User talk:MarshallBagramyan

Archives

User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 1 (27 December 2005 - 29 July 2006) User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 2 (29 August 2006 - 5 November 2006) User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 3 (8 November 2006 - 18 March 2007) User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 4 (22 March 2007 - 9 June 2007) User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 5 (11 June 2007 - 4 December 2007) User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 6 (21 January 2008 - 29 July 2009) User_talk:MarshallBagramyan/Archive 7 (29 July 2009 - 25 August 2010)

Deleting sourced information

Hello. Here you removed the sourced information. What's wrong? --Quantum666 (talk) 18:26, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

overwelmed

How do you do it? IPs and stuff, you are outnumbered like 10 to 1. BTW, can you request a check with kheo17 and Garapapag. Garapapag had only two or three edits made 3 years ago..., and come recently to make the same reverts as kheo17. This more that shows that it is an alternative account of someone. Magotteers (talk) 15:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I have been editing for almost five years now but patience comes in handy :) I would say that the edit wars are relatively useless as well, so try not to get entangled in them. But since you've already been reported for it, I would suggest you check out the helpful links that'll help you defend yourself. Also, thanks for pointing out the appearance of the new user; it does seem somewhat suspicious and I'll file a report soon.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

New section

Hello. Why did you remove Azeri name from Khanate of Erevan? --Quantum666 (talk) 13:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the khanate of Erevan page: you can read its talk page for the full debate but to put it briefly, it's an anachronism. There was no Azerbaijani state in that part of the region until 1918 and none of the Turkic groups living there at the time would have referred to themselves as "Azerbaijani".--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:17, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Whatever you call those people they lived there, there language was Azeri and their nationality was Azerbaijani (Another example of usage of such "anachronism" is "genocide" which is used to describe the events happened before the word was created. Shouldn't we use it then?) --Quantum666 (talk) 08:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

You're painting the Muslims who lived in that region with a thick brushstroke. Many of them would later go on to call themselves Azerbaijanis; but there were also other ethnic Turkic groups living in the Khanate, many of whom would probably would object to being called Azerbaijani if they were here today. As for the inappropriate analogy regarding the Armenian Genocide - please go read the article itself and that of Raphael Lemkin, who specifically invented that word after learning about the genocide. This is perhaps one of the weakest arguments used by Armenian Genocide denialists today and I'm quite saddened that you bothered to even bring it up. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:08, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

But the fact is the fact: Erevan khanate was inhabited by Azeris that time (as well as by Kurds, Persians and other people). So all those people have right to mention their name for the khanate in the article. --Quantum666 (talk) 20:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

SPI

Hi. We need some more info on the SPI case you opened before we can continue the investigation. If you could go there and respond to the requests, that'd be great. Thanks. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:59, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

See my comment here. Magotteers (talk) 07:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

How do you find my evidence poiting that Kheo17 is Neftchi? Magotteers (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Quite convincing. I'm surprised I didn't see that earlier.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:04, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

New section

Hello. Here you reverted my edit. Could you please explain the reason? What is the relation between some "Muslim tradition" invented by you and the described events? Why do you present Walker's and Hovannisian's opinions as facts but not as their opinion? Why do you insert primary sources instead of using secondary ones? --Quantum666 (talk) 20:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

According to Islamic tradition, if a city resisted a siege, it gave itself up to a full-scale (typically 3 day-long) sack. The fact that the residents of Baku resisted the siege thus made it fully liable for pillaging (which is why it is included; other examples include the Fall of Constantinople in 1453 and or the city of Ani in 1064). This fact is relevant since multiple authors make mention of its importance and that this was the reason the Ottoman army did not formally enter the city until several days later.

Walker and Hovannisian, based on my reading, both believe that about 10,000 Armenians died. They simply make mention of the fact that higher figures have also been brought up - rather than check the material out yourself, you've automatically misinterpreted the citations that have been used to back up assertions which are never made.

As for the primary source: there is no rule on Wikipedia barring the use of such sources. The context is fully provided, as the reader understands what he is reading is a contemporary eyewitness account, and a significant one at that.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

There is only one source (Walker) claiming relation between "the tradition" and the events. This is not enough to present his opinion as a fact. It must be rewritten. I requested quotation from Walker.

But you wrote "Estimates of the dead range from 10,000 to 30,000 Armenians." This is not equal to "They simply make mention of the fact that higher figures have also been brought up". Your wording misinterprets the source and merely violates WP:NPOV and WP:DUE as most of the sources say about 10 000 but not about "from 10000 to 30000".

Yes we can use primary sources but very carefully and you cannot write claims (especially such controversial) based only on primary sources. You must provide secondary neutral RS confirming what is written in primary source. --Quantum666 (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

It looks like major portions of the book have been copy-pasted from Walker's book (which can be read here), so I've adjusted it accordingly, But while his statements do not directly reflect it, it looks likes that line has to be attributed to Hovannisian, who writes "Halil, Nuri, and Mursel withheld the entry of regular Ottoman units into Baku so that the age-old Islamic custom of looting and pillaging defiant cities might be observed." (Armenia on the Road to Independence, p. 227.)

I'm not misinterpreting anything: the sources support what is written. Even Walker says that "Estimates for the number of Armenian dead are around 20,000; the figure may easily have been higher. In this way the government of Azerbaijan installed itself in Baku, backed by Ottoman Turkish forces."

And the quotation is also taken from Walker's book, who in turn cites "Jacques Kayaloff, The Fall of Baku (Bergenfield, N.J., 1976), p. 12". See page 261 for the full text from the previous link I posted above. There's your secondary source--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 02:08, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Then shouldn't we use phrases like "According to", "As stated by"? --Quantum666 (talk) 16:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Problems with an article

Sorry to post this here. You've recently done work on [[1]], and mentioned a "discredited historian" & "denial" - no problem with your edit or anything like that. I've seen this problem elsewhere in the article. Do you feel some sections lack a neutral pov, and if so, how can this article be improved. Thanks.Ebanony (talk) 08:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Ghazanchetsots cupola.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Ghazanchetsots cupola.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ukrainian People's Militia (2nd nomination)

Out of your area, but would really appreciate your language skills and general regional nous. Please take a look. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thankyou for your varied assistance, troubleshooting and commitment to historical accuracy over the last few days. I am pleased to award you this barnstar.} Buckshot06 (talk) 09:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot buddy. Anytime :)--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 02:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Review of actions

Would you be able to please review my past few actions with regard to User:Turco85 and tell me what you think? I need some further views to help me decide how to proceed here. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, MarshallBagramyan. You have new messages at Tuscumbia's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tuscumbia (talk) 20:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi, Mareşal:) What do you think of Talk:Malibeyli and Gushchular Massacre, Talk:Garadaghly Massacre, Talk:Agdaban massacre ? Takabeg (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I suggest you gather other users' opinions who know the subject better than I. I'm always available to appeal to, but talk to users who you think have the interests of the encyclopedia at heart, but also know the subject. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 08:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Given that I actually made the deletions incorrectly out-of-process, and the community is still deciding What is to be done?, I don't feel I can take any more action in this area at the moment. I suggest you approach User:Nick-D, who is already somewhat aware of this issue, as he has alrady commented on the WP:AN thread. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 20:44, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Armeniapedia

Hi MarshallBaghramyan - there's a vote to delete the Armeniapedia.org article. Can you please add your thoughts? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armeniapedia.org Thanks! --RaffiKojian (talk) 21:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks Marshall. No, I don't celebrate Novruz, although it has nothing to do with the New Year, at least in Azerbaijan. Happy New Year to you too! Tuscumbia (talk) 16:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

New section

Hello. Please do not remove quotation requests like you did in Armenian–Tatar massacres of 1905–1907. And why did you put npov tag in the article? --Quantum666 (talk) 09:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Drmbon

Hi

If you find time, please join Talk:Drmbon. I'd appreciate very much your opinion.

Best,-- Ashot  ^(talk) 11:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Irreconcilables

Good idea-- see the new article Irreconcilables Rjensen (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Historical Armenian settlements

Hi Marshall

The issue you raised is very interesting to me ([2]). Should you ever decide to pursue this, please let me know.

-- Ashot  ^(talk) 08:55, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Areni-1 winery

Hey Marshall. Just read your new article Areni-1 winery. Pretty good and informative! Great job! Tuscumbia (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Much appreciated.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't you think it would be better to have all the various articles about the finds of the excavation in just the one article? Scribblescribblescribble (talk) 21:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

For the moment, I don't see that happening. The cave does really appear to be a treasure trove (for archaeologists at least :) ) but I think we'll just have to wait this one out and see what other goodies are excavated. Maybe then we can create an article called "Areni-1" and reserve sections for each unearthed artifact. But right now it looks like the world's oldest piece of leather footwear and the world's oldest surviving winery deserve their own separate articles.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem!

No problem, the Anastas Mikoyan article you've written is very good. To be honest, I don't know, I haven't read Robert Service's book about Stalin yet. I've read History of Modern Russia: From Tsarism to the Twenty-first Century, another book written by Service if that helps. To be totally honest I don't know very much about the Stalin Era, I know much more about the history of the late Soviet Union, meaning the period from 1964 til it's demise. As seen by my work here on Wikipedia, I've worked extensively on such articles as Leonid Brezhnev, Alexei Kosygin and Andrei Gromyko. Stalin: Court of the Red Tsar is a great book, and yes, I think you should keep it. While you're right that it is a "mish-mash" of historical events, it covers most, if not all, of Stalin's Soviet Union history. You could in theory reference all major events in Stalin's USSR with this book, so yes, keep it. Bye --TIAYN (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Areni-1 winery

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Twilight Chill

I too have observed and documented Twilight Chill's habit of subtly removing and suppressing information from articles, often without any discussion and most of the time through false and misleading edit summaries, mostly relating to Azerbaijan. Please monitor his activity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjbronn (talk • contribs) 08:56, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

You are about to be topic-banned.

But you may make a statement in this AE thread first, if you wish.  Sandstein  22:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

"You are about to be topic-banned ... but you may make a statement"! Wikispeak for "I have the verdict pre-prepared so I will hang you, but I must follow the procedures so I invite you to attend the show trial"? Scribblescribblescribble (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

report

Please see this report [3]. Gorzaim (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement restriction: Armenia and Azerbaijan

In application and enforcement of WP:AA2#Amended Remedies and Enforcement, you are indefinitely restricted as follows: You may not make derogatory statements about sources or their authors on the sole basis of their nationality, place of birth or publication, ethnic group, religion or similar general characteristic that is unrelated to their reliability in terms of Wikipedia policy, in the context of the area of conflict of the arbitration case WP:AA2. This restriction is to be enforced by blocks or other discretionary sanctions. It is not to be construed so as to encourage any derogatory comments that it does not explicitly prohibit. The reason for this restriction is explained in this AE thread.  Sandstein  23:18, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I think all this is a given, but I will formulate my words in better fashion next time. Thanks.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 01:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Karo Qakhedjian.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Karo Qakhedjian.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Anastas Mikoyan

Seeing that you wrote the article, I'm wondering, just wondering, why have you left so many things un-referenced when you could have referenced it a long-time ago? Even so, that's not why I'm here. I'm going to nominate the "Collective leadership" to GA Topic. The topic is to consist of Brezhnev (GA), Kosygin (GA), Podgorny (GA), Tikhonov (GA), Kirilenko (GA-nom), Mikoyan (GA) and the Suslov (Start; working on it) article, along with main article, "Collective leadership" (not even in existence yet). I'm wondering if i could include the Mikoyan article to the GA topic. I'm asking because I didn't write the article, YOU did. Anyhow, you could probably become a co-nominator of the topic if you want. --TIAYN (talk) 13:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, It's appreciated it. :) I'll leave you a note when I nominate the articles for GA topic. It may take some times since I havn't created the main article yet. --TIAYN (talk) 14:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

re

I'll try some more range blocks, if it continues past tomorrow I'll bring it up on ANI. I'm wary to go through the effort of semiprotecting dozens of pages when he'll just move to others instead. --Golbez (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Duduk

Hello. What does it mean:"The Iranica article is referring to a Balaban (which is only referred to in Azerbaijan as a duduk - so that doesn't make it the same". Does it mean that duduk is not an Armenian instument as it is called "apricot horn" in Armenia? --Quantum666 (talk) 19:41, 20 February 2011 (UTC) And please read the article carefully in Azerbaijan it is also called düdük. --Quantum666 (talk) 19:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Genocide

Hello MarshallBagramyan. Could you please see this [4], it's nonsense, how's Zangezur an Azeri Land? And also this sentence:

Genocide became an integral part of the Azeri history starting from the partition of the Azeri lands with the treaties of Gulustan in 1813 and Turkmenchay in 1828. And if you time also see [հttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_History#Azerbaijan], if it's a Genocide, why Sumgayit Pogrom isn't Genocide?--Aram-van (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Tistsernavank

Hi,

Please have a look at Talk:Tsitsernavank Monastery‎. I wonder if you can help with preventing endless and useless dispute with well sourced argumentation.

