Talk:Aghdam District

Reference

The reference to Vukovar, a very known battle, helps many (definitely Europeans) to understand the magnitude of the topic. Babaroga 23.01.06 10:42 CET

Verify

This article needs more citations. - FrancisTyers · 20:28, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Disputed paragraph

I removed the following:

In June 1, 2006 it was reported that Armenian armed forces were torching down several occupied villages of Azerbaijan’s region Aghdam for ten days long. The local residents said they heard explosions at nights and carrying of building materials by armored equipment in May. APA's provincial bureau reported that Yusifjanli, Novruzlu, Baghbanli, Seybali, Sarijali and Bash Garvand villages have been reduced to ashes. Aghdam and new settlements in Shikhbabali, Marzili, Khidirli, Goytapa villages were seen by eyewitnesses blaze. It was also reported that the Armenian soldiers were taking all things from the houses, and new settlements are constructed in foothills. The newly established 150-house settlement constructed by Armenians in Gulabi village of Aghdam can be observed from the villages near the front line. [1] [2] [3] On June 13, 2006 it was confirmed by Azerbaijani authorities that the fire had spread to the forest and Azerbaijani controlled areas were refugees from Karabakh had settled, the refugees again transferred to another settlement for safety reasons [4] [5] [6].

Why? Because the only sources for these claims are "Azernews.net" and "Today.Az". I'm not saying the news reports are wrong, but they're also very biased. Can we get a better reference for this please? Thanks. —Khoikhoi 23:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Someone added it back again, and I will once again remove it. Why? Because I know it is false. ALL of the Azeri houses in pure Azeri villages were completely looted and then burned as soon as they were captured. There was nothing left of value except the actual bricks and the pipes in the wall, which to this day are being collected by scavengers. That there are fires is also nothing remarkable - I see them all the time in Armenia. There were two under my apartment in the park in CENTRAL Yerevan, and I saw a half a dozen in the fields yesterday on a 45 minute drive back from Garni. So fires are just set all the time here all over Armenia, no villages were targetted, I am sure of it. Which means the only thing that is possibly true in the article is a new settlement being built. I don't know first hand about Gulabi, so I can't say for sure, but except for that the whole paragraph is pretty pointless and just plain false. --RaffiKojian 03:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and similar news has been re-added once more. Sorry but you will need a better source than az.news or similar media. - Fedayee 03:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

hey, Raffi, I don't understand what you are saying: "ALL of the Azeri houses in pure Azeri villages were completely looted and then burned as soon as they were captured." and "That there are fires is also nothing remarkable - I see them all the time in Armenia". So, do you think Armenians burned villages in Agdam or not? --12insan 05:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

There is not a single evidence that Azeris burn any villages or town in Azerbaijan - after all it is their land, and no one in the right mind would do that. Azeris have been always absolutely confident that the entire Karabakh (Upper and Lower) is their ancestral land. It is unthinkable for Azeris to damage the land of their ancestors. The fact of Armenians burning and looting Azerbaijani populated areas in Armenian and Azerbaijan, unfortunately, were just a common practice. Anyone, who is familiar with Caucasus region would confirm that this is very typical. Agdam is a clear and eternal evidence of Armenian vandalism. see, for example: Simplygr8 (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2011 (UTC)Symplygr8

References

Vandalism

Added sentence by weburbanist about vandalism in Agdam and graffiti-covered mosque, inc ref. Baku87 (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. The website is not reliable, only Azeri media reports of alleged vandalism by Armenian military. If we can find solid references that are reliable than please add the same sentence again. --Namsos (talk) 14:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Here's a report in Russian mass media: [7] Grandmaster (talk) 04:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

And here's a view to the city from top of the only remaining building - the mosque: [8] You can see that the city is completely ruined and looted. --Grandmaster (talk) 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I don't read Russian. Also there was a war, I don't think it is necessary to say it was 'looted'.--Namsos (talk) 05:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

If there is regular army involved, it could be a chance to avoid looting. Unfortunately, the fact of systematic looting of Azeri villages and towns by Armenian military forces were way too common. If there was no looting by Armenians, who would do that? Is someone could seriously consider Azeris looting and ruining their own houses? That would most preposterous. Who else then, Martians ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simplygr8 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Bias

While I am not saying that the claims made in this article are 100% false, I believe that it is exceptionally biased in favor of the Azeri side. Please refrain from using Azeri (and Armenian) websites to document, as both sides are inherently biased. I have thus flagged this article for neutrality. IBstupid (talk) 06:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Armenian name for official Azerbaijani province

Moved from user's discussion page

Could you please explain your edit.--Quantum666 (talk) 10:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem. According to the policy of NPOV in the geo-articles in disputed territories should be mentioned both POV. So You've tried to delete one of them and I've reverted Your edit as it was not neutral. --Ліонкінг (talk) 12:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

The article is not about disputed territory but about the administrative division of Azerbaijan. Your edit would be correct if the article was about the town Agdam itself. For example there is the article Shushi (province) and no Azerbaijani name is mentioned there. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

No, the article about Agdam district. As I know partly it is under control of Azerbaijan, while the biggest part (including Agdam city) is under the control of NKR. But I can agree with You that it will be normal if the articles about districts of NKR don't contain Azeri names and the articles about Azeri districts don't contain Armenian names. So as a compromise I'll revert my edit. But there are other problem, about population. Before the conflict there were an official census in USSR, so I added the official info with link. I think You can agree with me that the population of Agdam district can not increase in 4 years in 25%, so we should use pre-conflict sourced information, not estimate data's. --Ліонкінг (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

We can show both of the figures with correct attribution. The official information from Azerbaijani authorities is important too. Comparison of these two figures is not our job but the job of the sources. --Quantum666 (talk) 08:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

And another point is that the terriory of Agdam rayon in 1989 may differ from the territory of the present day Agdam rayon. Do you have ane sources comparing them? --Quantum666 (talk) 08:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

1) Official census in USSR, 1989 Data from the all-Soviet census (1989) on the neutral Russian web-site.

