Talk:Kalbajar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

??[edit]

What exactly description do you mean under unsourced or biassed?--FHen(ru) 20:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see problem in 3 photos:

1. File:Karvachar009.JPG|Karvajarian children playing football. - "Kalbajarian" should be used instead of "Karvajarian" according to WP:PLACE

2. File:Karvachar010.JPG|Khachkar (an armenian crossstone) with erased cross, exposed in Kalbacar museum at Soviet times as azeri monument. - such serious statements should be provided with reliable sources.

3. File:Karvachar014.JPG|Other khachkar with armenian subscriptions at the backside from former Kalbacar museum. - one photo of khachkar is enough. The article is not about khachkars but about the city. This photo is more suitable for another article, maybe about khachkars. --Quantum666 (talk) 06:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Children are armenians and live in armenian city named Karvajar. They CAN NOT be "Kalbajarian"
  2. OK. I'll provide the source soon
  3. It's Khachkar from former Kalbajar museum. If it was a khachkar from other place, You are right. What is the reason that they can not be in the article? --195.94.251.74 (talk) 07:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It's not a question of their nationality but the question of naming places in Wikipedia according to the rules of Wikipedia. (please see WP:PLACE)
  2. Ok. When you provide the source we'll return the photo.
  3. Please see WP:BOLD. The article is about the town, not about khchkars and one photo is enough. --Quantum666 (talk) 10:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kalbajar. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 12:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms[edit]

@Nicat49: Municipality of Karvachar adopted new coat of arms in 2013 - http://times.am/?p=20392&l=en. --Vmakenas (talk) 19:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicat49: Hope you'll read this before changing coat of arms sector many times a day, thank you. --Vmakenas (talk) 19:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1) Kalbajar not Karvachar. 2) Your coat of arms is not an official. 3) Kalbajar de jure part of Azerbaijan.--nicatnabiyev (talk) 21:19, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicat49: I'm sorry, but that was Karvachar municipality that adopted the coat of arms just because there is no longer a town called Kalbajar. And here is Stepanakert page, which, as I know, is also a "de jure part of Azerbaijan", but the problem is that the coat of arms of Stepanakert is also adopted by NKR officials. So, there can't be double standarts on Wikipedia, as I know. --Vmakenas (talk) 22:34, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, lets follow WP:NPV. Kelbajar is de facto in NKR, but de jure it is in Azerbaijan, so both coat of arms can be presented in the template. I think current view is the solution. Don't continue editwarring. --Interfase (talk) 16:48, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Interfase: agree, thanks! --Vmakenas (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Armenian translation in the first paragraph[edit]

I don't see a problem with moving the Armenian translated name to the 2nd paragraph like; ..the city was slowly repopulated by ethnic Armenians and renamed Karvachar Armenian: Քարվաճառ), the usage in the first paragraph is misleading as most international sources have long abandoned the name since the capture. The name would still be present in the first section but I think it needs to moved to the 2nd segment as the name Karvachar is only used by Armenian sources and mostly out of use. User:ZaniGiovanni [1] [2] [3]

That's not a valid reason to remove or move down a name. Armenian name was still the official name of the city not so long ago, and there is not a single issue with it being in the lead. You failed to show any rule/guideline that says otherwise. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And it's not an “Armenian translation”, it was the original name of this settlement. More of a reason of its significance and justification to be included in the lead. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I support the view that the Armenian translation of the city should be kept in the etymology section only. It is referred to as Karvachar only by some Armenian sources. There is no need to include it in the first paragraph, as the official, international and local name is Kalbajar only. It is also just one of the hypotheses that the original name was Karvachar. It is not a fact. There are other hypotheses as well. Including Kalbajar's Armenian version in the first paragraph is same as including Munich's Italian version - "Monaco" in the first paragraph.--KHE'O (talk) 18:49, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://apnews.com/article/international-news-azerbaijan-armenia-f1ce47fea3ecb8f85f9b7670f385343c
  2. ^ https://tass.com/world/1373303
  3. ^ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57266297

Relevance of ruling dynasty[edit]

