Talk:Vardenis

Population

Hello, Archives908. I spend time on researching the edit and the reason for your revert. The rationale you provided for your revert is fundamentally incorrect per the rules. It makes no difference whether the edit was a sock edit or not if another user restored it. Let's move on to the content on hand.

If nothing was posted on the noticeboard beforehand, both sources can be regarded as WP:RS. I. B. Taurus and Edinburgh University Press are well-known publishers that have never been criticized for prejudice favoring Azerbaijan or Armenia in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. If you have any concerns about these sources, please post them on the noticeboard.

Furthermore, you're referring to POV-language, with which I also disagree. The content is neutral in language and adheres to the original source. Here are the quotes:

• Azerbaijanis in Vardenis faced armed assault by paramilitary forces if they chose to stay behind.

Original, Bölükbaşı, p. 7: In Armenia, Azeris in Kalininskiy, Gorisskiy, Gugarkskiy, and Vardenisskiy raions faced armed assault by paramilitary forces if they chose to stay behind.

• By the 1960s, Vardenis, along with Chambarak, became one of the Azerbaijani-majority areas of Armenia's eastern regions.

Original, Broers, Displacements, p. 11: All of the Azerbaijani-majority regions were in the periphery, in the north-west region of Amasiya, and its outer rim to the east of Lake Sevan (Krasnosel’sk and Vardenis). The latter became Azerbaijani-majority regions during the 1960s, evidence of robust Azerbaijani growth.

Please, revert the edit if there's no question left about it. — Toghrul R (t) 11:27, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Hmm I'm curious, since when is a WP:SPA, of a known WP:SOCK, here to genuinely WP:BUILDWP? Editor ZaniGiovanni had to report, and editor User:TheSandDoctor had to block this IP and protect this page for a reason. The text is clearly WP:POV and the fact that you ignore that is concerning. The Sockmaster writes "the ethnic Azerbaijani population of Vardenis was expelled violently" not once, but twice. Not to mention that the source is derived from Azerbaijan-based researchers. Not only is it redundant (and seems to violate WP:UNDUE), but it propels the same POV agenda which led to the Sockmaster being blocked in the first place. But, let me guess, you still want it restored? I'm not convinced. Archives908 (talk) 14:43, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2022

Spelling Error:

Under DEMOGRAPHICS.

Currently: The Holey Mother of God church, built between 1903 and 1912, is the town's main church regulated by the Diocese of Gegharkounik based in Gavar.

Change to: The Holy Mother of God church Thranitt (talk) 12:38, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done Madeline (part of me) 15:31, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Tatar's name of several settlements in today's Armenia proper

I would like to seek a consensus, whether I can or am able to add Tatar's (later known as Azerbaijanis) name of several places/settlements in present-day territory of the Republic of Armenia. There are several sources and not published specifically by the Azerbaijan Government as they are largely considered as propaganda.

This talk/request doesn't promote the interethnic strife and purely to highlight some of those settlements history, specially of 1800s and early 1900s.

Settlements mentioned above including places like Gheghamasar, Vardenis, Vanadzor, Dilijan, Sis, Masis, etc.

Thank you. Mfikriansori (talk) 23:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Provided there are reliable sources to back them up, I don't see why the old (often Azerbaijani) names shouldn't be added to the Etymology section of each settlement's article – it seems reasonable considering their official usage in the 19th and early-to-late 20th centuries. – Olympian ^loquere 00:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Olympianloquere for your response/support of what I am about to do as long as I can provide reliable sources. I will avoid using Azerbaijani publications due to their conflict with Armenia, instead I want to use this two books as main references: * Kiesling, John Brady & Raffi Kojian. 2001. Rediscovering Armenia: An Archaeological/touristic Gazetteer and Map Set for the Historical Monuments of Armenia. Yerevan: Tigran Mets Publishing House.

• Leupold, David. 2020. Embattled Dreamlands: The Politics of Contesting Armenian, Kurdish and Turkish Memory. Taylor & Francis.

Mfikriansori (talk) 03:05, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Those sources are reliable as far as I'm aware. I would also recommend using Sevan Nishanyan's website Index Anatolicus which provides historical etymology for villages and towns in Armenia, among other places. – Olympian ^loquere 03:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

The Kiesling/Kojian book is not a reliable source. It is self-published and one of the authors is even a fellow Wikipedia user. Please do not add the first source you can find that verifies what you want to write without checking its reliability first, as another user previously did. --Dallavid (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dallavid, could you please explain how exactly Rediscovering Armenia: An Archaeological/Touristic Gazetteer and Map Set for the Historical Monuments of Armenia is a self-published source? It was published by Tigran Mets in December 2001 and has an ISBN (9993052280 & 978-9993052289) so I'm a bit confused where your rationale comes from. Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 01:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Tigran Mets is a self-publisher because the only qualifications to publish with them are to pay a financial price. I would've thought this had been obvious by looking at their website, which says "order a print cost estimate' on the home page. --Dallavid (talk) 22:27, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I've read through WP:USINGSPS and there's nothing in there that prohibits it (if it is even the case here); what's important is the relationship between the author and the publisher, and since they are separate entities and unaffiliated, their book cannot be considered self-published. Moreover, it's not up to an individual editor to unilaterally claim a source is self-published and revert tens of edits based on their personal view — these things are procedurally taken through WP:RSN whereby a consensus is reached before taking action. If you're unwilling to take Rediscovering Armenia to RSN, that suggests that you're unsure if others would agree with your view that it's unsuitable for use. Finally, even if the source was "self-published" as you claim, WP:ABOUTSELF allows its use provided "there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity", and there isn't given that the old names of villages are consistently supported by English, Russian, Armenian, and Turkish-language sources (see Drakhtik's etymology section for an array of such sources). — Olympian ^loquere 07:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:SELFPUB specifically calls for "reliable, independent publications", which a paid service is not. But putting aside the self-published issue for a moment, what about the problem that neither of the authors are established experts, and one of them is even a Wikipedia editor? The whole book can be considered original research. ABOUTSELF only applies if the authors were writing about themselves, not random village articles where we'll need reliable sources, especially for historical information. --Dallavid (talk) 21:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