Best, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 14:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Tsitsernavank Monastery

Hi there, I have just reverted your reversion of the edits to the Tsitsernavank Monastery article. I have been asked as a neutral party to have a look at the issue, and though I'm loath to protect the page to one version or the other I have asked all involved editors to refrain from simple reversions while we try and resolve this issue, and find a wording that is verifiable, reliably sourced and hopefully meets somewhere in the middle. As someone involved in the article please could you respond to the questions I have left on the talk page. Best regards ^Khukri 16:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Do you think Verman can behave the way he does and stay unsanctioned? -- Ashot  ^(talk) 05:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

He has already been warned twice about his actions so hopefully we will desist from such activity. If, however, the edit warring and the unnecessary invocations of ethnic identities are brought up again, he can be reported, or an administrator can impose, sanctions against him. Regards, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Why did they change the wording on Tsitsernavank Monastery? It now says Caucasian Albanian and has been protected from editing whereas before it said Armenian.--Moosh88 (talk) 04:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

NVM, I see that it was done by verman when the protection level was changed.--Moosh88 (talk) 04:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Learning Greek

Hello! I am sorry to say that you've come to the wrong person for this: as a Greek, the issue has never concerned me... Perhaps some of our resident linguists like User:Future Perfect at Sunrise might be able to help you, or you could place a request at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. Again, sorry for not being able to help, and best of luck! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 10:02, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, Greek, whether ancient or modern, is definitely not an easy language to master. It has a complex but regular grammar and syntax (similar to German, because German is based on Ancient Greek in these areas), but has a vast vocabulary with many peculiarities. From what my foreign friends tell me, the worst thing is the declension system, where different roots can be employed for the same meaning. For instance, the verb "I eat", trōō, is efaga, "I ate", but etrōga, "I was eating". I had a French teacher once who spoke some six or seven languages including Arabic, Russian and Hittite, and was trying to learn Greek; she found this thing absolutely maddening ;) To an extent, this is less the case in Ancient Greek (for many of these forms have been added over time from colloquialisms), but conversely, Modern Greek is considerably more simplified overall.

As to your other question, for an educated modern Greek, reading a Koine Greek or medieval text is relatively straightforward: if not 100%, one can at any rate get the gist. For Classical texts, it is more difficult, and if it is in a dialect other than pure Attic, it may be unintelligible. Aside from grammar and syntax, which has changed to a degree, the biggest change is the vocabulary, as you'd expect over 2,500 years and a few hundred wars, migrations and invasions. Many of the words used in Antiquity are now archaic or entirely obsolete. Those who were still taught Katharevousa have an advantage here. Constantine ✍ 00:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Verman1 expanding his non-constructive activities

Hi, just spotted Vermin's activities on Gandzasar Monastery. Not sure if this is enough to report him. Whatsoever, this is just to make you aware to keep an eye on. Best, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 14:00, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, you may read Sandstain's response here: [5]. Best, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 04:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not familiar with ArbCom2. Could you please pursue this issue there and I'll keep an eye to see if I can help somehow. Thanks. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 17:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking the time and reporting Verman1. I just, wanted to ask whether this may be considered yet another notification to him. Regards. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 06:14, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Karabakh Khanate

Can you please watch these articles [6], there is more vandalism. Its a Qajar dynasty not Azerbaijani, and the reliable sources were removed again. 75.51.164.40 (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Request for advice

Hi, Please have a look at this edit. What do you think should be done about it? Best, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 16:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism on Orontid Dynasty

Please watch the Orontid Dynasty article. There was an Azeri Turk blocked for 2 weeks, once he returned he changed the Orontids to "Persian dynasty" -> [7] again! Please watch these articles, I even let Moosh88 know about it and he didnt pay attention either to the changes. It was like this for 8 hours! The guy changed the info it was like this for hours! Please report him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.51.174.163 (talk) 19:14, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Same issue in Satrapy of Armenia

I provided the ancient sources of Xenophon and Moses of Chorene, both of them mention Tigran Yervanduni (Orontid) being an ally of Cyrus the Great. And as you know one of the most common Armenian names is from this dynasty, Yervand. You already know these things, but you can help out to mention to Kansas Bear. Phoenicians8 (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Here is also the most recent change in this page in case you missed it [8] Phoenicians8 (talk) 00:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Karabakh Khanate

The Karabakh Khanate page is open now and as you see here again [9], they are removing the sources that mention the Qajar dynasty, and adding their political agenda of Azeri Turk dynasty. Can you take a look at this? Phoenicians8 (talk) 00:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hate to say I told you so.....

I guess what I said about those certain editors, removing information about Persian ancestry/origin and the cooresponding references, was correct.[10] --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

This makes two reverts![11] --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

And this one[12], is quite amusing. De-linking Iranian people???..... Wow. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, problematic, yes. I think his editing activities are going to be curtailed if he doesn't shape up. Warnings don't seem to be getting through him.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

This being the THIRD revert.[13]. Following this last revert, I would suggest you file a sockpuppet inquiry. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

So is Aryamahasattva, a sockpuppet of Phoenicians8? Numerous anon IPs have popped up to revert Orontid dynasty(far to many to begin to count or track).... --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:14, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

You are wrong Kansas Bear, the info you have read you have not done enough research: "Darius I of Persia sent an "Armenian" named "Dâdarši" to suffocate the revolt <--- Dadarsi was Satrap of Bactria !! this Armenian was satrap there, this is not an Iranian, nor are the rest of them!" 75.51.160.60 (talk) 23:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

You are wrong sockpuppet, Marshall and AgadaUrbanit came to a compromise on the talk page. Something you are incapable of using, apparently. Since IF you would look on the talk page you would find NUMEROUS university sources calling Orontid of Persian/Bactrian origin. So continue to ignore facts and go play in your edit-war... --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Karabax/Arcax

For some reason, my computer acted weird and my edit summary didn't show up. But basically, I meant to say that I thought that that image was better as it showed a more multi-faced view of the conflict. Thanks. --Yalens (talk) 17:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but all those photos are found below in the article anyways so why repeat them? The issue was raised a few months ago but I don't think anyone it will do the article any sustaining damage if we replace it with something else. If you ask me, I would simply prefer a composition photo of the Ghazanchetsots Church and the mosque in Shushi, although I am unaware if such a carefully-taken photo like that exists. I tried to take such a shot when I was there a couple years ago but my camera kept playing games with me :| --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Major POV and distortions in Urartian language page

Please revert those edits, that is complete distortion of the sources [14] they are providing![15] They are saying that, "Armenian replaced the former language Urartian in 5TH CENTURY AD!, before that they are putting it was territory of Urartu!, before 5th century "AD" <--AD ??? Please read the discussions and revert back to the stable original versions.

Here is the POV and major distortions:

It is Classical Armenian that emerges in written records in the 5th century AD as the dominant language of what had used to be Urartian territory.[5]

76.237.9.215 (talk) 23:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I've responded on User:Kevorkmail's talk page, where the same message has been posted [16].--Anonymous44 (talk) 00:43, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Khojaly Massacre in Armenia page??

They just added a section Khojaly Massacre in the Armenia article. I dont think that belongs in the article? And if it is even factual information to begin with. 75.51.173.222 (talk) 19:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:SAEStepanakert.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SAEStepanakert.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Stepanakert Airport

Hi Marshal, could you please comment on the new version proposed by me at Talk:Stepanakert Airport. Thanks, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 05:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Armenians article infobox

Can you revert the infobox recently changed by user Vahan. He has included a certain Turkish person, apparently of some Armenian decent, but is an unimportant figure for the infobox on Armenians. He also removed Hayk (he tries to give reasons for removing it in talk page), which we call ourselves by Hayk and Hay to our country and peoples. 76.246.25.215 (talk) 21:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Name of Armenia article

Can you revert the last revision that removed the references and is regarding the Akaddian record Armani, which in that page they are removing the link to Name of Armenia.

Now on top of that, User Dougweller comes and removes further info from the page. The part that it even says "Further Speculation", he removes specifically the Egyptian record of "Ermenen" by Thutmose III of Egypt. (and you know why? he wants there to be a huge gap from the 2200 BC records to the 500 BC, when we have the 1400 BC in between these huge gaps of time, in order to not connect all of them as one and the same) It says speculation but he still removes it!? Please restore those records, there is even references and sources to that record. The previous user also removed referenced material regarding Armenians being native and not from Phrygia etc, that the IE colonies went westward from Armenia, not the other way around. 76.246.25.215 (talk) 21:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you please put this record back? 75.51.172.42 (talk) 20:19, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Mr. Bagramyan, can you please restore those records/info already? I also noticed in the Armenians page, that the user Vahan.Hovn had added other languages where it says in the infobox "Language(s)", where as if you check in for example the Greeks page, it only says Greek language. It always said only the Armenian language, now he has added, Russian, Persian, French, English, Arabic, Turkish etc, to that list. Can you please fix these things???? 76.232.254.120 (talk) 19:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Iran in Nagorno-Karabakh war

According to recent edits, Iran is said to be a belligerent on the Azeri side. Both of these sources, aside from only being Armenian, are very recent (less than a week old). I am seriously doubting the validity of the claim. First of all, it is contradicted by earlier belief- including that further down on the page- that Iran actually favored Armenia in the conflict due to the threat of a stable, secular state run by Azeri Shias inspiring unrest or irridentism in their brethren in Iranian Azerbaijan, among other things (Azeri irridentism, Iranian dislike for secularist Azeri Shias, etc...). Furthermore, these sources say that "According to Ayatollah Ameli [supposedly a reliable source?], Iran also provided logistical support in the delivery, if necessary to the front lines, of thousands of fighters from Afghanistan.", which at least I find odd, considering that the "Afghan fighters" in question are labeled as being the muhajideen that previously fought Russia and then later the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan (the Northern Alliance which Iran backed against them). And how cozy could hardline Shia Iran really have gotten with a Sunni fighting group (I could understand maybe if they were Hazaras, but as far as I know that isn't the case...)? I did not revert although I was tempted to... what are your thoughts on this? --Yalens (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it does seem to come off as empty boasting, even though it's quite possible that Iran may have provided some sort of aid in one form or another to Azerbaijan during the war. If we don't see any independent press reports or see some official comments made by Iranian officials over the next few days, I myself would not oppose its removal. Let me know if anything turns up. Best,--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:45, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Your comment on draft here is welcome. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 06:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Stepanakert damage photo

