTE tag should be added until these are resolved. The easiest way to fix it is to add words such as "According to Azerbaijan" or "Allegedly." Even Reference #1 BBC article. and #2 Independent state that it was stated by Azerbaijan. For example the Independent states "Azerbaijani officials said Sunday that Armenian forces attacked Ganja..." and "It wasn’t immediately possible to verify the authenticity of the video." 104.33.81.154 (talk) 06:46, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I fully agree. The problem of this article is not the name, but tendency of this article. The most of this article is maybe supported by outside (of the conflict) sources, but outside sources which almost completely cites the Azerbaijan's view and based on that the whole article is composed. Therefore it can't be objective.RikerCZ (talk) 11:38, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

"Allegedly"

@Mhmk97: We do not have to insert "allegedly" into the statements The Ganja ballistic missile attacks were four separate missile attacks or The first attack took place on 4 October, killing one civilian and wounding more than 30. There is not doubt over whether an attack occurred. The uncertainty comes when it's time to discuss who fired the missiles, and that is properly described in the third paragraph of the lead: Azerbaijan accused Armenia of the attacks, but Armenia denied any responsibility. Introducing "allegedly" into the first two sentences makes it sound like there is some doubt as to whether missiles even struck Ganja, which is not the case. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTNEWS

What is the notability of this, besides the fact that media has written about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:1085:D560:699A:511E:2924:3992 (talk) 09:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

It is a mass casualty event with international responses in a major conflict. Johncdraper (talk) 09:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

There are many contributions to its notability.

1. Causalities: over the weeks, 24 civilians were killed and 120 more were injured. I bet if something happened in Armenia, you guys would have jumped over the fact.
2. Ganja is the second-largest city of Azerbaijan, about a hundred km away from where the fighting takes place.
3. Ballistic missile, duh. Hell, Scud missile's usage on civilians is so rare that I think only Saddam Hossein have done such thing (See: October 22 Scud missile attack).
4. A regional power (Turkey), a regional union (the EU), and ambassadors from foreign countries have condemned this. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 10:01, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because this appears to be a drive-by template by an unregistered user. Add: reverted as vandalism and posted appropriate template to user's Talk. Johncdraper (talk) 09:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't agree with speedy deletion. But in my opinion this article's main issue is that a lot of news are not first hand from foreign news reporters, but they state what Azerbaijan stated. For example the BBC article. I propose that either POV or DISPUTE tag should be added until these are resolved. 104.33.81.154 (talk) 06:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Notes for editors

This article has been on many radars since yesterday, especially in Armenia. People didn't liked an article about a human tragedy, and have been making conspiracy theories, mistakenly citing Misplaced Pages's server time (which uses UTC+0, four hours behind the current time). And an English-Armenian journalist, Onnik J. Krikorian have commented on the issue. In the meanwhile, I was able to put some light into it. But, nevertheless, be cautious. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 10:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Duly noted. Johncdraper (talk) 12:55, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Noted. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 12:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Are you talking about him and can you specify what comment you are referring to? Tks Hemşinli çocuk 05:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Citation format

This cite's author metadata is incorrectly populated. Johncdraper (talk) 12:53, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Fixed --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection

This article may require semi-protection? Johncdraper (talk) 16:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I appealed for EC protection, but it was declined. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

BTW, be careful on the way you are handling of the sources, this edit (on the first attack), seems accurate. From the source you're referring to, it appears they are (at least, it seems to me) taking the credit for a supposed bombing of the airport. Hemşinli çocuk 04:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ermenermin, independent sources have confirmed that the airport was not hit. And they took responsibility for striking the city in general, so yeah, nothing wrong there. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 13:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum That's your assumption, they claim to have hit the airport. That can not be considered taking credit for an attack of the city. Turkish sources say that the F16s were removed from Ganja airport after the bombing of Ganja. So a bombing was close enough to warrant a removal of the F16s from the airport. That there was any actual bombing on the airport or not, isn't the point here. Hemşinli çocuk 13:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ermenermin, that ain't an assumption, they failed to strike the airport, which is within the city limits. It is same as striking the city. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, exactly, that's what an assumption is, that they failed is a point of view, either sourced or not. For all we know, there could have been an unreported bombing in Ganja. That could be as much an assumption as the one you are making. Hemşinli çocuk 14:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ermenermin, it isn't an assumption if it is well sources, at least in Misplaced Pages's standards. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, For the last time, where did they take credit for that bombing? If you can not provide a source for that, either you have to reword it or remove it. The info as it is, is your assumption, because they denied having bombed a residential area, that that's what actually happened or not, isn't the issue here. Hemşinli çocuk 14:24, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ermenermin, you're trying to falsely word it out here. The article doesn't specify that Artsakh took responsibility for striking residential areas. The article is about the strikes on the city, which Artsakh responsibility of, whether or not it is residential, industrial or military areas. Here is the source btw. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I have reworded it. Hemşinli çocuk 14:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

