| Revision as of 07:27, 14 January 2005 editKalbagdola (talk | contribs)6 edits →comparative example← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 20:16, 9 December 2024 edit undoMellk (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users61,457 edits Undid revision 1262135085 by 2601:98A:A83:90D0:89D:E24A:BC6B:FFDB (talk) soapboxingTag: Undo |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
How come there is not a single Azerbaijani weblink below your page on Nagorno-Karabkh? How can you maintain impartiality when you have four website links which are all pro-Armenian? I am sorry to see that Misplaced Pages is far from impartial on these issues and thus looses credibility... |
|
|
|
{{Talk header|search=yes}} |
|
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
|
{{Calm}} |
|
|
{{Old peer review|archive=1}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Armenia|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Artsakh|importance=top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Azerbaijan|importance=top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Caucasia|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Limited recognition|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Geography|importance=high}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Consensus|<big>'''WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES'''</big><p> The article ] is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, as laid out during ''']'''. Per a 2012 complaint at ] about apparent sock editing, ] is under a '''] restriction'''. This is a modified 1RR restriction to limit the power of newly-created accounts to prevail in disputes, while still leaving the article open to editing: |
|
|
#All editors are under a 1RR per day restriction. |
|
|
#Editors with less than 500 article edits, less than three months old or are ] are under a 1RR per day restriction with no exceptions. |
|
|
#Editors not subject to the #2 above can revert edits by those who are subject to #2 without breaking 1RR, but are still subject to the general edit warring policy. |
|
|
#Violations of the special 1RR by any editor can be reported at ] or to any admin.}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
Truly worrying... |
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
|
|counter = 21 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== One-sided intro == |
|
Kubilay Gultekin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The intro mentions Armenian conflictuous acts, but nothing on the Azerbaijani side. It would be more neutral to describe the (purported) reasons for those Armenian acts, labelling disputed "facts" as such where needed. That would at least remove the current impression of repeated sudden unprovoked aggression from one side against a purely victim peaceful other side. ] (]) 10:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 September 2023 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit extended-protected|Nagorno-Karabakh|answered=yes}} |
|
|
Change the misspelling of “betweeen” to “between” in the first paragraph ] (]) 22:59, 27 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{done}}<!-- Template:EEp --> ] (])<sup><span style="color:Green"><small>Ping me!</small></span></sup> 02:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:whoops, that seems like my bad. {{sorry}} ] (]) 03:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Disputed status of Nagorno-Karabakh == |
|
Say, are those ethnic statistics correct? I thought Many Azeris left during the war |
|
|
|
I want to raise a question on the status of the territory. Why is Nagorno-Karabakh still considered a disputed territory? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. The UN recognizes it as a sovereign part of Azerbaijan<br> |
|
: The numbers probably refer to the last census (pre-war). There are no Azeris left in NK. I'll rewrite this page when I have time ] 12:14, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
2. Armenia officially recognizes it as a sovereign part of Azerbaijan<br> |
|
::i have no personal knowledge. available references give the current stats as i modified them. ] 21:07, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
3. The separatist government of the Republic of Artsakh dissolved itself by the official decree<br> |
|
---- |
|
|
|
4. There is no de-facto presence of the separatist government in the region and the central government of Azerbaijan controls the entire territory since the end of September 2023. |
|
], or a battlefield. do not remove one language/ethnos or the other, or link to racist web sites. ] 21:07, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't it the right time to adjust the wording of the article accordingly? ] (]) 20:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