@Abrvagl: Hey! I noticed in this edit [1] that you restored information from “A history of the Georgian people” which I don’t believe mentions the town of Kalbajar at all. I know previously you have removed a source by Robert Hewsen for the same reason. I don’t see the WP:Relevance of mentioning the local ruling dynasty or their ethnic background, especially when it is not stated in the first source, making it essentially WP:Synthesis as the town of Kalbajar is not mentioned. The article to the Karabakh Khanate is already linked if readers wanted to understand more about it. We could add that the Karabakh Khanate was under Iranian suzerainty as that is supported by the Bournoutian source and is more relevant to understanding the wider geopolitical situation? Also, would you be able to give me a quote on exactly what the “History of the Georgian people” source says so we can verify relevance? It’s rather hard to access. Thank you, TagaworShah (talk) 04:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for reaching out. I find the mention "ruled by the Turkic origin Javanshir clan in 1748-1822" relevant. With regards to "A history of the Georgian people", I logically assumed that it's in the source because a historical fact covered by number of sources didn't seem suspicious to me, and neither did you doubt it in your edit. However, it worth to check it or replace it since you have raised a concern. Also, I disagree that it is WP:Synthesis, I did not combine A and B to imply the conclusion C.
With regards to your edit, we cannot write this In the 18th century, Kalbajar was again incorporated into the province of Khachen as a part of the newly-formed Karabakh Khanate based on the what is essentially a map from the book. It is original research, because there is nothing in the source about being incorporated again. The only thing that we can state based on that source is that Kalbajar was part of the Karabakh Khaganate in mid-18th century, and also probably mention that it was part of Khachen (which is almost similar to what altered version of the article was stating). So I guess we should return to the altered version and just add the mention of Khachen. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 09:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Abrvagl: Thanks for your response! Unfortunately, It is almost certain that the source which appears to have been written in the 1930s before Kalbajar had any significance to outsiders, and was mostly likely just copy and pasted from the Javanshir clan wikipedia page, does not mention Kalbajar or anything about it’s vicinity like the tatar river valley, it’s mostly likely just saying that the Javanshir clan of Turkic origin ruled the Karabakh khanate which is already in the respective article and not related to the history of the city. By the same reason as the removal of the Hewsen source, which that actually did mention the specific area, this one should be removed too no? In addition, maps are perfectly fine to be used as long as you are not drawing your own conclusions, the Bournoutian source does state that the Melikdom of Khachen became the Khachen province in the Karabakh Khanate so I don’t see how that would be original research. I would say we keep the current version and take out information that is not relevant to the focus of the article, which is Kalbajar and the territory it sits on. TagaworShah (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mentioning that the Karabakh Khanate was a dependency/province of Iran is definitely more relevant than mentioning its ethnic origins, as it gives a better grasp of the geopolitical situation. That piece of info was added by a notorious LTA user [2]. Also, per Bournoutian; "Moreover, there was no territorial or religious unity, or ethnic/national identity, among the numerous khans of the South Caucasus. Their main interest was to keep their individual posts and revenues." - page 120, Bournoutian, George (2016). "Prelude to War: The Russian Siege and Storming of the Fortress of Ganjeh, 1803–4". Iranian Studies. Taylor & Francis. 50 (1): 107–124. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Prior to any discussion, can you please cite and point me out in where Bournoutian source states that the Melikdom of Khachen became the Khachen province in the Karabakh Khanate? Also, can you please be so kind and diff me which Hewsen source are we talking about? Thanks. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 14:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Abrvagl: Of course I can! It is stated on page 55 of the Bournoutian source [3] and the diff for the removal of the Hewsen source is here [4], it looks like someone else removed it, I guess I was thinking of another article, my bad, but the same concerns apply. I also would like to say I agree with the concerns HistoryofIran brought up above and do agree that it is much more relevant to mention it was under Iranian suzerainty. TagaworShah (talk) 14:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sorry for inconvenience, can you please quote that part? I read 55 page, searched both for Karvachar and Kalbajar, but did not find to where you were referring.
Actually, I took a step back and asked myself, "Why do we include this information in the Kalbajar city article at all?" We're talking about ancient and medieval times, but it appears that we forgot that Kalbajar city did not exist until the twentieth century. That means that the majority of the information in the "Early History" section, including what we're talking about now, is unrelated to this article. The majority of the information is about the Kalbajar area, but it incorrectly implies that it is about the city.As fortune has brought us all together, I am hoping for common sense. We should go over the early history section of the article and remove irrelevant information. This information not only irrelevant, but also misleading. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 15:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Abrvagl: That is not how Wikipedia works, should we erase all mention of the indigenous history of Los Angeles including the Tongva village that was located in the area, before it was founded as Los Angeles? Kalbajar existed as an Armenian village known as Karvachar since at least the 10th century, this is sourced within the article. Page 55 states that the Melikdom of Khachen became the Khachen province of the Karabakh Khanate which the source establishes that Kalbajar is located within. Maybe take a look at the Stepanakert article which is a good article to see how the history section should look. And all of this is rather irrelevant to the topic at hand, which is the information sourced by the History of the Georgian people? Do you agree that it should be removed given the points brought up by HistoryofIran and I? TagaworShah (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We should not mix history of the city with the history of the district. "Territory of Kalbajar district was controlled by X empire in Y year" is irrelevant when the subject of the article is the city, which didn't even exist in those times. Los Angeles is an excellent example of how this article should be arranged. History begins with a brief description of the area before moving on to the settlement that would eventually become Los Angeles. It does not go wild, mentioning tons of irrelevant information and occupying roughly 25% of the article as in our case.
For example:
  • "Archaeological evidence uncovered in 1924 by Soviet archaeologist and scholar of the Caucasus Evgenia Pchelina attests to the existence of an Armenian settlement in the area during the middle ages." - this is irrelevant and misleading. The Source refers to the entire Kurdistansky Uezd not just Kelbajar, and does not even mention if that was related to the Kalbajar city (or to what later become Kalbajar city).