The airport being non-operational, seems that either there were two airport, or that that one was serving as two airports (one military airbase). From the tweets of the NYT expert who confirmed the presence of F16s there was one answer from someone who appeared to be a Russian journalist (I don't know if he's the same cited here, I will check and come back). He said that he was there (that day that the satellite image was taken) and from the markings on the asphalt, that that was not the Ganja airport. But we see that in google map, that he was probably on the other strip. Also, we have evidence that it was non-operational for civil flights only, not military. Artsakh itself claimed hitting a military airbase on Oct 4. And what we know, the F16s were removed from the airport that day, as a result of bombings. Whether or not a military airbase was hit, that is another issue. Particularly when, either side will be quick to report civilian losses, but when it comes to military loss, they have a tendency to under report theirs. Hemşinli çocuk 15:11, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

There is one airport in the city, Ganja International Airport, just beside the main residential areas, on north-western part of the city. The missiles have all hit the central-to-eastern part of the city. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I am under the impression that you are not reading what I write. You are assuming (again!), that it is the same missiles that Artsakh took credit for that hit the city. Given that each side has the tendency to under report or even deny military losses, there is no indication that Azerbaijan will report hit on infrastructures used for military purposes. All we know is that Artsakh claims to have hit a military airbase (whether or not they succeeded is not the issue here), and that we know that there was hits that prompted to move away the F16s, whether or not, they're the same hits that were reported by other sources to have hit the city, that we can't confirm from the sources we have. Hemşinli çocuk 17:49, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ermenermin, there are third-party confirmation that the airport was indeed not hit. You're, yet again, on the wrong here... --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum The link provided for the third party source, send me to a page, with several news, can you provide me that part (in its original language, I'll get it translated with google translate) that stat that the airport wasn't hit? And if it is provided, the name of the reporter. I want to check if it's the same reporter as the one I previously referred to. Hemşinli çocuk 19:26, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Warnings issued to Civilians of Ganja on 4th of October (6 days before 1st major attack)

On 4th of October, before the two major attacks on Ganja of 10th and 17th of October, the president of the de facto Republic of Artsakh Arayik Harutyunyan issued two warnings (here and here) to the civilians of Azerbaijan. This was after what he claimed was the use of "Polonez and Smerch multiple launch rocket systems" against Stepanakert. His words were "From now on, military facilities permanently located in major cities of Azerbaijan became the targets of the Defense Army. I call on the people of Azerbaijan to leave these cities as soon as possible to avoid possible casualties.". In the second warning he mentions calling off an attack on Ganja last minute to avoid civilian casualties, saying that "Azerbaijan can stop before it is too late". I think the fact of the warning has to be mentioned in the background section of this article --Sataralynd (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Can we also mention the fact on 5 October, Artsakh "president"'s spokesperson threatened to "level Ganja" by saying "I'm afraid, in a few days even archaeologists won't be able to find Ganja" — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 09:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