I can see a map from Estonian Misplaced Pages. We asked Estonians to put Slovene names into the map and they did it so I can see no reason why they wouldn't do it with English --] 07:10, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:The government of the RoA has not technically dissolved itself yet, it declared that it would dissolve by Jan 1 2024. It's not known yet exactly how many Armenians are left in NK (last credible report stated 50-1,000 but that's probably different now). It may be time to update the status though, I agree. ] (]) 21:03, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Point of order but do we know that Armenia recognizes it as part of Azerbaijan? They have no formal relations, so absent an affirmative statement, we can't assume they recognize anything about Azerbaijan. --] (]) 21:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
This article is entirely Point of View, copied from the . ] 23:13, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::This is also true. They've never formally recognized the Artsakh government, but ''de facto'' they have for a long time (given how much military aid they've provided, the blurring of lines between governments via politicians holding office in both governments, etc). I think we need to wait for more ''verified'' information before definitively changing the status to avoid ]. ] (]) 21:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Yeah, not recognizing Artsakh over the area is not the same as recognizing Azerbaijan over the area. --] (]) 22:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:Reliable sources still describe it as disputed. ] ] 21:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
::Reliable sources can be out of date, and we don't have to parrot them when that can be demonstrated. --] (]) 22:22, 11 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: In fact, the prime minister of Armenia officially recognized Azerbaijan's sovereignty over 86,600 sq km of territory which includes Nagorno-Karabakh in the Prague summit in October 2022<ref></ref> and the Brussels summit in May 2023<ref></ref>. He even later at his speech at the Armenian parliament explicitly stated that the recognized territory of Azerbaijan includes Nagorno-Karabakh. <ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref>] (]) 20:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: Since it has been more than three weeks from the last comment in this discussion, should we request a close? ] (]) 16:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
::::: I don't think Nagorno-Karabakh could be considered a disputed territory anymore. If it is disputed, then who disputes it? Armenia officially recognizes Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, and NKR has been dissolved. And previously, no country in the world has ever recognized NK as being independent from Azerbaijan, and 4 UNSC resolutions refer to NK as Azerbaijan's region. So I support removing the word "disputed" from this and other articles. ]] 11:10, 13 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
:I don't see that it is. The article pretty much just describes facts and events, and I don't think I've ever heard a different description of the conflict. |
|
|
|
::::::Yes and Armenia's recognition of Azerbaijani sovereignity is a major indicator. If there are further objections, we can ask for further opinion at ] or ], but currently I don't think it's necessary. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
:For comparison, here's a statement that clearly isn't NPOV: "The Azerbaijani government has contributed very little towards the resolution of the conflict, presumably waiting for the economic burden of holding a cease-fire and reductions in trade with other countries to force Armenia into retreat, while Azerbaijan itself is not significantly affected economically, and enjoys high levels of trade with other countries because of its oil reserves." |
|
|
:The above statement is strongly believed in by most Armenians, and would generally be cosidered an only mildly biased point of view. Since the article doesn't even come close to saying statements like that, I would say it's safe to call it a NPOV article. |
|
|
:Oh, and if anybody is aware of different interpretations of the conflict, please mention them here, I, for one, would love to hear them. --] 04:05, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{reflist-talk}} |
|
== removed paragraph == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 October 2023 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit extended-protected|Nagorno-Karabakh|answered=yes}} |
|
I added a paragraph, that Aramgutang removed. In deference to his experience with the subject, I'll trust his judgment -- but let me just say that this question is what draws some to the NKR question, not as an abstract problem but as one of the relationship between ethnicity and territory. |
|
|
|
Turn the sub-section "Azerbaijani offensive (2023)" which has "History" as the section inside it into a sub-sub-section of "History" and a sub-section of "Blockade (2022–present)" ] (]) 07:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: ] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a ] and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:EP --> ] ] 01:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