We need sources, your comment is welcome [17]. Neftchi (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Mechanisms against POV-pushing

Hi Marshal, I wonder what is the mechanism in Wikipedia to fight "sophisticated" POV-pushing. E.g. an editor launches RfC and all uninvolved editors give favor to one version, but a number of partisans give vote to another. How it can be assured that the discussion is not closed with the result "no consensus" simply because some partisans took active participation in the RfC? -- Ashot  ^(talk) 15:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Sandstain

Hi Marshal, are you aware who is currently on the position of Sandstain, who appears no more engaged in AE? I guess Angel deserves some attention. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 06:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure if he/she has been formally warned but if you choose not to take it to arbitration or file a formal complaint you can try speaking to editor Golbez, who is very informed in this area, although I wouldn't worry about it too much, as Neftchi's edits seem to be far more troubling and disruptive for the moment.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 07:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Golbez seems to be tired of Armenia-Azerbaijan related issues on Wikipedia. I have that feeling from a couple of recent interactions with him. As per Neftchi, I agree that he tresspasses certain limits on regular basis. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 08:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Neftchi

Just for your attention: Neftchi's recent edit, and Golbez' note (as it refers to him). -- Ashot  ^(talk) 18:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Some sources that might be interesting

Hi Marshal, think these sources might be Interesting (in case you are not already aware of them):

THE SHOPS are empty. The fruit and vegetable market is closed: agricultural produce from the villages does not reach the city because of a petrol shortage. Soviet troops stand at every street corner. Killings are frequent. Stepanakert, capital of the disputed territory of Nagorny Karabakh, is at the centre of a region on the brink of civil war.

Arguably, that war has already begun. Yervant Maroutian, an Armenian doctor in the region, warns of Nagorny Karabakh becoming 'the Lebanon of the Soviet Union'. For almost two months, the Armenians in Nagorny Karabakh - an enclave within the republic of Azerbaijan - have relied on helicopters arriving at Stepanakert Airport for emergency supplies and daily food.

As a response to Nagorny Karabakh's demand to leave Azerbaijan and become part of the Armenian republic, the Azeris imposed what was described as an economic blockade. Rail routes were cut. In addition, the Armenians, who form a majority within Nagorny Karabakh, claim that every road into the region has been rendered dangerous for Armenians. According to the mayor of Stepanakert, Maxim Mirzoyan: 'Since the blockade, the Azeris have resorted to attacking Armenian villages and the outskirts of the city regularly.'

Since January, Nagorny Karabakh has been under the jurisdiction of a special committee ruling from Moscow. Both sides, Armenians and Azeris, had their own reasons for ensuring that direct rule failed. Robert Ghazarian, a doctor at Stepanakert hospital, claims that the Soviet authorities do not care what happens to those in Nagorny Karabakh, and asks: 'Why doesn't Gorbachev send some troops to lift the blockade? We do not understand.'

Armenians want Nagorny Karabakh to form part of Armenia. Azeris, however, are equally determined to prevent such a change. Some Armenians in Karabakh say they are in despair. 'We have had enough. Azerbaijan stifled us economically, culturally and in every possible way. We cannot go on,' said a woman queueing in front of the main bakery in Stepanakert. She had been standing there for more than five hours. 'The army truck came in and took tons of bread while we've been waiting here. Do you think it is fair?'

Earlier this month, Soviet troops fired on crowds, killing one person and injuring five. According to the official account, the troops had been stoned, though Armenians denied this. By the end of the night, Stepanakert hospital had run out of bandages. The hospital, the region's largest, says it cannot cope with the growing number of injured.

The helicopter in which I landed in Karabakh was carrying medical supplies and, more importantly, a surgeon from Erevan to treat a man who had been shot two days earlier by Azeris at his workplace in a village near Stepanakert. The surgeon arrived too late: his patient died the next day.

The shortages are all-pervasive. When the parents of a Russian worker, shot by the Azeris, came to collect the body of their son, it proved almost impossible to find enough petrol to get the body to the airport.

Nagorny Karabakh's Armenian population initially sought to take advantage of Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika. In February last year, the regional parliament voted unanimously to become part of Soviet Armenia. 'We believed in Gorbachev then,' said Janna Kalsdian, an actress from Erevan, who has come back to her birthplace, Stepanakert. 'Now look what they are doing to us. They are standing aside, and watching the Azeris kill us one by one.' The Armenians say the Azeris are armed with machine-guns and other sophisticated weapons, a claim which the wounds of the injured appear to bear out.

Armenians in Karabakh feel isolated, and the sense of distrust is everywhere. In the words of the commentator Armen Hovhannissian: 'In the West, people talk about human rights. At one time, the rights of one political prisoner in the Soviet Union were an important issue. But now a whole nation is on the brink of annihilation - and nobody is doing anything about it.'

For the inhabitants of the enclave, the situation of their brethren in the republic of Armenia is no better. Mr Hovhannissian continues: 'In Armenia there are more than a million homeless, both from the earthquake of December 1988 and refugees from Azerbaijan. The Azeri blockade hampers any type of work towards solving the problems. All this is creating political frustration and I cannot foresee where it will lead. Solutions must be found soon.'

Nelly Danielian, a teacher, spoke the day after the shooting of demonstrators in Stepanakert: 'At school, my pupils were asking this morning: 'Is it war?' I had to say yes, because it is war. The Azeris want it, and what should we do?'

Source: "Besieged Armenians say they face civil war in a Soviet 'Lebanon': Ani King-Underwood reports from Stepanakert, a city rarely visited by foreigners, on the Armenian enclave's slide into civil war with the Azeris who would rule it". The Independent (London). October 24 1989. p. 10. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)

Ten thousand Armenians have been forcibly deported from the disputed Azerbaijani enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh since April, an international human rights group said yesterday.

Residents of Armenian villages inside Azerbaijan were illegally detained, harassed and tortured, said the delegation, which visited the area before holding a news conference in Moscow yesterday.

Members of the group said they were held at gunpoint and threatened by Azerbaijani special police. The delegation was led by Baroness Caroline Cox, deputy speaker of the British House of Lords.

They were first outside observers allowed to visit the remote region in the Caucasus mountains. Nagorno-Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan, but most of its residents are ethnic Armenians.

Nagorno-Karabakh is claimed by both Azerbaijan and Armenia, two of the 15 republics that make up the Soviet Union.

Residents of Nagorno-Karabakh want to become part of the Armenian republic, but Azerbaijani leaders refuse to let it go.

The resulting conflict has led to ferocious ethnic violence over the last two years in the region, with Armenians and Azerbaijanis carrying out pogroms in Nagorno-Karabakh and elsewhere.

"Forced deportations continue in the Armenian villages in and around Nagorno-Karabakh. . . . Evidence shows the deportations are brutally enforced. They involve loss of life, property and physical injury," the group's report said.

The report also said Armenian paramilitary groups were to blame for armed attacks on local Azeribaijanis, although the violations were on a lesser scale.

Asked about the scale of the deportations, members of the delegation put the figure at 10,000 since the end of April.

Azerbaijan's president, Ayaz Mutalibov, denied Tuesday that Soviet and Azerbaijani troops were forcibly deporting Armenians and said those leaving were doing so of their own accord.

The human rights delegation's report asked for an immediate end to deportations and attacks on civilians, as well as withdrawal of Azerbaijani special police from Nagorno-Karabakh.

The special police - known as "black berets" - held the delegation at gunpoint and threatened it at the airport of the regional capital Stepanakert when members tried to prevent the arrest of five Armenians, delegation members said.

The local "black berets," with no professional training and consisting of Azeribaijanis driven from Armenia, appeared to be out of control and responsible for most of the atrocities in the region, a member of the delegation said.

The delegation was set up last May in Moscow at an international human rights conference held in memory of Soviet Nobel Prize winner Andrei Sakharov.

Source: Anatoly Verbin, Reuters (July 18, 1991). "ARMENIANS DEPORTED, TORTURED, SAY OBSERVERS". Philadelphia Inquirer. p. A04. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); |author= has generic name (help)

THE WORST fighting in four years of conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan flared up in Nagorno-Karabakh yesterday, as Azeri rockets pounded the capital, Stepanakert, and Armenian forces seized the Azeri town of Khojaly.

The Azerbaijani interior minister, Tofik Kerimov, told the independent news agency Interfax that 100 people were killed in the attack on Khojaly, an Azeri stronghold in the mainly Armenian enclave. Armenian sources said casualties were much lower because civilians had been evacuated.

Unquestionably, however, there was a huge escalation in the four-year-old conflict, forcing the Iranian foreign minister, Ali Akbar Velayati, to abandon a plan to visit Nagorno-Karabakh yesterday as part of his attempt to mediate.

Russian television showed terrifying scenes of heavy Grad rockets blasting Stepanakert, large parts of which have been laid waste by Azeri bombardment. Armenian forces have retaliated by firing on nearby Shusha, the only Azeri town in Nagorno-Karabakh still in the hands of Azerbaijan's troops.

Each side accuses the other of trying to drive out its population. They both allege former Soviet troops have been helping their opponents - a charge hotly denied by the local command, which says several soldiers have been killed despite their refusal to get involved.

The attack on Khojaly, which the Azeri Popular Front said had been left "in ashes", appears to have been part of an Armenian counter-offensive to halt the bombardment on the capital. A concerted Armenian effort to take Shusha too can be expected in the next few days. Armenian forces also regained control of Stepanakert's airport yesterday.

Last Sunday Azeri forces overran an arms depot belonging to former Soviet troops in Agdam, just outside Nagorno-Karabakh, and seized huge quantities of arms, including Grad rockets.

Mr Velayati had talks with Azerbaijan's President Ayaz Mutalibov on Tuesday, and is due to see President Levon Ter-Petrosyan in the Armenian capital, Yerevan, today. But on the ground, his mediation efforts have been brushed aside as ruthlessly as were earlier attempts by Russia. Reports by Tehran Radio on Tuesday that both sides had agreed to a 24-hour ceasefire were greeted with incredulity by both Armenia and Azerbaijan. Iran said a second attempt at a ceasefire would be made today.

Yesterday the French minister for humanitarian action, Bernard Kouchner, said France was trying to put together a peace plan for the region by involving the European Community, the CSCE and the United Nations, which Armenia and Azerbaijan are due formally to join next week.

The plan, which France will present to the EC, "envisages a ceasefire followed by demilitarisation, and in the short term, access to the wounded and the establishment of humanitarian corridors," Mr Kouchner said.

- Three soldiers died in a mutiny by hundreds of construction troops stationed at the former Soviet space centre of Baikonur, in Kazakhstan, Russian television reported yesterday. It said the mutiny broke out in protest against abysmal living conditions and ill treatment by officers. Several barracks were burned down, 17 cars were stolen and 35,000 roubles stolen from a paymaster's office.