You could open a new thread for that if you wish, by as usual providing sources. In the meantime, please address the original post, thank you--Sataralynd (talk) 10:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Facebook cannot be used as a source. IMO, when its from an official page like that it should be allowed, but its not my decision. If you can find this same thing covered in an independent news story, we can add it. @User:Sataralynd do you have a source for what you mentioned? Expertwikiguy (talk) 04:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Expertwikiguy: Facebook is a multipurpose tool and we need to look at what is the reference before dismissing it just because it is on facebook. The posts were made on Arayik Harutyunyan's verified facebook page. However, here are 1, 2, and 3 outlets where the warning has been reported, all of them on the 4th of October, 6 days before the first major strike on Ganja. I think it is fairly clear that a warning has been given, and it has been widely reported--Sataralynd (talk) 13:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with you but unfortunately it is against the Misplaced Pages rules to use Facebook as a source and it is on their blacklist. Check here. But if your other news sources provide the same details then they can be used.. Expertwikiguy (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Here is what I suggest to include based on above sources. @Johncdraper: I know you were interested in this, let me know if any comments. Also could you opine on the question of using Facebook? I understand it is very restricted due to WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, but the posts were made on his verified facebook page and I believe his main mode of communication during the conflict:

On 4 October 2020, Arayik Harutyunyan's, the de facto Republic of Artsakh's president, issued a warning to the Azerbaijani army and civilians for the latter to leave Ganja, claiming that military facilities permanently located there have been targeting civilians in Stepanakert using Polonez and Smerch missiles (sources 1,2,3,4,5)--Sataralynd (talk) 04:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Summary: as no one is opposed to the addition and the article is open to editing, I just added the above bold text. Thanks for your comments.--Sataralynd (talk) 01:24, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sataralynd: Apologies: busy elsewhere; I now have a little free time and ce'd your contribution. Please check and confirm whether it's okay. Johncdraper (talk) 09:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Johncdraper: checked and it looks good to me, thank you. As my original edit request was for the main article, could I ask you to add the same wording there? I am unsure under which heading, maybe section Official Statements, subsection Artsakh and Armenia what do you think? Also the discussion there has been removed for some reason--Sataralynd (talk) 12:26, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd, Araik's "warning" came after the first attack. It has no place in the background section. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd and Solavirum, would you please agree on a form of words on this issue and on the main article page? You could use your own Talks. I am still officially busy. Johncdraper (talk) 15:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Edits of E badalyan

@E badalyan: Addressing your edits:

1) You're adding an "According to Azerbaijani side" to a sentence stating on what day the attack happened. The date of the attack isn't under question.

2) How is "It was one of the first serious attacks in the conflict outside the Nagorno-Karabakh region" an opinion? What other large cities outside of the disputed/occupied territories do you know that has been bombed severely? — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 20:46, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

1) Okay, I agree with the date. However, the reports about casualties are from the Azerbaijani side, and the number of wounded does not correspond to any sources. One source says that the foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan reported four wounded, but the sentence says more than thirty.

2) The information in the sentence "It was one of the first serious attacks in the conflict outside the Nagorno-Karabakh region" is not present in any sources; that's why I saw an opinion in it. No source says that it's the first or one of the first or says that it's serious. I would also recommend not using the word "serious." --E badalyan (talk) 21:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 27 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus, discussion already continued in new RM below. (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 22:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

2020 Ganja ballistic missile attacks → Ganja ballistic missile attacks – It's the first time Ganja was hit by a missile, so the "2020" part is irrelevant and I don't see any reason why the "ballistic" part must be specified in the title, making it unnecessarily longer. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 14:34, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

EDIT: I have changed the move request name to Ganja ballistic missile attacks per the message below. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 10:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment we can remove "2020", but see Grozny ballistic missile attack for clarification. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with naming it "Ganja ballistic missile attacks" then. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 16:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support the name change as there is no evidence that the attacks were done by ballistic missiles, only accusations--Sataralynd (talk) 16:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Support per WP:CONCISE and MOS:PRECISION. EDIT: I'm supporting the shortest version that makes scence (Missile attacks on Ganja) per WP:CONCISE and MOS:PRECISION. There is no need to add extra words when the short one is understandable to everybody. --ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 16:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Oppose now that you added the word ballistic without a single piece of evidence--Sataralynd (talk) 21:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Brandmeister 07:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:NCEVENTS.  Bait30   21:35, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

NOTE: I guess there are more people who put "Support" or "Oppopse" for the old version hence it doesn't seem correct to change the suggested version after that. --ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 18:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

If you're talking about the old suggested request name, I only changed it after a day and there were only 2 voters affected by it which are both informed about the decision. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 19:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