Here is the excised paragraph: |
|
|
|
::Now I have EC rights so I can make the change I wanted to make. ]] (]) 07:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
The dispute is a problem of border geometry: Nagarno-Karabakh, mostly populated by Armenians, is essentially surrounded by Azerbaijan, while the Azeri-populated enclave ] is surrounded to the North and East by Armenia. If Armenia and Nagarno-Karabakh are to be united as a contiguous territory, it would require keeping Azeri-populated land in between and permanently separating Azerbaijan proper and ]; likewise, if Azerbaijan and Nakhichevan are to be united in contiguous borders (once true, but no longer realistic), it would require seizing much Armenian-populated land, particularly Nagarno-Karabakh. -anonymous. |
|
|
:This is simply wrong. Look at the maps and you will see yourself. Only a thin slice of southern Armenia will help connect mainland Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan. Separation of these two is completely unrelated to Karabakh, geographically. ] 19:55, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
::I removed the paragraph because Nakhichevan has very little to do with Karabakh, and there's no dispute concerning its borders. Azerbaijan has never expressed intent to form a contigious border with Nakhichevan, and Armenia is not trying to form a contigious border with Karabakh either. However, since there are less than 10km separating the Karabakh border and Armenia next to the town of Lacin, Armenia is pushing for an open transport corridor through it, not a unification of the border. In fact, if you find a more detailed map, you will see that there are 2 other small regions enclaved by Armenian territory that are controlled by Azerbaijan, and 1 other such region enclaved by Azerbaijan, yet controlled by Armenia. Thus both countries are fine with having enclaves they control separate from them, as long as the ethnic majority of an area determines who it's controlled by (except for the case of Karabakh, obviously). The separation of Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan has not been an area of dispute and has existed thoroughout history, and thus has pretty much nothing to do with the Karabakh conflict. Also, I find that the sentence "If Armenia and Nagarno-Karabakh are to be united as a contiguous territory, it would require keeping Azeri-populated land in between and permanently separating Azerbaijan proper and ]" simply doesn't make sense. Please explain or correct it if you can. --]''']'''] 01:11, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Where is truth? == |
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I see all the information about Daglig Garabag is subjective. It is obvious that it was written by armenians. So it is completely biased and cannot be taken as fact, since it is given in one format and one point of view: armenian. To be fair the information should be given regarding only facts not assumptions. Or if you insert information it should not be describing only one position of armenians but azeri's as well. Let's say if you write massacres over armenians in some azeri towns were conducted, you should also mention massacres conducted by armenian vandals over azeri population in azeri city of Hodjali in Daglig Garabag in 1992. |
|
|
You should mention that over 300,000 azeri people were forced to leave their homes in armenia where they lived for centuries. You should mention that there also was azeri population in Garabag which was against the independence of autonomous republic. You should mention that until 18 century the majority of the population of present armenia (not even Garabag) consisted of azeri people not armenians. It is after russian politics the christians (armenians) from Persia and Eastern Ottoman Empire started to move and dislocate to present Armenia and Garabag territories. It's not just words, it's fact, which you can discover in archives (of course if you wish). |
|
|
So the point here is not deny everything presented by armenians, but to put information that would reflect the true historical events. The matter is to deliver to the readers the very objective and rich information from different points of view, not just armenian. And let the reader deside what to choose, let him search the truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Well, of course, that's the whole point behind Misplaced Pages. That's why there's a notice on top of the article about its disputed neutrality. And like I've said before, you're welcome to add any valid couterpoints to the article, as long as they're backed up with sources. As an Armenian, I have little motivation to go out and find arguments against what I've believed in all my life, it is you who should collect the facts you wish to be known and incorporate them into the article. Also, I would disagree that the article has assumptions in it (besides maybe the phrase "Karabakh was subdued by Azerbaijan, with approval from the Allies interested in the oilfields nearby Azerbaijan's capital, Baku."), it mainly describes only facts. Like you said, some facts may be missing, so feel free to fill them in. Also, please try to provide neutral sources, since for every Azeri site claiming one thing, I can find you an Armenian site claiming the opposite, it is the hard to find independent press (non-Turkish, which are Azeri biased, and non-Russian, which are Armenian biased) aticles and international body reports on the subject that count. |