Source:"KARABAKH VIOLENCE GROWS". The Guardian (London). February 27, 1992. p. 20. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)

Best, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 16:19, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

AE Report

Dear MarshallBagramyan, please see this report on enforcement: [18]. Angel670 talk 19:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see some questions I left for you in the Result section. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 00:40, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Razmik Pannosian

Dear Marshal, I'd like to ask you for a comment about Razmik Panossian. Particularly I wonder if there has ever been a serious discussion about him and what is his stance as a reliable scholar in Wikipedia circles. Your quick response will be very appreciated. Thanks a lot in advance, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 16:16, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I've read a few articles by him, and skimmed over his book on the history of Armenian nationalism, which was based on his PhD. thesis. From what I can gather, his area of expertise is political science and, of course, nationalism. His comments regarding the latter are very interesting but I'm unaware if he has carried out any new studies on history per se. Hope this helps. Best, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. I wonder if you know of his articles/books published in serious western journals or by serious publishing houses. Thanks, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 16:51, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't seem to recall where the articles he wrote were published but his book was published in 2006 by Columbia University Press, which is about as academic a publishing house as one can get. Also, if I recall correctly, his main PhD. adviser was Dominic Lieven, whose background is in Russian history at the London School of Economics.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. By the way, I have filed case against Angel, but it seems to be trapped (perhaps not groundlessly) in other formalities of Wikipedia :) Don't know what the outcome will be, but you can follow it if you wish. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 18:27, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:MovingtoLachin.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:MovingtoLachin.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if fair use rationale could be applied to this photo. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 08:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry i didn't see your response earlier. I'm thinking probably not, because I don't think it satisfied WP:NFCC#8. You can see an archived version of the image here: [19], and an example of how it was used here: [20]. If you respond further to this message, please do so on my talk page, or leave me a {{talkback}} notice. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shusha coa.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Shusha coa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:06, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Sardarabad

Hi Mareşal :) I provided small imformation. When you have a time, could you improve and correct them ? And I want to know modern names of Karzak, Alagöz and Mahtaka. Shnorhakal Em. Takabeg (talk) 02:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Bash-Abaran

According to this master thesis, On the same days, with the support of Silikian, Armenian forces headed by Dro Kanayan fighting against the 11th Caucasus Division’s 3rd Regiment, launched a counter-attack against the Ottomans in May 25 and with also the support of Silikian’s infantries, drew back the Ottomans to the north of Bas-Abaran on May 29. But in the article, the battle continued between May 21 and May 24, 1918. Which information is correct ? Takabeg (talk) 03:16, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Re:

Merhaba arkadaşım :) I certainly will take a look at the article right now and will also look into your query regarding Bash-Abaran with the sources that I have at my disposal. I know that it might be difficult to find since it's no longer in publication and somewhat outdated, but the book by E.D. William and Paul Muratoff, Caucasian Battlefields (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953), will come in very handy in your edits (or private study) on modern warfare in the Caucasus. I would also like to thank you for your valuable contributions on these articles and hope that you continue. All the best, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:26, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Sağol Mareşal. I found Baş-Abaran in the new edition of the book you said. I also used same book for the article Van Resistance. Do you know modern names of those towns ? Takabeg (talk) 16:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Azerbaijani citizen/ethnic Azerbaijani

Hi Mareşal. this problem ? I think we must not use that photograph in the article related with ethnic Azerbaijani people (not Azerbaijani citizen) in the view of Wikipedia:Verifiability (see Talk:Azerbaijani people#"Azerbaijani" girl and Wikimedia Commons). Do you have any opinions and information, as their neighbor ? Takabeg (talk) 11:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shusha coa.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Shusha coa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Kazrakh

Also, Karzak, if I understand correctly, is the village of Kartsakh/Kartsakhi in current-day Georgia, in the Akhalkalak region of that country. It has sometimes appeared as Karzakh in Armenian. I haven't been able to identify Mahtaka unfortunately. All the best, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Çok Merci. And I've proposed it. Best regards. Takabeg (talk) 17:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mareşal. Do you have any information on the common name of massacres ? And did you forget Ivan ? : )) Takabeg (talk) 04:08, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide's influence on the Holocaust

I've been reading a book (Robert Fisk's book The Great War For Civilisation, pages 329-331) which among other things, draws some links between various German officers who witnessed episodes of the Armenian Genocide and then later became Nazis (some of which carrying out the Holocaust, others involved in planning it), and some of them also made reference apparently to the Armenian Genocide (including Hitler's famous statement of course). I had two questions for you: one- do you think its too risky to add (could it provoke an unwanted edit war? Be challenged for POV?) and two, do you think that's enough (plenty of quotes, but only one source) and if not, do you have more sources? --Yalens (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I got the edit that finally deleted your version... [21]... After briefly getting distracted by a discussion on the talk page (I'm sure you saw my comment there :) ), I looked through about twelve of the nineteen archives to discover the concoction of embarassed Kurdish apologists, a certain well-known troll and apparently sockpuppet, embarassed Turks, unhelpful edit warriors and so on mixing to form a tangled web of edit wars... apparently your entry was not the first time there was a section on it that got deleted, and there were at least three separate wars over it in the past it seems. I think I'll refrain from potentially starting another. Thanks for the help anyways though. --Yalens (talk) 21:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Crypto-Armenian

Hi Mareşal. Do you have any detail information about Crypto-Armenians. Some nationalist referred to the presence of 1 million Crypto-Armenian in Turkey. Maybe they created new theory to deny Armenian Genocide. And some scolars supporsed relationship between Crypto-Armenian and Alevi Kurds, Zazas. Takabeg (talk) 14:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

P.S. “Who Remembers the Armenians?” This statement attributed to German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler (1889–1945), was in all probability made on August 22, 1939, in a speech to his military chiefs and commanding field generals at his mountain retreat, the Berghof, at Berchtesgaden., Samuel Totten, Paul Robert Bartrop, Steven L. JacobsDictionary of Genocide: M-Z, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008, p. 470.

As long as I understand, Adolf Hitler quoted the "anihilation of the Armenians" to stimulate the annihilation of Poland and merciless　operation against "Poles (Hitler used the term Polish speaking race)" (even if many Jews also have been in Poland at the time), rather than the extermination of Jews. Emin değilim ama... Takabeg (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Merci. Now do you have any idea to solve discrepancy in this matter ? Takabeg (talk) 22:31, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Armenian Genocide#Translation from Turkish. Takabeg (talk) 10:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:April24Victims.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:April24Victims.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:51, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Mubariz Ibrahimov

Even though Mardakert skirmishes should be there, you should not blank section as it is not covered fully in that article. You have warned as next time, I will have to take sanctions against you.--NovaSkola (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Your opinion required --NovaSkola (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#MarshallBagramyan

User:Dighapet

An AE proceeding was launched against User:Dighapet [22]. This may concern you since you were involved in editing articles with his participation. Gorzaim (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xebulon for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:07, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Military units of DRA

Hello, MarshallBagramyan. You have new messages at Talk:Democratic Republic of Armenia‎.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi, Mareşal. Do you have other sources about the number of deaths of Talk:March Days ? Takabeg (talk) 21:31, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

(moved from article)

also if anyone can help me understand if Armenian Plateau is fertile PLEASE tell me and you will be greatly appreciated, email me at [email protected] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.47.168.181 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 11 October 2006.

This article needs minor editorial clean up to reduce advocacy and bring it in conformance with the Neutral Point of View policy. Gregkar 18:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Armenian Highland

Add please if approved. Armenian highland is a mountainous country, a natural fortress that stretches from the eastern West Asia to Anatolia and from the Black Sea to Mesopotamia. The mountain is made up of several coast ranges, buying the Taurus and Pontos which are the two most important. Between these jungle chains there are several high altitude plains, the minority of them situated between 1,000- 2,000 meters over the sea level. In the lakes run some of the major reservoirs in the area, e.g. Araxes, Euphrates and Tigris.

Tags

No references, blanket statements of political character, mentions of "official thefts", statements like "Armenia has helped build many popular cities even today", funny that Republic of Armenia was founded recently. What city has "Armenia" built? Armenians I could understand, but Armenia? Whether some people like it or not, those lands belonged to the Seljuqs and Ottomans since 1071, both legally and practically; so let's cut down on the political overtones. The present day borders were established by the Treaty of Kars, and some people better accept that and stop irredentist notions, like pan-Armenianism. It doesn't matter if Armenia doesn't accept the Treaty of Kars since Armenia doesn't have such a right: UN maps do not show a "Greater Armenia". Those lands belong to Turkey, and if you don't like it, fine; that's your opinion, but keep them out of Wikipedia please.Baristarim 05:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Why isn't there anything else in the history section? The geographical formation has been inhabited by Turks, Kurds, Persians etc for more than a millenia! Pfff.. Good faith, really.. Baristarim 06:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Warning

I have noticed a massive deletion here. I dont know the history of this article, so an unsuspecting person like me may conjecture vandalism. Please double-cleck. Mukadderat 02:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC) It seems to have just been some bizarre religious Christian fundamentalist stuff that was removed.Meowy 21:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

uk iwiki

as the page is protected please add the an iwiki link to the Ukrainian wikipedia: uk:Вірменське нагір'я —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.76.33.74 (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

"See also" deletions

Preferable to discuss before the deletion of significant topics at SeeAlso, all are related to the region. Andranikpasha (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Map

this map is obviously POV, there are only 3 states in the caucasus, but here 4 states are illustrated (seperatist NKR). So if your going to show seperatist states in the Caucasus, then why just 1 and not all of them? Perhaps becayse this map comes directly from a armenica.org a Armenian Diaspora site. Any person with common sense will agree this is simply POV, this was the reason for the removal of the map, perhaps a standard map of the Caucasus will be a better choice. Baku87 (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Removed the maps altogether, political maps are not suppose to be in geographic articles. Replaced them with satellite image of the Armenian highland. VartanM (talk) 10:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Removed the spurious "Garden of Eden" reference

Who are these "some" who believe this to have been the (physical) location of the Biblical "Garden of Eden"? One reference to a Christian Creationist publication is not significant enough to be included in a geographic article. Religious traditions about geography are important, but this particular statement has no basis in any historically established religious tradition before the Biblicallly-inspired geographic speculations of the 19th century. The Bible, which is the source text for the story of the Garden of Eden, does not associate it with any particular geographic area at all and certainly not this region.

References to Young Earth Biblical Creationism have no place in scientific articles about geography and geology.

• Archæogenetics  ^TALK  20:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Reference

Treaty of Sevres is from 1920, not 1923, and it does not grant Turkey sovereignty over Eastern Anatolia/Armenian Plateau. Therefore it would have been impossible for the Turkish government to change anything in the region had the issue had anything with the Treaty of Sevres. So the intention probably was to refer to the treaty of Lausanne.

In addition, although it is quite true that the place names originating in Armenian and other languages have been and still being changed by the Turkish government, the name "Armenian Plateau" itself being used by the Turkish government before 1923 is highly doubtful. But I am having trouble understanding why there is even the mention of this issue in this article, because:

1) It appears to be region containing at least parts of modern day Armenia, so what turks call the part in their country does not apply to the whole region. 2) Therefore, nobody bothered to give the Turkish expression for the region at the start of the article to start with. So why something you did not care about at the beginning became relevant at the end? 3) It is a universal name expressed in English. Who cares if the turkish government desperately avoids it?

It may be important to mention how political cimates affect the geographical thinking but this one really looks like a very out of place shot at the turkish government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.42.76 (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

1. Sorry, I misread the source, although it mentions Sevres, it is actually Lausanne that it dates as 1923.
2. What the source states is "Attempts to eliminate the memory of Armenia included change of the geographic expression 'Armenian plateau' to 'Eastern Anatolia.'"
3. I am not saying that this passage makes sense, and would be happy to eliminate it altogether from the article as irrelevant. However, if it is in the article it needs to reflect the source -- which does not say anything like:[23]

In the 1980s, the ministry of education in Turkey ordered that names that could be conceived as reminiscent of pre-Turkic peoples of Anatolia like "Armenian highland" (Armenians) and "Pontic range" (Pontic Greeks) be effaced in atlases in Turkish schools. The official term of the plateau in Turkish usage is "Eastern Anatolian Highland."

Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 15:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The treaty is unimportant except in the sense that it confirmed Turkish control of the region and thus gave Turkey the right to call the region whatever it wanted. It would be more appropriate to explain why the phrase "Armenian plateau" became unacceptable for use within Turkey, resulting in the coining of the "Eastern Anatolian Region" phrase - a phrase that then gradually became adopted by non-Turkish sources resulting in the abandonment of the older "Armenian plateau/Armenian Highlands" terminology. I don't know what terminology the Ottoman empire used for its easternmost regions. But the Ottoman empire was not particularly interested in the study of geology or geography in itsremote provinces, so most sources and most researchers from that period and will have been foreign and they called the region the Armenian plateau. Meowy 16:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:RS? (Incidentally, I only put in the treaty in an attempt to provide some sort of time context, not because I thought the treaty itself was important.) Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 08:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

So Hovannisian, the cited source, does not mention the treaty? I think it would be best to call a spade a spade and just say something like "in the aftermath of the Armenian genocide". There have been a fairly large number of articles on the Turkish policy of eliminating names or concepts seen (by Turkey) to have had an Armenian connection, but I don't know if any have specifically mentioned the coining of the "Eastern Anatolia" term as a way of removing the previously accepted "Armenian plateau" term (though that obviously was the reason why it was done). Meowy 15:22, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

As stated above, he mentions both treaties. The cited page makes no mention of the genocide. From memory it goes something like 'treaties' … 'renaming' … 'something else happening between the two world wars'. If you can't find a WP:RS, there's nothing really we can do about it. In any case, the renaming issue is peripheral, wandering into WP:COATRACK, for this topic. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 16:31, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is peripheral to mention why the phrases "Armenian Highland" and "Armenian Plateau" have become non-standard and somewhat old-fashioned terms, and why they have been replaced by "Eastern Anatolia". If the source says "Attempts to eliminate the memory of Armenia included change of the geographic expression 'Armenian plateau' to 'Eastern Anatolia" then there is a source making an explicit link between the expression and Turkey's policy to eliminate things seen by Turkey to have some sort of Armenia connection. Those other articles that I mentioned which deal with that policy also mention the Armenian Genocide. Meowy 17:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Political map

This map is a political map while the article is about geography also note how the map highlights Nagorno-Karabakh as the same colour as Armenia and other seperatist regions are exluded (South Ossetia and Abkhazia), it seemed obvious to replace that map with a geographical map of the area. Neftchi (talk) 19:51, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

There was a geographical map in the article. I agree that there must be a geographical map, but maps are there to illustrate the text - so I don't see why there should not be a political map as well as a geographical map in the article. It doesn't have to be that particular map, and perhaps it should be cropped to show exactly the same area as the geographical map. And the geographical map should come first, at the top of the page. Meowy 20:02, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The political map definitely helps place the region. Geography and political boundaries are related and useful to juxtapose one with the other... Adding it back. Serouj (talk) 20:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

You ignored my comment above as I stated that the political map highlights Nagorno-Karabakh the same colour as Armenia and other seperatist regions are exluded (South Ossetia and Abkhazia), so as this is not a neutral political map, I removed this map, if you can find a neutral map of the Armenian Highland you can use it. Neftchi (talk) 08:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

That minor point is a rather insufficient ground to delete the map, don't you think? Besides, neither South Ossetia nor Abkhazia are in the Armenian Highland. Serouj (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Its not a minor point at all, the map is wrong and a wrong map cannot be used in a encyclopedia, then again what can one expect off a map from armenica.org, a nationalist site. Again I removed it and I ask you to stop your revertings. Neftchi (talk) 09:00, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the political map does not belong here. Grandmaster 09:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

First explain what part of it is "wrong" and then we can take it out if you have any grounds. The fact that NKR is singled out as a different color and is not shown as part of AZ is not sufficient grounds as this isn't a factual error. Not showing Abkhazia and Ossetia in their own color is irrelevant to this article, as those regions are not part of the Armenian Highland. Reverting for lack of grounds. Serouj (talk) 09:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The article says the Armenian highland is a geographical, and not a political concept, therefore political maps are not appropriate here, especially the ones that are not accurate and neutral. Grandmaster 11:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes Armenian Highland is geographical article but it can also show the geopolitical situation of geographic region and that's the reason why NKR has the same color as Armenia. En-9mm (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all NK is given the same colour as Armenia giving the illusion that NK is part of Armenia, second this colouring of NK doesnt even reflect the real situation as the 7 regions around NK are occupied aswell by Armenia and yet they are not reflected in this map. Also other seperatist regions as South Ossetia and Abkhazia are not reflected in this map at all. This map is highly incorrect and cannot be used in this map. If you wish you can find a better political map which reflects a neutral position. Neftchi (talk) 12:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Like I said before, the fact that SO and ABZ are not shown as separatist is a TANGENTIAL point to the article! NKR is CLEARLY labeled as such, and if it were the same as Armenia, then there would be an ARROW that connects them. It is not "HIGHLY" innacurate as you say, and there is really no grounds to remove it. The map gives the user an idea of where the Armenian Highland is in the context of current political borders. Serouj (talk) 16:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

If you can find a political map that shows all the borders correctly you are welcome to use it but the map you are presenting is wrong. You say this map has a small mistake and I say its a big mistake but it doesnt matter, a mistake is a mistake and such a map cannot be used in a encyclopedia. Neftchi (talk) 21:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

We also have to consider the plight of the population of Azerbaijan. They have a medical condition that's rather like a severe nut allergy. At the sight of a map showing the borders of Nagorno Karabakh their necks start to swell up, then they begin to involuntarily jump up and down as if possessed, arms swinging about wildly. If the situation is not quickly relieved by removing the map, their heads will quite literally explode! Many medical papers have been written about this unfortunate condition, but a yet no definitive cure has been found. The ingestion of a very large dose of democracy is known to alleviate the symptoms, but this is something the afflicted are reluctant to undergo because of cultural reasons. But seriously - illustrations in Wikipedia articles are there in order to illustrate or explain points made in the text. In this article, there already exists text explaining where the Armenian Highland is located in relation to modern political units. A political map would illustrate that text, so it is justified to have a map showing the borders of those political units. Trivial phobias about showing the borders of Nagorno Karabagh have no place in this discussion. Meowy 21:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

You have to read what I said to Serouj, the political map is wrong, if you can find a correct one and add it to this article. I also want to point out to your use of language, which is very offensive to say the least. Neftchi (talk) 16:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

My vote is that the geographic map should be the one in the infobox, but the arguments for the removal of the political one are very weak. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and is in the business of providing information. The political map provides information on which countries occupy the said geographic region. So it is very informative to provide that information. Lida Vorig (talk) 23:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Neftchi, sorry but you've got no basis to remove the map. The map isn't "wrong". It's just inconsitent with the NKR separatist state being shown and not the other separatist states in Abkhazia and Adjaria. There is a difference between "wrong" and "inconsistent." If you can't see the difference, then what can I say? See the difference! Furthermore, it's inconsistent in a region that isn't even the subject of this article. Serouj (talk) 23:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

First please lets talk civil and reach a consensus beforing adding the map back on, this kind of add-and-remove doesnt help our discussions and Im pointing out to Sardur for re-adding the map without talking. Now the occupation over NK isnt even portrayed correctly, note that the regions surrounding NK are also under occupation but not shown in the given map, thus meaning the map does not show the real situation as you would suggest, it only shows fictional political borders that do not excist. If this is supposed to be a political map of the Armenian Highland then would it not be obvious to show at least the correct borders. This map doesnt show the official borders of Azerbaijan and Armenia nor does it show the realistical borders (occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh and regions surrounding it). By saying the map is inconsistent you would be challenging the official maps of both Azerbaijan and Armenia. I suggest we stick to the official maps of both the countries, tell me is it really such a difficulty to find a correct political map of the Armenian Highland. Neftchi (talk) 09:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Neftchi, the current map of the NKR need to be shown, instead of the non-existent NKAO. Lida Vorig (talk) 03:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Lida Vorig you are under , it would be best if you actually readed this entire section about the political map before making random comments, which are damaging to the discussions. Neftchi (talk) 09:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Editing restrictions apply to discussion pages as well? Thanks Neftchi, but my understanding is that so are you and most of the editors here... I did get my feet wet by reading the arbitration files when I was first notified about their existence. Lida Vorig (talk) 20:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Citation style

I am currently using WP:CITESHORT as the citation format for the referencing. I would however be willing to accept any other recognised WP:CITE#Citation styles. I am unwilling to accept the style that Serouj is proposing as I've yet to see any standard style that generates results like this: "Hewsen, pp. 1-2 ^{Hewsen 1997}". The {{note}} template was meant to be used for a number or letter (see the template documentation for examples), as a precursor to the <ref></ref> & {{Reflist}} markup. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 21:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Armenia

Yes, this region is clearly called "Armenia" by not only Robert Hewsen in the cited text, but also by countless ENGLISH sources pre-dating the Armenian Genocide WHILE the territory was under the jurisdiction of the Ottoman Empire. For example, even H.F.B. Lynch (a Brit who travelled the area extensively in 1893-1895) refers to the area as "Armenia" -- indeed, the title of his book is "Armenia, travels and studies." Serouj (talk) 16:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

On top, if I remember correctly, that was the name of the Ottoman province before the division in vilayets. Sardur (talk) 21:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Anatolia is an older name

Why are Armenians uncomfortable with it? Nobody is disputing name of Armenia. And why doesnt anybody try to change name of Ağrı(Eri, leading tribe of Urartu, Yerevan also has the same root), which is older than both nations by centuries. Stop fooling yourselves and trying to increase your importance superficially, nobody cares Armenia in Turkey, safe for some ultra nationalists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.214.101.159 (talk) 11:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Name

Firstly, can anyone add the transliterations for the Armenian and Russian names of the Armenian Highland? Secondly, if we are giving the names in those two languages, we should also be stating the names in Azerbaijani, Georgian, Farsi and Turkish, with transliterations where appropriate, as the Infobox shows the area extending into those countries. Probably, Kurdish as well. Can anyone add these? Skinsmoke (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The subsection "Name" really needs retitling. This section refers purely to the modern Turkish practice of referring to the area as "Eastern Anatolia". It is not written in a neutral point of view, as is required by Wikipedia, although it is cited. What name did the Turks use prior to the founding of the modern Turkish Republic? Do they really use the English term Eastern Anatolia, or is this a translation of a Turkish name? If George J. Andreopoulos claims that the use of Eastern Anatolia was purely to "shroud the Armenian heritage of its eastern lands following the Armenian Genocide", this should be attributed as his personal opinion, not as fact. Are there any contrary views? If so, they should be stated. Until these issues are addressed, the section will always appear as blatent propaganda and point of view pushing, and would be better removed from the article. Skinsmoke (talk) 15:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds pretty good to me. It is what it is. There is no need to apologize on behalf of the Turkish government. We can speak the way it is. Serouj (talk) 02:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Nobody is talking about apologising on behalf of the Turkish government. What I am demanding is that the article should be neutral, and not push a particular point of view. That is, it should comply with the basic tenets of Wikipedia. If it fails to abide by those tenets, then it has no place in Wikipedia. Skinsmoke (talk) 07:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

In Turkish "Ermenistan Yaylası" or "Ermeni Yaylası" or "Ermenistan Platosu" or "Ermeni Platosu". Today we can scarcely see these name. Takabeg (talk) 07:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Doğu Anadolu Yaylası and Doğu Anadolu Platosu are also used. But Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi isn't equal to Doğu Anadolu Yaylası (Platosu). Takabeg (talk) 02:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