I was one of the users and nobody informed me :).--ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 15:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Huh, the spaces in Sataralynd's comment made me think he was informing you lol. Sorry. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 17:00, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum's edits - removing the warning from Republic of Artsakh's president to the residents of Ganja

@Solavirum:, despite the discussion that is ongoing here about the topic of the warning to the civilians of Ganja, you have unilaterally removed again the warning description from the Background section of the article stating 'not "background" if it happened during the attack' when I have challenged that position on your talk page and you didn't answered to that challenge. You have disengaged from that discussion in breach of policy, and just went ahead and made the reversion for the third time now, without discussion--Sataralynd (talk) 21:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd, you're acting like I'm the one that needs to reach to a consensus. If you can't define "background", that is not my issue. I'm not going to let anyone push a particular point of view on this article. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 02:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: You're the one who is evidently pushing Azerbaijan's view into not only this article, but many others. This whole article is basically about Azerbaijan's view (e.g. part Azerbaijan's response). Azerbaijan's press release or official statements, no matter how retransmitted by western media, can't be perceived as objective description of the events.RikerCZ (talk) 12:10, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Edits by CuriousGolden on Background Section

@CuriousGolden: I see you have just reverted my edit on the background section, changing significantly the intended meaning. Our job is not to reinterpret the content of the source WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH but to present them as they are. Removing the reference to the targeting of civilians in Stepanakert, which according to the source was the reason for the warning is not justified. You have done this substantial change despite there being two talks here on the topic, and you were engaged in one of them. Could you please 1) revert the change 2) outline your reasoning behind the intended change (if you still want to make it)? Thanks --Sataralynd (talk) 04:35, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sataralynd: Hey, I removed part of the sentence that implies that the Polonez and Smerch missiles that Azerbaijan allegedly used to hit Stepanakert is located in Ganja. None of the links you provided said this and I believe you took it from this Facebook post of Arayik. But what he says in the post is:

"Despite numerous warnings, the Azerbaijani terrorist army continues targeting the civilian population in Stepanakert, using "Polonez" and "Smerch" multiple launch rocket systems. From now on, military facilities permanently located in major cities of Azerbaijan became the targets of the Defense Army."

As I understood it, no clear indication that the missiles that hit Stepanakert were in Ganja, or were fired from Ganja. Respectfully. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 06:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

@CuriousGolden: you actually made 3 changes

1) changed de facto to self proclaimed 2) removed the mention that Stepanakert has been targetted by deleting been targeting civilians in Stepanakert, which was the reason for the warning 3) removed the type of weapons, using Polonez and Smerch missiles as you claim there is no proof they were in Ganja I have reverted all the three changes because you didn't explain the first two, and the word "claimed" about the weapons and them being in ganja is there to highlight that it is a claim. Further here is a source about the claim of this weapon use and no one expects the other side to know from where each weapon is coming. If you have a denial from the Azerbaijan government on this topic, bring in the source and add the words which Azerbaijan denied at the end--Sataralynd (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sataralynd:

1) Is it not self-proclaimed? "self-proclaimed republic" is gramatically correct rather than "de facto republic"

2-3) As I said above, you're writing openly that things that hit Stepanakert came from Ganja, when not even Arayik has claimed that. He has only said that there were military facilities in the city that had become target. You're adding things that have no source. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 07:16, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@CuriousGolden: regarding 1) suggest to remove both terms as they are both mentioned in the previous paragraph and the intention of the paragraph is to talk about the warning and not the legal status of RoA. 2) and 3) please see here where he is clearly stating that civilians in Artsakh have been targeted by military facilities in Ganja using cluster bombs, and for self defence purposes he is attacking Ganja and calling the civilian population to leave it, again on the 4th of October. I agree there is no explicit mention about Smerch and Polonez missiles coming from Ganja itself so we don't have to call these weapons in the article. But, there is mention of cluster munitions from Ganja targeting civilians in Artsakh and as their use were proven by Azerbaijan in Stepanakert so need to mention it (here - so we have claim + third party evidence)

If you are ok, I'll make these changes--Sataralynd (talk) 21:57, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@Sataralynd:

1) The "self-proclaimed" or "unrecognised" is added near "Artsakh" in almost all articles it's mentioned in, so I think adding either one of the 2 words is good.