The fact that one of the authors is a WP editor isn't a discrediting factor, I'm not sure why you keep bringing that up as there's nothing to prohibit this. The policy you're citing from WP:SELFPUB applies in the case of self-published sources which as I already stated isn't the case here – seeing as we have different interpretations of whether or not the source is self-published, I advise you to take the source to RSN before reverting others' edits and gain a consensus there; until then, you can't unilaterally declare a source to be unacceptable and revert based on your own logic. In the About us page of Tigran Mets, you can see the publisher works with the UN and other international organisations, there's nothing to suggest they exchange payment for publishing unmerited works.

Since you keep bringing them up, why don't we ask the author? @RaffiKojian, as one of the authors of the source in question, could you give provide us with some insight, please? Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 13:46, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello folks. Seems to be a lot of discussion about some very basic facts, and some either mistaken interpretations of comments and texts, or purposeful misrepresentations. All of this is quite clear in the texts and references, so I'm not sure why I keep getting summoned, just because I happen to be a Wikipedian. First and most importantly, when the name "Vardenis" is being used, it can refer to the city or the region. It seems what is true for the region is being portrayed as if it refers to the city using 2 references, neither of which means it that way. Serzh in Black Garden says "Vardenis and other regions", and he is referring to Vardenis REGION (also and arguably better known as rayon), not the city, and in Rediscovering it clearly says the Vardenis REGION, going on to mention it consists of 30 villages/settlements. Not just Vardenis. So really, none of this really belongs on this page at all, it belongs on whatever page does or does not exist for the former administrative region. That most of the villages of Vardenis Region were populated by Azeris is no secret, and anyone can look them up one at a time and see for themselves. You can get a list of the villages here. It's the last paragraph of the Vardenis Region entry. The previous page has the entry about Vardenis city. There you can see clearly the name used to be Basarkechar, and more historically, Vasekashen. There is no indication that Vardenis, which was founded by Armenians in the 1800s ever had an Azeri majority or anything approaching that. That book in any case is the authoritative source for the names of all toponyms of Armenia. This is the title of contents of this excellent reference which I use, and recommend others use as well: http://nayiri.com/imagedDictionaryBrowser.jsp?dictionaryId=61 --RaffiKojian (talk) 06:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that insightful response, Raffi! Yes, the relevant sentences re the Vardenis region were indeed moved to the Vardenis District article, I don't think anyone disputes that it belongs there. The disagreement Dallavid and I were having and wanting your opinion in was whether Rediscovering Armenia is a self-published source and therefore unsuitable for Wikipedia usage in providing old village names, e.g. Hayanist → Gharaghshlar. Are you saying that you referenced all the old village names mentioned in your book with the authoritative source you provided? Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 08:53, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

On the contrary, the book being WP:OR is very discrediting. Publications where the only requirement is to pay a fee to a service are still considered self-published. For example, Kindle is a self-publishing service. Since you are the one proposing changes you do not have a consensus for, the WP:ONUS is on you to try getting a consensus from RSN. And the Tigran Mets About Us page literally refers to their clients as "customers"... --Dallavid (talk) 21:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

• Tigran Mets is self-publishing similar to publications such as Lulu, there shouldn't be a debate about this. Self-publishing doesn’t just mean “published by the author”, there are hundreds of self-publishing ‘pay to get’ publications which have no academic or otherwise merits, no peer-review and will publish virtually anything from anybody for the money. Such publications obviously aren’t reliable (and it's entirely irrelevant what kind of primary source the book uses, that's not how we determine the reliability of a book or if it's SPS). Tigran Mets is such a publication as clearly displayed on their website; they have no merits of an actual reliable publication and exhibit all the signs of a typical self-publisher;

1. https://tigran-mets.am/about-us/

The publisher has no research or academic goals, its only goal is to serve clients. It's self-publishing.

2. https://tigran-mets.am/our-history/

Confirms the publisher is privatized and basically only exists to make profit.

3. https://tigran-mets.am/portfolio/

It doesn't even prioritize books, most of the things it publishes are common goods.

The authors also are non-experts and seem to be random people who happen to publish a book, and there is a clear conflict of interest when one of the participants in this discussion is the author and they were pinged and asked whether the book matches Wikipedia standards. In any case, editors may wish to take it to the WP:RSN. I personally think there isn't a need for that as it is pretty obvious this is a self-publication source and not suitable for our standards. Regarding 'other sources', as far as I understand, the user in question didn't actually include other sources, they used only this source in their edits [1], [2], [3]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Your accusation of this being a conflict of interest, whereby the author is simply asked to answer a question is unfounded and uncalled for. In any case, if Dallavid takes Rediscovering Armenia to RSN and proves that it's self-published (as the onus is on the editor who questions the reliability of the source), would you be opposed to instead referencing the 1986 Yerevan-published book titled Dictionary of the toponyms of Armenia and surrounding regions for old village names? It was published by Երեվանի Համալսարանի Հրատարակչոիթյոին ("Yerevan University Publishing House") which I'm sure we can all categorically agree is an academic-publisher. – Olympian ^loquere 03:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN: The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, which would be the user trying to add the source that clearly fails WP:RSSELF. --Dallavid (talk) 21:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)