What was it called on Ottoman-produced maps, I wonder? However, we need to remember that this article is about a phrase that was used to define a geographical and geological region, so the name would not have been coined by either Turks or Armenians (or any of the other nationalities that skinsmoke seems to want included), but by European, probably British, geologists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.143.19 (talk) 20:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Maps produced during the Ottoman period called it "Ermenistan" - "Armenia". Eastern Anatolia is a relatively new designation.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

But was "Ermenistan" being used in the same way as "Armenia Highland" is - as a geographical term? After all, "Armenian Highland" does not mean ""Land of the Armenians". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.143.19 (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

It has to have had at least two connotations: one signifying the lands where Armenians resided, and the other to designate the geographical entity known as Armenia. These maps were produced well after the Armenian Plateau had been absorbed within the borders of the Ottoman Empire (sixteenth century and after).--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 20:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Name change

Yes, the name is changed and the source states that. But, the Eastern Anatolian region have places which are not part of Armenian highlands (like Hakkari), and Armenian highlands have places which are not part of the Eastern Anatolian region (like Republic of Armenia). Can you change the sentence a little to reflect this? Kavas (talk) 02:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

There is a separate article about Turkey's "Eastern Anatolian Region". It is of course country specific and has hard borders, unlike the Armenian highlands. For the same reason, te vague and loosely-used phrase "Eastern Anatolia" isn't really the same as "Eastern Anatolian Region" either (as tatabeg pointed out earlier "Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi isn't equal to Doğu Anadolu Yaylası"). I'd assume Hakkari, or at the very least the northern parts of it, would be geographically part of the Armenian Highlands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.143.19 (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Semi protection

I've requested for semi-protection of this page, due to continuing vandalizing. Aram-van--Aram-van (talk) 14:22, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

The so-called "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic"

Historically and by all international laws the territory of Karabakh is sovereign part of Azerbaijan Republic, so the link to so-called "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" must be removed from this article, as it is not a subject of international law, rather a separatist puppet entity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inafreeworld (talk • contribs) 23:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree NKR is not compatible with the other countries in the list. It is not an independent country and therefore its very misleading. Neftchi (talk) 09:21, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Totally agree, so called NRK can not be listed as an independent country. Best, Konullu (talk) 21:32, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Doubtful naming of picture

The first photo apparently shows that it was taken from nearby north-west of Ararat mount (High one is located at north of low), instead of from Turkey-Iran border indicated at the name (The Armenian Mountain Range near the Turkey-Iran border). (Asif Qasımov (talk) 10:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC))

On google books, we can find 1,250 results ("Armenian Highland" -Llc) Takabeg (talk) 10:48, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, your reply does not relate to my note (Asif Qasımov (talk) 12:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC))

Hmm. I understand. You added "of picture" later. Takabeg (talk) 15:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistency on description of borders

The description of the borders (or whatever you call it) should, I think, be consistent with the introductory paragraph of History_of_Anatolia. Two should be synchronized in any way to reflect the same description. --Stultiwikia^{text me} 19:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Turkish Names

I have added the Turkish name of the area, "Şark Yaylası" (Eastern Plateau) to the entry of the article, as follows:

Turkish: Şark Yaylası;

This is a correct citation. Armenian Highland is called "Şark Yaylası" in Turkish. Most of this geographical area and population of the area lies in modern day Turkey, so Turkish name should be mentioned in the entry text. "Eastern Plateau, Eastern Anatolia or Eastern Asia Minor" names are hence not errorneous, they are currently used in many resources to denote the area. Anatolia's eastern boundary is not perfectly defined, but Turke-Armenia-Georgia-Iran border is used most of the time. Eastern Anatolia should not be confused with Eastern Anatolia Region, which is one of the seven geographical regions of Turkey and composes most of the Armenian highland except modern day Armenia's lands. I am reverting back to my text, please do not revert unless you have sources telling us otherwise. Khutuck (talk) 18:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

• I totally agree with Khutuck. --Duke ^{ϡ»» ileti ^^} 18:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Şark Yaylası is not equal to Armenian Highland. Şark Yaylası was one of the regions of Turkey and didn't include the outside of Turkey. Şark Yaylası = present-day Eastern Anatolia Region + Southeastern Anatolia Region + α (Ali Yiğit, "Geçmişten Günümüze Türkiye'yi Bölgelere Ayıran Çalışmalar ve Yapılması Gerekenler", Ankara Üniversitesi Türkiye Coğrafyası Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi, IV. Ulural Coğrafya Sempozyumu, "Avrupa Birliği Sürecindeki Türkiye'de Bölgesel Farklılıklar", pp. 34-35., Hande Özkan, "Türkiye' de tek parti dönemi coğrafya ve mekân anlayışları: Yatay bir dönemlendirme denemesi", Toplum ve Bilim, Sayı 94, Autumn, 2002, p. 168.) . -- Takabeg (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I cannot find the term Şark Yaylası in Gürsoy, Cevad R, "Türkiye'nin Coğrafi Taksimatında yapılması İcabeden Bazı Tashihler (Mit deutscher Zusammenfassung)" that you added persistently. Please show us in which page we can find Şark Yaylası ? -- Takabeg (talk) 18:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Page 229. --Khutuck (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Line ? -- Takabeg (talk) 19:07, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Turkish name of Armenistan Highland are:

"Elburz dağlarının güneyden gelen dağlarla birleştiği yere Ermenistan yaylası denir" (Hürriyet Ansiklopedik Yıllığı, Hürriyet,Istanbul, 1974, p. 323.)

"Güneye doğru Küçük Kafkas dağları ve yüksek Ermenistan Platosu başlar. Bu plato topografik açıdan Doğu Anadolu yüksek yaylası ve İran Azerbaycanı ile birlikte bir bütün meydana getirir." (Aynur Özfırat, Doğu Anadolu Yayla Kültürleri: M.Ö. II. binyıl, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, 2001, p. 13.)

-- Takabeg (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

---

• altı farklı (1. kitap)bölge - number five ps: TR: bölge EN:region and 2.kitap another book. I will continue with Turkish. Sorry for this. Konya ovası'nın yeri tarif edilmiş 2. kitapta. Gördüğünüz üzere şimdiki doğu anadolu bölgesine şark bölgesi denmiştir. eğer denmemişse Türkiye'nin bilim konseyi ile sonradan tekrar değiştirdiği şark yaylası ismini ve doğu anadolu bölgesini inkar etmiş olursunuz. bu tamamen ve tamamen açıktır. böyle başıboş tabirleri hiç ama hiç hoş karşılamıyorum. ve yukarıda takabeg adlı kullanıcının verdiği linklerden 1 bu kitabın yayın tarihi benim verdiğim 2. kitapta bulunan kitaptan oldukça eski bir tarihte yayınlanmıştır. geçerliliği ne kadar etkileyeceğini bilemeyeceğim.

this article is also considerably old. Whay you added again ? -- Takabeg (talk) 00:52, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

son olarak bozuk bir kaynak linki

bu bağlantıda aldığım sonuç: Your search - "Güneye doğru Küçük Kafkas dağları ve yüksek Ermenistan Platosu başlar. Bu plato to- pografik açıdan Doğu Anadolu yüksek yaylası ve İran Azerbaycanı ile birlikte bir bütün meydana getirir. " - did not match any documents.

böyle bir şey yoktur. --Goktr001 (talk) 00:27, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe link is not working. You can read here "Güneye doğru Küçük Kafkas dağları ve yüksek Ermenistan Platosu başlar. Bu plato topografik açıdan Doğu Anadolu yüksek yaylası ve İran Azerbaycanı ile birlikte bir bütün meydana getirir."

-- Takabeg (talk) 00:33, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

---

Sorry, but you read my previous comment? Turkey has seven regions right now. Please look Kitap 2. At kitap 2, Turkey has seven regions. OK? pic Look this picture from Kitap 2. I will continue with Turkish. Sorry. Resimde görüldüğü üzere,zaten kitaptan alınma bir resim, 1941'den önce herkes bir görüş bildirmiş ve en sonunda 1941 yılında Coğrafya Konseyi bu önerileri dikkate alarak öneri olan Şark Yaylası isimli bölümü değiştirmiş. Yeni ismi ve halen ismi Doğu Anadolu Bölgesidir. --Goktr001 (talk) 01:56, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Şark Yaylası is equal to present-day Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi + Güneydoğu Anadolu Bölgesi of Turkey, and not include Iranian Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia etc. Şark Yaylası is not alternative name of Armenian Highland. This article explains neither Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi nor Güneydoğu Anadolu Bölgesi. -- Takabeg (talk) 02:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Karıştırmışım galiba. Üzgünüm. --Goktr001 (talk) 02:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

O zaman kendi değişikliğinizi geri alırsanız iyi olur. -- Takabeg (talk) 02:17, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

References

Kouymjian

Kouymjian's article is provided as the source for "erroneously referred to as "Eastern Plateau", "Eastern Anatolia" or "Eastern Asia Minor". But I couldn't find in p. 1.. Takabeg (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Merhaba Takabeg. Kouymjian uses the word "misleadingly" in the second paragraph from that page. The word "erroneously" may have been substituted as a synonym for misleadingly since it conveys nearly the same meaning. For the record, I have never heard the word "Eastern Plateau" be used as a proper noun to refer to the Armenian Highlands, so its removal might be necessary.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 02:27, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Merci. "misleadingly referred to as eastern Anatolia or eastern Asia Minor". Takabeg (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

As long as I understand (by sources),

also referred to as "Eastern Plateau", "Eastern Anatolia" or "Eastern Asia Minor" is wrong, because Eastern Plateau (Şark Yaylası) is only a part of the Armenian Highland and the Eastern Anatolia (Doğu Anadolu) is only a part of the Eastern Plateau.

And

erroneously referred to as "Eastern Plateau", "Eastern Anatolia" or "Eastern Asia Minor" is close to reality. But I couldn't find sources. Takabeg (talk) 02:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

First of all, let's remove "Eastern Plateau" from this sentence. Takabeg (talk) 02:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Original research ?

Where is Armenian Highland ? Where is Iraq ? Where is Syria ?

I don't find any sources that prove the Armenian Highland involves Iraq and Syria. Takabeg (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

You have a point, unless there are new sources which can proof that the Armenian highland includes territories from modern Iraq and Syria, these countries should be removed from the list. I also want to point out that NKR doesnt belong in the list of countries. We all know its only de-facto independent, while all the countries in the list are full independent states and members of the UN. By including NKR it creates the illusion that this is just as independent as the other mentioned countries, while its obviously not. Therefore I suggest to remove NKR as this could be considered a provocation. Neftchi (talk) 09:32, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

He might be referring to the territory of Greater Armenia during the medieval period, although Mesopotamia was a separate geographical entity. The most well-known cities which girdled the southern and south eastern extremities of the Armenian Highland were Amid/Diyarbekir, Bitlis, Mayyafariqin (Np'rkert), Mokk' and Zarehavan. I don't think that statement is supportable. For the NKR, we can just use a slash - for example, "Azerbaijan/NKR". I don't think that suggests anything untoward for the reader. There's no rule that the infobox should only list the names of countries which have full or partial recognition.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Note: Mayyafargin (Silvan), Mokk' (south of Lake Van), Zarehavan (near Urmia). Takabeg (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Cyprus article does not contain TRNC or its flag in the infobox. According to some heavily interested users, the reason for that is it is not a recognized state. Filanca (talk) 10:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. But I didn't touch the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh. My ideal is to change Cyprus to Republic of Cyprus, to create the article Cyprus (island) and to rename it into Cyprus like in more neutral Wikipedias. Takabeg (talk) 18:31, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

South Caucasian highland ?