2-3) Again, he is not saying directly that Stepanakert was shelled directly from Ganja. This is your interpretation. For all we know, that could interpreted as "Azerbaijan bombed Stepanakert, so we bombed Ganja which also has military facilities". If you have tweet or statement of his that directly says "Because Azerbaijan bombed Stepanakert from Ganja, I ordered the army to bomb Ganja", you can add it. But at this point, I see no evidence of him directly saying that. Instead you can add "President of the unrecognised Republic of Artsakh announced that he would bomb Ganja because of Azerbaijan's shelling of Stepanakert."

Also, I'm kind of confused as to how this is related to Background section, as he said these after the attack. Perhaps you can add it to Second Attack tab. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 07:54, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

@CuriousGolden: sorry for taking some time it is busy times these days

1) I suggest we use "self-proclaimed de facto" and put this matter to bed. It presents both what Artsakh sees itself, as well as its international status 2) Fine about Stepanakert being left out. But, it is very clear that the sources present a warning to the civilians of Ganja to leave the city. This is not a matter of interpretation as you claim though I'm sure Azerbaijan would say so. I'm happy to take it to dispute resolution if you disagree because it is going around in circles. This is to be mentioned in the background section because the warning, albeit (arguably) coincided with the first attack, happened before the three others, but more importantly before the two most deadly attacks on 10th and 17th of October In light of the above, I suggest we rephrase as follows: On 4th of October, Arayik Harutyunyan, the self-proclaimed de facto Republic of Artsakh's president, issued a warning to the Azerbaijani army and civilians for the latter to leave Ganja, claiming that military facilities permanently located there have been targeting civilians in Artsakh. Plase note that the language used is much stronger, but I am choosing to redact it in order to present the content of the message, as well as maintain the NPOV --Sataralynd (talk) 23:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

@Sataralynd: Hi, it's alright, no worries.

1) That's fine.

2) Your suggestion of the sentence is good, but again it makes it seem like he said that the military facilities in Ganja hit Stepanakert. But he doesn't directly say that as I pointed out in my previous comments. I think we also need to point out that he said this after the first attack as it's an important detail. I think it's better if we just say: On 4th of October, after the first attack, Arayik Harutyunyan, the self-proclaimed de facto Republic of Artsakh's president, issued a warning to the Azerbaijani army and civilians for the latter to leave Ganja, claiming that military facilities were permanently located in the city.

— CuriousGolden (T·C) 07:25, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

@CuriousGolden: changes made. Thanks--Sataralynd (talk) 05:38, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• People carry the coffins of Anar Aliyev and his wife Nurcin Aliyeva, killed in Ganja attack during the fighting over the breakaway region of Nagorno-Karabakh, in the city of Shamkir, Azerbaijan, Oct. 12, 2020.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:15, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 7 November 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved
Five support !votes (including the nom) versus one oppose !vote shows a clear consensus to move in terms of raw numbers. Looking at the arguments a clear invocation of WP:CRITERIA is made for support (particularly that the new title is more precise and shorter) but not much in the way of policy is cited against that.(non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 20:30, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

2020 Ganja ballistic missile attacks → 2020 Ganja missile attacks – The use of ballistic missiles in Ganja has not been confirmed by international media or reliable third party source. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Do not edit without reaching to a consensus. Here's Amnesty International confirming use of ballistic missiles. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Support. No new confirming source are available for this. Sincerely, --Alex662607004 (talk) 15:32, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Oppose. It has been confirmed by Amnesty International. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 15:35, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Support. AI is not a weapons expert organization. The article mentions their (direct quote) "Crisis Response team", not a weapons expert. Additionally, the same article talks about AI experts finding evidence for the likely use of cluster munition by Azerbaijan, something the Azerbaijani side claims the Armenian side has used it. AI could not confirm the claim of the latter. As you can see, the article talks about BOTH sides/claims while the title is imposing a perspective from one side only; a clear selective bias. Sincerely, --Alex662607004 (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2020 (UTC) (Note: This is same user's second support comment)