    В нынешнем Курдистанском у. Азербайджана курды появились не ранее XV — XVI вв. Об этом говорят прежде всего народные сказания. Например, родословная фамилии Ильясовых из сел. Огундара, выводящая свой род из Диарбекира, или рассказы о вытеснении армянского населения с земель района сел. Шальва — Ардашев и занятие их курдами из Хорасана в Персии. О том же говорят и встретившиеся мне археологические памятники в этом районе, указывающие на христианско-армянское население, бытовавшее здесь в средние века. За то, что курды осели в этих местах около 1589 г., т. е. во время турецко-персидской войны, говорит принадлежность курдов Азербайджанского уезда к Шиитам (под влиянием Персии), тогда как те же племена курдов „Курманджи“, живущие в Эриванской губ. бывш. Турции, в настоящее время или сунниты шафиитского толка, или иезиты.

A b r v a g l (PingMe) 16:14, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kalbajar District is probably place where most of that information reflected in the early history belongs to, but definitely not Kalbajar city. Information about the area should be short and precise and have links to the relevant articles lie Kalbajar District. P.S. Stepanakert article also talks about the things related to the settlement and does not go wild including tons of information unrelated to the city. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 16:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Abrvagl: Thank you for self reverting! As for the Pchelina source, I don’t see the issue, she speaks of the entire Kalbajar district as having an indigenous Armenian population prior to the forced removal of the Armenians and settlement of the Area by Kurds, this includes Kalbajar as Kalbajar is part of the area she talks about and while I don’t have full access to the source right now, if you do, I am under the impression that she does mention the archaeological Armenian sites found in Kalbajar city such as the 10th century Khachkar referenced in the article. Regardless, just like in the Los Angeles article, it is definitely relevant to mention who the Indigenous people that inhabited the region where Kalbajar lies were. And the majority of the early history sources speak directly of the city of Kalbajar like Karapetyan, who confirms that it was an important medieval village named Karvachar prior to it becoming depopulated and settled by Kurds and that the name Karvachar was still used as late as 1873 for the town according to archival documents. I also do think we should also add that it was under Iranian suzerainty. TagaworShah (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The quote makes no mention of Kelbajar and Pchelina is talking about their findings in the whole of Kurdistan uezd, not in Kalbajar. Assuming that they found it in Kalbajar and that it is related to the history of the city would be an original research. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 16:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Abrvagl. This article is about the town of Kalbajar. Everything that has no direct relation to the town should be left out. The history section must describe when the town was founded, and how it developed over the years. Also, many sources in the history section do not appear to be third party and peer-reviewed publications, as required by the rules. Grandmaster 16:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not always possible/practical to only use citations which solely mention the city itself, rather than its district/province/region. Recently I noticed that when even expanding a pretty well-known city (Maragheh), where I sometimes write the name of its region instead, Adharbayjan/Azerbaijan/etc. That said, we should obviously be careful not to overuse the latter. I do think the "Early history" and "Etymology" sections of this article needs some expanding/rewriting to make it all more clear. I agree with Grandmaster about the citations of this article, though that extends over the whole article itself imo. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Grandmaster: Hi, nice to see you editing again! Can you specify what sources exactly don’t fit WP:RS guidelines? I don’t understand what you mean by third party as well, Kalbajar isn’t really a person for there to be a conflicting interest with the authors. Additionally, It is commonplace in a lot of Geography related city articles to mention a brief history of the region prior to the founding of the modern-town, in this case it’s only about one sentence by Pchelina, as the rest is specifically about the village of Karvachar. Cheers, TagaworShah (talk) 16:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to WP:SCHOLARSHIP: Reliable scholarship – Material such as an article, book, monograph, or research paper that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable, where the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses. I have doubts than some of the sources used were published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses. And looking over the Early history section, it says almost nothing about the town itself. Most of it about the region of Kalbajar, which has its own article. Grandmaster 17:11, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Grandmaster: Thank you, but I am already familiar with the guidelines. I am asking which sources in particular do you view as not fitting within these guidelines? The only one I could see so far is the Raffi source, although that would be a matter of adding attribution. I do have a similar source that is reliable but I’m not sure if it’s specific enough so I left it out for now but we can discuss it. Also most of the information is about the medieval village of Karvachar and as HistoryofIran mentioned above sometimes it’s necessary to mention the whole region. TagaworShah (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kalbajar&oldid=1212545737"