• "South Caucasian highland" -Llc 0

Takabeg (talk) 23:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

The South Caucasus Highland is called Transcaucasia. What is your point and suggestion? Neftchi (talk) 09:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't find this name in reliable sources. Anyway I asked you and Mareşal about Iraq and Syria. Takabeg (talk) 09:30, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

objectivity?

where is the objectivity and neutrality? All article is looking like was written by an armenian officer. It is just trying to show armenian heritage with the biggest possible land and the other alternatives eliminate with humiliation(sample:"erroneously referred" ) How can be true referred calling a land with same nation unless they are not majority in there (were not in Ottoman period, many sources says just %30-35) and Where is the Turkic and Kurdi history and perspective in the article? South part of Armenia even Van have been called as Kurdistan or after the Turkish conquest name "Turcomania" [24] [25] started to use for land of ancient Armenia Major

• 
  kurdistan
• 
  Turcomania

If the term East Anatolia is political name, still using term Armenia which is roman name of area, is that much political. That's why this article should rewrite, according to all sides--Ollios (talk) 08:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Armenian Highland is a term used to describe ancient Armenian settlement in those lands shown, its been mentioned by ancient historians and such, not as much Anatolia since that term came in later. Kurdistan and Anatolia have their own pages to describe what they mean as Armenian Highland is here... its significance is important. Nocturnal781 (talk) 08:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

"Political aspect"

"The term "Eastern Anatolia" is designated for the region and is mainly used for statistical and administrative purposes, while geographic expression Armenian plateau is continued to be used in contemporary Turkish sources."

This is plain wrong. "Eastern Anatolia" has zero administrative relevance in Turkey. It's an essentially geographical term that ignore the borders of actual administrative divisions (provinces) in Turkey. Here's a map showing geographical regions of Turkey: External Link. For comparison, this is the map of provinces: External Link. --Mttll (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

As for Eastern Anatolia being an "erroneous" way to refer to this region, there's a method to compare the prominence of some names:

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

It's not some Wikipedia editors' bussiness to correct the "errors" of the world. --Mttll (talk) 16:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

There is such a thing as the Eastern Anatolia Region, which is an official geographic subdivision used by the Turkish government. In that respect, that sentence is not inaccurate.

And the mere fact that the word is used nowadays, by scholars and laymen alike, does not negate the notion that it is a misnomer. The words "Eastern Anatolia" were introduced by Turkey in the early 20th century as a substitute for the long-standing and commonly applied "Turkish Armenia." The word Anatolia itself denotes the area west of the Euphrates area, since the east embankment is where historical Armenia's western borders were typically delineated from. Regardless of which, we have a scholar, Dickran Kouymjian, a respected author and former Professor at Cal State Fresno University who is making such an assertion. If you have anything that challenges his statement by a third-party author, please introduce it, but please do not repeat the above, as it is nothing but your personal interpretation. And please do not import ongoing debates from other pages, at least not until some sort of consensus is established.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

As long as the term is in common usage, especially by the scientific community, I don't see how Wikipedia can afford undue endorsement for one man who asserts it's a misnomer. As a side note, when modern Eastern Anatolia was referred as Turkish Armenia, a big chunk of Southeastern Europe was referred to as "European Turkey" or "Turkey in Europe". Today, those would be merely synonyms for Eastern Thrace. So, the meaning of terms change over time. Wikipedia may serve as a chronicle of these changes, but not a platform for, let' say, "nostalgic" individuals who like to undo history by themselves. --Mttll (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not (i.e., should not) endorse any viewpoint on any article. A word can be misleading or erroneous and still be used by scholars, journalists, writers, etc. (a result of Turkey's own policies to conceal mention of Armenians). However, just because a certain word is in popular usage does not mean that the opinions of scholars are to be excluded. The opinion of a scholar, in this case that of Professor Kouymjian's, can be included so long as relevance and his reliability as a source can be demonstrated (for more information about him, see here). Again, do you have any sources that directly and clearly challenge Kouymjian's assertion?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 01:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Why would I need to have a source that directly challenges that assertion again? That assertion challenges the popular usage of a term by what's considered "reliable sources" by Wikipedia in the first place.

Quote from Wikipedia policies concerning neutral point of view and balance:

"Neutrality assigns weight to viewpoints in proportion to their prominence. However, when reputable sources contradict one another and are relatively equal in prominence, describe both approaches and work for balance. This involves describing the opposing views clearly, drawing on secondary or tertiary sources that describe the disagreement from a disinterested viewpoint."

In short, minority views certainly have a place in Wikipedia, but they should be presented as such. They can't be used in an introduction of an article, attempting to casually "correct" the majority view as if it's a mere misconception. --Mttll (talk) 02:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

You're challenging its place in the article, but the burden remains on you to explain and demonstrate why Kouymjian's opinion is invalid or should be removed. Sorry, but constantly repeating "others use it, too!" is irritating and does nothing to convince me that you may have a point or if Kouymjian's viewpoint is even considered minority. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 02:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't have to prove the assertion is invalid, as my objection is to the way it was presented:

The Armenian Highland (for names in other languages see below; also known as the Armenian Upland, Armenian plateau, Armenian tableland, simply Armenia; erroneously referred to as "Eastern Anatolia" or "Eastern Asia Minor")

On the other hand, I had already proved it's a minority viewpoint before I said it's a minority viewpoint. "Eastern Anatolia" is found in 117,000 books and 12,200 articles whereas "Armenian Highland", in 4,570 books and 244 articles. --Mttll (talk) 11:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Again, Mttll, a Google Books search doesn't prove anything and in any case is not really appropriate for this kind of argument. Given this impasse, you can, if you like, ask for a third opinion.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 01:03, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

The Google Books & Articles searches prove "Eastern Anatolia" is by a large margin the primary name the scientific community use to refer to the region in question. --Mttll (talk) 01:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I stand by what I wrote above.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 23:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Lesser Caucasus in Armenian Highlands?

How could it possible? Armenian Highland is a single mountain range with a uniqe mineral resources and chemical composition. It is impossible that the Armenian Highland included a chain of other mountain range, because it is in itself one and indivisible. 91.77.80.111 (talk) 15:18, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved - uncontested (with no votes) after a full listing and a full relist, and the Google books result seems to tally, so looks uncontroversial enough. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 10:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

---

Armenian Highland → Armenian Highlands – WP:COMMONNAME Relisted. BDD (talk) 19:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC) Երևանցի ^talk 22:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC) Google Books

• "Armenian highland" - 4,230 results
• "Armenian plateau" - 8,240 results

Comment Per google results, Armenians highlands yields 8,000+ results. Proudbolsahye (talk) 00:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

notable peaks

Soviet Encyclopedia also lists Sabalan and Sahand there. Is it accepted classification? - Altenmann >t 06:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

That's a little weird. I thought Lake Urmia is the south-eastern border of the plateau. --Երևանցի ^talk 06:32, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, It looks like Tabriz & Sahand are within the latitude range of Urmia. It is bad that in wikipedia maps have no clear delineation of mountain ranges, plateaus, lowlands, etc.- Altenmann >t 07:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Armenian Highlands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090528175656/http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/Regional/EcoNetworks/Documents/2008/TpvsEm11_2008_en.pdf to http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/Regional/EcoNetworks/Documents/2008/TpvsEm11_2008_en.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:34, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 12 August 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 19:32, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

---

Armenian Highlands → Armenian highlands – MOS:CAPS, use in high-quality modern sources by academic publishers as well as notable historical works like Karajian Seraphim System ^(talk) 19:23, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

References

• Oppose - When searching in google, I can see no sites that use the lowercase version. These sites include: Encyclopaedia Britannica ([26]) and Armenian Geographic ([27]). Thus, I would say the current name is it's WP:COMMONNAME. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk | contribs} 16:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

South Caucasus

is now referred to as "Lesser Caucasus" or "Caucasus Minor." ... have the Caucasus moved since 1915? Since Armenian highland is also a modern and invented term (mostly used by Europeans) if it is now referring to the Lesser Caucasus that begs the question when was it called the Armenian highland? It would be nice if editors took the time to explain things like this a little more carefully when creating POV forks. This article really should be merged into Transcaucasia.Seraphim System ^(talk) 03:50, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes that wording is wrong I think. Lesser Caucasus is just a mountain range! Altering it to "is now sometimes referred to as being part of the Southern Caucasus" would make it more accurate. But there is no content in the article that elaborates on this. 92.28.136.76 (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I think Britannica has some discussion of this which can be added. Though the Caucasus have presumably remained in place, Britannica has altered the content since 1910, but I don't think we can expand on the "is now referred to" without it becoming WP:OR...probably better to tweak the wording and leave out the "is now", unless there is a source discussing the change in language in more detail.Seraphim System ^(talk) 22:52, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

It's clear Seraphim didn't even understand the line "Eastern Armenia" is now referred to as "Lesser Caucasus". Who said anything about South Caucasus? Does he not know what "Lesser Caucasus" is? Look on a false colour map. You see that highland region that includes Nakchivan, Armenia, and Artsakh? That's the part. The "Lesser Caucasus" is geographically and geologically part of the Armenian plateau (the eastern slope of the range formed by the East Anatolian Fault with a valley where the Kura River flows (through Tbilisi) from before we reach the actual Caucasus. The separation between the Caucasus Mountains and this so-called "Lesser Caucasus" is so big and natural that we have a huge valley with one of the biggest rivers in the region going through it (Kura River). When it was not called "Armenia," it was called "Anti-Caucasus," meaning "opposite the Caucasus" or "the region on facing against the Caucasus." The only "modern invention" here is the term "Lesser Caucasus," which I'm assuming (with zero evidence, but as a hunch) was a Russian policy to include those territories into a greater concept of "Caucasus." Learn a bit of the geography of the region and its history before commenting so boldly about it (oh wait, you're banned... that makes sense). Also, what's this nonsense about "Armenian Highlands" being a modern Western invention? I can take out a hundreds old maps ranging from the Middle Ages to 1828 that refer to the highlands as "Armenia," including Persian, Arabic and Ottoman sources. Heck, I'll even throw in some texts from antiquity. If it wasn't called Armenia, why in the world would the Ottomans ban the use of the word in 1880 to refer to the region? Get out of here with your agenda-reeking POV. — [ kentronhayastan ] 01:52, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 27 October 2021

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. There are three guidelines on this:

• WP:NCCAPS says "For multiword page titles, one should leave the second and subsequent words in lowercase unless the title phrase is a proper name that would always occur capitalized, even mid-sentence."
• MOS:CAPS says "only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia".
• Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Names of classes) instructs to" look to sources to determine what is conventionally capitalized".