Support per nom. --E badalyan (talk) 17:44, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Support there has been no evidence presented on the use of ballistic missiles by Armenia or NK forces. The AI piece that @CuriousGolden: mentions doesn't make a specific claim about who used it--Sataralynd (talk) 19:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

We're not trying to clarify who used in the title anyway. It still confirms that it was used in the attack, by whomever it was. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 19:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

You people have to bring better sources for your claims. WP:NOTADEMOCRACY. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: which claim is that? you need to provide sources as the title you are advocating has an extra piece of information (i.e. the use of ballistic missiles) without any evidence--Sataralynd (talk) 02:48, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Ermm, I already have? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 06:48, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

No you didn't. The only one you provided was from Amnesty and there's no mention in that Ganja has been attacked by ballistic missiles. Just becuase the words "Ganja" and "ballistic" are used in the same article doesn't warrant inclusion. WP:ORIGINAL--Sataralynd (talk) 19:26, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

That's actually what it means. And how's citing an internationally recognized source is an original research? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 06:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Support: ballistic missiles are still missiles. The suggested title is more. WP:PRECISE.  Bait30   04:32, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 5 December 2020

It has been proposed in this section that 2020 Ganja missile attacks be renamed and moved to Ganja missile attacks. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

2020 Ganja missile attacks → Ganja missile attacks – There have been no attacks on this city before, therefore there's no need to specify the year by adding "2020". In addition, none of the WP:RS specify "2020" in their titles to describe the event (BBC, France24, Al Jazeera). — CuriousGolden (T·C) 19:20, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose we generally have year for less than mega mega mega or unique events - these year identifiers help readers. Even without that, Ganjia is Azerbaijan's second largest city where fighters were found near the former Soviet 104th Guards Airborne base, are we confident a missile has never been fired in the area before? In ictu oculi (talk) 22:44, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

That's your WP:OR. This event is, as you put it, a mega mega mega unique event. Lots of articles about city bombardments don't use year in their title, e.g. Grozny ballistic missile attack, Zagreb rocket attacks, Elistanzhi cluster bomb attack, Niš cluster bombing and so on.. About your second point, that logic is flawed. Take a look at First Nagorno-Karabakh war. It wasn't the first war to be fought over Nagorno-Karabakh, but it's the most notable one, hence its name. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 07:04, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. No weight should be given to the fact that sources for this recent event don’t specify the year of the event, as these sources are discussing a recent event. 2020 helps tremendously with recognizability, including making it unambiguous that this article covers all of the multiple missile attacks. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:NCEVENTS. This event isn't historically identifiable enough to satisfy WP:NOYEAR.  Bait30   23:04, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

• How can you tell that event isn't historically identifiable enough? It's a widely recorded/sourced event with almost every single reliable source covering it. When does an event become historically identifiable if this is not the case? — CuriousGolden (T·C) 06:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

2020 bombardment of Stepanakert

Zohrab Mnatsakanyan confirmed this was retaliation for Azerbaijan shelling civilian areas in Stepanakert. --Steverci (talk) 17:57, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

References

1. Foreign Minister Zohrab Mnatsakanyan’s interview to BBC Newshour

• All unassessed articles
• Pages using WikiProject banner shell with duplicate banner templates
• C-Class Azerbaijan articles
• High-importance Azerbaijan articles
• WikiProject Azerbaijan articles
• C-Class Artsakh articles
• Mid-importance Artsakh articles
• WikiProject Artsakh articles
• C-Class Armenian articles
• Low-importance Armenian articles
• WikiProject Armenia articles
• C-Class Crime-related articles
• Low-importance Crime-related articles
• WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
• C-Class Death articles
• Mid-importance Death articles
• C-Class Disaster management articles
• Mid-importance Disaster management articles
• C-Class Discrimination articles
• Mid-importance Discrimination articles
• WikiProject Discrimination articles
• C-Class Human rights articles
• Mid-importance Human rights articles
• WikiProject Human rights articles
• C-Class International relations articles
• Low-importance International relations articles
• WikiProject International relations articles
• B-Class military history articles
• B-Class Russian, Soviet and CIS military history articles
• Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force articles
• B-Class Post-Cold War articles
• Post-Cold War task force articles
• Requested moves