|
|
:P.S. A word of advice, in the future, try to sign your posts (by writing <nowiki>"--~~~~"</nowiki>), and also, your contributions and opinions will be held in higher regard if you have a registered username. --]''']'''] 10:54, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== comparative example == |
|
|
|
|
|
*** |
|
|
This is a letter I sent to an Armenian university professor, Dr. Papazian, at U of Michigan-Dearborn, after reading some of his questionable comments. |
|
|
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO RESPOND |
|
|
*** |
|
|
|
|
|
I have a special interest in learning about the |
|
|
Nagorno Karabakh region and in my search came across |
|
|
your fact sheet. I was born in Baku, but I am Jewish |
|
|
and in no important way consider myself Azerbaijani, |
|
|
for obvious reasons. I am also a college student and |
|
|
very interested in international political |
|
|
developments. |
|
|
The reason that I am contacting you is for some sort |
|
|
of clarification on the information you provided as |
|
|
well as a response to an Azeri view that I have found |
|
|
on the following web site: |
|
|
http://www.ehtiram.s5.com/whats_new.html |
|
|
|
|
|
All of my relatives from Azerbaijan, Jews, of |
|
|
course, believe that ultimately N-K is a part of |
|
|
Azerbaijan. From what I've read, I also believe that |
|
|
to be true. |
|
|
Real independence can only be granted by an |
|
|
international organization, such as the UN. There is |
|
|
also never a situation where solely a majority vote |
|
|
justifies independence, even in a legal region. |
|
|
Legally, I have a unique US address that no one else |
|
|
may have, but I have no right whatsoever to |
|
|
independence due to a majority vote of my home's |
|
|
inhabitants. |
|
|
|
|
|
On the web page provided, they make a argument that |
|
|
self-determination is granted to colonies, and never |
|
|
to autonomous regions of already formed nations, |
|
|
unless both sides agree. Neither is the case with N-K. |
|
|
Even the UN guarantees the territorial integrity of |
|
|
its members. In addition, an Armenian country already |
|
|
exists. |
|
|
|
|
|
I am constantly comparing the case to the |
|
|
establishment of Israel, which is of great personal |
|
|
interest to me. Unlike N-K, the territory was: (1) a colony (British), (2) was given independence by an international body (UN), (3) a similar Jewish nation did not previously exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
However, I am in favor of a Palestinian country, one |
|
|
with UN recognition, simply because no other |
|
|
alternative exists. The Palestinians cannot move to |
|
|
another Arab country because that would benefit |
|
|
Israel, and would not lead to its destruction, a goal |
|
|
shared by most Arab nations. That it why they keep the |
|
|
Palestinians in limbo. |
|
|
|
|
|
*** Why can't Armenians in N-K simply move to Armenia? *** |
|
|
The added notion that N-K should be independent is ridiculous. Armenia |
|
|
denies trying to annex N-K. Since no N-K nation ever existed, there is no |
|
|
need for one to exist now. |
|
The intro mentions Armenian conflictuous acts, but nothing on the Azerbaijani side. It would be more neutral to describe the (purported) reasons for those Armenian acts, labelling disputed "facts" as such where needed. That would at least remove the current impression of repeated sudden unprovoked aggression from one side against a purely victim peaceful other side. 178.237.74.251 (talk) 10:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I want to raise a question on the status of the territory. Why is Nagorno-Karabakh still considered a disputed territory?
1. The UN recognizes it as a sovereign part of Azerbaijan
2. Armenia officially recognizes it as a sovereign part of Azerbaijan
3. The separatist government of the Republic of Artsakh dissolved itself by the official decree
4. There is no de-facto presence of the separatist government in the region and the central government of Azerbaijan controls the entire territory since the end of September 2023.
Turn the sub-section "Azerbaijani offensive (2023)" which has "History" as the section inside it into a sub-sub-section of "History" and a sub-section of "Blockade (2022–present)" Equalwidth (talk) 07:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Done ARandomName123 (talk) 02:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Sorry! Remsense (talk) 03:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)