There is insufficient evidence to show that the "h" in highlands is conventionally capitalized; in fact, the ngrams results show that it is usually not capitalized. In the absence of such evidence, guidelines appear to favor not capitalization. In terms of headcount there are 10 supports (including nom) and 8 opposes. (non-admin closure) VR _talk 06:19, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Armenian Highlands → Armenian highlands – Per MOS:CAPS, if there is no consistent capitalization in reliable sources, lowercase should be used. In this case, lowercase is more common according to NGRAMS, Google Scholar indicates mixed usage. (t · c) buidhe 09:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:57, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Probably an uncontroversial move. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:41, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment -- three years ago @Dreamy Jazz: provided some good reasons to oppose this move, and they still seem like valid reasons today. TiggerJay (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. I would agree that capitalisation is best for a geographical entity unless it is most commonly seen in lowercase. That is clearly not the case here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

  It most certainly is the case here, as nom's linked evidence shows, that lowercase dominates. Dicklyon (talk) 00:14, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. I don't think much has changed since my last !vote, so I'm sticking to oppose unless someone convinces me otherwise. When using my own search engine (duck duck go) "Armenian Highlands" is more common than "Armenian highlands" in the results list, as when I search for the lowercase version in quotes it still really only brings up results for the uppercase version. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

See my comment below and see if it convinces you. Dicklyon (talk) 02:55, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. as per above. TiggerJay (talk) 20:37, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose the article seems to indicate its about a particular place rather than a generic term and it probably appears in lower case in sources sometimes perhaps because the term is used generically rather than for a specific place but this article seems to be about a specific place. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

  Are you suggesting that "Armenian highlands" without the cap refers to something different from this particular place (region)? Did you find an example to illustrate what you mean by "used generically" that's different from how the capped version is used? Dicklyon (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

  It might be used in an unofficial way to refer to other places in a descriptive manor, although this article is a bit vague about the place it does appear to refer to a specific place. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

  If you scan some sources, I think you'll have to agree that "Armenian Highlands" and "Armenian highlands" refer to the same place, and it's not a place with an officially defined boundary, like a political entity, so a bit fuzzy. The caps difference is not signalling a difference in intent about what to refer to, just a different styling choice. We have our own guidelines about that choice. Dicklyon (talk) 23:58, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom's rationale, which would bring it into comformance with our guidelines. The previous "good reasons" that Tiggerjay refers to are irrelevant; we don't follow Britannica, and COMMONNAME is not relevant to the capitalization question. Also since search engines tend to sort by prominence, they tend to show more of the capped versions. The n-gram stats are not biased that way, as they count all, without ranking. And the Armenian Geographic article that Dreamy Jazz linked does not cap highland or highlands in sentences. Check it. Dicklyon (talk) 02:51, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Dicklyon: could you help point me in the right direction to the specific guidelines you are referring to. A cursory look at: MOS:CAPS, MOS:PLACE, WP:PLACE does not reveal what you're referring to. Or perhaps there is some other established precedent I am unaware of? I did find WP:WIAN but that seems to affirm following Britannica, although that really seems to deal more with "naming conventions" and not necessarily the question of casing. TiggerJay (talk) 22:07, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

  MOS:CAPS has the most relevant guidance: "Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is conventionally capitalized; only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia." I'd say that MOS:PLACE is less relevant, since it's not a proper-named place (i.e. not like a city or county or country, a specific named entity); rather, it's a descriptive common name. Again, we make that determination by consulting sources, not by just asserting, as some do above, that it's a proper name. There's no question what's the common name here, just how to style it; if the great majority of sources would cap it, so would we, but if it's mixed, we don't. Ref 1, the book, via Amazon's "Look Inside", clearly uses "Armenian highlands". Ref 2, 1911 Britannica, uses "Armenian highlands", at least in its article cited there. Ref 4, the Political Dictionary of Armenia, uses "Armenian highland" and "highlands" – no sign of proper name status. The modern Britannica seems to think the proper name is "Armenian Highland", which doesn't support "Armenian Highlands". And so forth. Why the resisance to fixing this per WP style? Dicklyon (talk) 23:03, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support per Randy Kryn and Dicklyon. Tony (talk) 03:36, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose Toponyms should be capitalized. Dimadick (talk) 13:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

  This is not a toponym, it's a descriptive term.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:31, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  Sure, and platitudes should be avoided. We all agree already that proper names should be capitalized, and that toponyms are proper names of places. But if you look at sources, you have to conclude that "Armenian highlands" is not the proper name of a place, not a proper noun. So you've said nothing here. Dicklyon (talk) 01:21, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. Agreed that capitalization is best for a geographical entity unless it is most commonly seen in lowercase.Lesliechin1 (talk) 08:35, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  It is mostly seen in lowercase. Clear proof: [28]. So, Lesliechin1 please change your !vote to agree with your own rationale.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:31, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  I wonder why several "opposes" haven't yet addressed the evidence put forward here. Tony (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support per MOS:CAPS and per source usage, in which lower-case dominates. [29].  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:31, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support per MOS:CAPS, WP:NCCAPS and the evidence presented. There is clearly mixed usage and it is not consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources. If it were truly a toponym, capitalisation in sources would reflect this. It does not. The area is also "described" as the "Armenian plateau" with similar frequency as the "Armenian highlands" [30] and in recent usage, there is also mixed capitalisation.[31] It is a term that generally describes an area. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 02:06, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support this is not even close. Even if the ngram showed a slight preference for using title case, we'd still use sentence case because that's what MOS:CAPS says, but the evidence actually says the sentence case version is quite heavily favoured in books, and increasingly so over the years. The above opposes cite Britannica as an example, but it we look at it, Britannica uses "Armenian Highland" in the singular, which adds even further to the suggestion that this is not a well-defined proper name, but rather a descriotive title, which we always lowercase even if other organs' style says they should uppercase it.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:14, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support per various comments above: Sources are mixed and mostly lowercase. In borderline situations, Wikipedia prefers lowercase. This doesn't even seem to be on the borderline. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:03, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 00:53, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose Most of the sources use "Armenian Highland(s)". [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37] etc. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 09:52, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

• Apparently, you have found some sources that use uppercase – but do you have any evidence for that being "Most of the sources" as you said? The ngrams shown above seem to indicate most using lowercase. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Corroborated by Google Books Ngram Viewer. Khestwol (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2021 (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.

Relation to Zagros Mountains

UserXpetVarpet, hi. You have added the Armenian highland to the Zagros Mountains intro, as part of the definition:

"It spans the southern parts of the Armenian highland, the whole length of the western and southwestern Iranian plateau, ending at the Strait of Hormuz.

Now, on this page here "Zagros" is not even mentioned. One of the two can't be right.

Brill's New Pauly has in its entry on Zagros:

"Alpine mountain range ... which runs from the northwest to the southeast in southwestern Iran, stretching from the Armenian highlands to the Kūh-e Fūrġūn on the Gulf of Oman..."

I'm not sure what that means: that the Zagros range includes the Armenian highlands, or that it is bordered on one side by them (and they don't belong), as it is on the other by the Gulf of Oman, which obviously also doesn't belong.

Once this is figured out, it should find its place in both articles, Armenian highland as well as Zagros Mountains. Maybe there is no consensus, and that should also be included, as it would inform the user. Yerevantsi, hi, you might be also interested in the topic - and maybe you and XpetVarpet know who else to consult. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Arminden. I agree that the Brill's New Pauly's definition is unclear whether it includes parts of or only borthers the Armenian Highlands. A more precisely written definition would be better for this case.

The Armenian Highland's article states that it borthers the Iranian plateau and we all can agree that the Zagros mountains are part of the Iranian plateau. By looking at images of the Zagros range, it seems that it goes well outside the boundaries of the Iranian plateau, reaching the Van region of the Armenian Highlands.

In the article for Zagros, the definition means that the mountain range starts in the southernmost areas of the Armenian Highland and continues in the western edge of the Iranian Plateau and so on. (It became more clear by comparing the [area] of the Zagros mountain range, with the [map] of the Armenian plateau)

A similar case to what you adressed above is with the Taurus mountains. While no mention of the Iranian plateau inside the article for Taurus mountains, the article for Iranian plateau#Geography states that it includes the Taurus mountains in the north west. (When actually there is the Armenian plateau located directly between the two and the Armenian plateau certainly is not part of the Iranian plateau).

Cheers, UserXpetVarpet (talk) 15:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Failed verification?

The lede states: "The population of the region has been primarily Armenian for most of its known history.[5]". However, the given Library of Congress link doesn't support this as far as I can see. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:12, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I went ahead and swapped the content and the Library of Congress link with material from the latest (i.e. third) edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam, per WP:BOLD.[38]-[39] Feel free to let me know if you disagree. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Problems with definition

There is some confusion in the article on whether it is about the Armenian highlands as a concrete geographical region or a political-cultural one. For example, Sinclair's EI entry "Armenia (topography)" is used to support the claim "The highlands are primarily defined by the geographical dispersal of its native inhabitants, the Armenians." But here, Sinclair is clearly talking about the term Armenia and its historical usage, in contrast to the broader, geographical understanding indicated in the first sentence of the entry, corresponding to "Armenian highlands": "Armenia, grosso modo, is a high tableland which in general character consists of a series of plains separated by wide mountain or hill ridges. However, it is defined essentially by the geographical spread of its native population." If the article is about the geographical region, then it obviously can't be defined by the geographical spread of the Armenians, which has dramatically changed in the last century. Revolution Saga (talk) 08:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Help

Hi, Mareşal. Are you busy now ? When you have time could you explain basic rules in Wikipedia for this user ? See you. Takabeg (talk) 22:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Malibeyli and Gushchular

What are your thoughts on the non-neutral unpublished website "sources" on the Battle of Malibeyli and Gushchular article? This issue has been consistantly ignored. As per Wikipedia:Reliable Sources[40];
"Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves"
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
1. the material is not unduly self-serving;
2. it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.
...these non-neutral unpublished website "sources" clearly violate #2 of "Self-published and questionable sources as sources themselves". Which means they do not pass for reliable sources on wikipedia and need to be removed. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I am requesting enforcement of arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 for your last two edits in reverts on Malibeyli and Gushchular Massacre and Deportation of Azerbaijanis from Armenia. See this page . Neftchi (talk) 22:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Greek name

Hello Marshal! I am well, although currently serving my military service :) Yes, the name translates as "beautiful/good well", and it should be "καλόν πηγάδιν". Cheers, Constantine ✍ 12:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Բարև

Բարև ձեզ, Կցանկանայի ձեր կարցինքը իմանալ Deportation of Azerbaijanis from Armenia էջի մասին և ազեռա-թյուրքական գրոհների հակառակ ստեղծել Ադրբեջանից հայերի բռնագաղթման մասին: Եթե նայես Northern Artsakh, Nakhichevan և Ganja, Azerbaijan էջերը, ապա կտեսնես որ հնարավորինս չափ փորձել եմ անկողմնակալ (ցարական ռուսական և սովետական մարդահամարներ) աղբյուրներ բերել, որպեսզի նրանք, հիմք չունենան այն ջնջելու: Հիմա կցանկանայի որ օգնես ինձ այդ գործում: Ի՞նչ կասես: --Yerevanci (talk) 00:34, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Please see [41] Dighapet (talk) 16:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I moved your statement lock, stock and barrel to the enforcement section where the request was refiled. Regards --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 18:27, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Armenian Highland again

Hello, MarshallBagramyan. You have new messages at Talk:Armenian Highland#Original research ?.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Takabeg (talk) 09:03, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Turkish Van & Van Cat

Hello, MarshallBagramyan. You have new messages at Talk:Turkish Van.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi, Mareşal. In Armenian language, does վանա կատու mean Van Cat or Turkish Van ? Takabeg (talk) 14:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Census

Mareşal. As long as I understand, the table at Armeniapedia is the copy of this official website. Isn't it ? If so, we'd better use official website. Takabeg (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Maibeyli

Hi Marshal, I really don't see any point in discussing anything on the talkpage of that article with editors currently active there - there is nothing new to add. Do you have any idea on formal means to continue the process? -- Ashot  ^(talk) 04:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Highland :(

Mareşal ! Bu kullanıcıyı ikna edemez misin ? Takabeg (talk) 08:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion for Arbcomm

Hi Marshall, I thought you might interested in my suggestion 7 here: [42]--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 12:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I would definitely like to hear your opinion on my proposal as well. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 03:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)