2) Azeri web-site, Minister of Tourism Data from the unknown estimate info (1993) on the web-site of Tourism Ministry of Azerbaijan.

But I it is impossible to have a growth of the population in 25% for 4 years. Compare: in 1989: 131,293 inhabitans according to the neutral all-Soviet official census and in 1993: 158,900 (!) according to the unknown Azeri source. I'm sure that we shouldn't mislead the reader as the second data is very doubtful, it is unavaible to have such growth in theory and in practice. --Ліонкінг (talk) 09:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

3 points:

1. The terriory of Agdam rayon in 1989 may differ from the territory of the 1993 year Agdam rayon so using Soviet census data is not correct.

2. the unknown estimate info (1993) - is the information from the official Azeri site

3. There is no need to explain the high growth rate as we have referenced information. But if you insist I can give you at least two possible reasons:1) Azeri refugees expelled from Armenia settled in Agdam region 2) see p.1. --Quantum666 (talk) 11:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

As I know a part of the territory of Agdam rayon is under the control of Defence Forces of NKR since 1993. But smaller part is under the control of NAA. According to the administrative division of NKR Agdam rayon was included to the Martakert, Askeran and Martuni rayons, so according the legislation of NKR there are no Agdam rayon. However a smaller part (without administrative center) is under the control of Azeri forces, A) there were no any changes of the territory of rayon according to the legislation of Azerbaijan; B) in the smaller territory cannot live in 25% more people than in the whole territory; and finally C) Azerbaijan just try to falsificate the real number of refugees, so after 4 years from the census the have added 20-30% of population to all regions which they have lost; D) speaking about refugees from Armenia - they would not choose a region where is a war, they will choose more unmilitary region, the population of the territory where are active military actions can't have a growth in 25% of population, so in this way Azerbaijan count refugees from Armenia and then add this number of refugees, saying that they are also from Armenia (so they count the same refugees twice); E) The information from the official Azeri site must links to something and be proved. The information from the neutral site demoskope.ru was taken from the official all-Soviet census in 1989. As there were no any census in Azerbaijan in 1993 this information can't be used. --Ліонкінг (talk) 13:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

A)"there were no any changes of the territory of rayon according to the legislation of Azerbaijan" - I'm not shure. Do you have any sources to confirm this supposition?

B)"in the smaller territory cannot live in 25% more people than in the whole territory" - it seems to be a reasonable idea but which figures did you compare? Unfortunately you cannot compare figures of 1989 and 1993 as figures of one date

C and D - it's only your opinion. Any sources (reliable of course) with the same opinion are welcome.

E - the official site is a good source to show opinion of Azerbaijani authorities.--Quantum666 (talk) 14:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

A) If You're not sure, confirm it please.

B) There can't be an increase of population in a quart for 4 years in a region with military activity.

C, D) I can make a compare of the data of the official all-Soviet census in 1989 from the neutral site and the site of Azerbaijani Minister.

E) The official site just represent the information from other source. I want to know this source. As I know there were no any census in 1993, so this data is unconfirmed. As a compare I can say that the population of Shahumian rayon before its occupation was a million residents and I will give a link to the official Armenian web-site. But there were a census which can refute it. --Ліонкінг (talk) 00:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

First of all your edit contraverses your own words "I can agree with You that it will be normal if the articles about districts of NKR don't contain Azeri names and the articles about Azeri districts don't contain Armenian names." Please define your exact position, wikipedia is not a market to bargain about edits.

A) It's not my job to confirm the equality of Agdam rayon in Azerbaijanian SSR and Agdam rayon in post-Soviet Azerbaijan because I see no need to replace the information about the population. As a compromise I have already offered to insert both of the figures.

B)OR

C)In 1989?

D)You can ask Azerbaijani authorities about the sources they had used. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

A) As I know, Azerbaijan controls a smaller part of the rayon. Since the collapce of the USSR there were one census in Azerbaijan. If this census gives a real info about the population of Azeri-controlled part of the Agdam rayon, we can mention two sources: of the Soviet census in 1989 and the new census which was in the Azerbaijan. But only if this data is not doubtful.

B) It's just common sense. It is as obvious as the fact that during the Second World War the country in which the battle took place the population declined, not increased.

C) Of the census in 1989 and unsourceful info in 1993.

D) In such way if any official Armenian web-site mention that the population of occupied Armenian village was a million You'll also say that it is a normal source and no need to confirm it from any datas from census? It's seems to me that You try to use double standards. While it is unlogical but You like it - there are no problem.

P.S. we're discussing now and if You disagree with my edits we should have a final decision, because I've proposed such compromise, but You disagreed. So I've proposed a new compromise (look p. "F"). And in future please try to avoid such phrases as "wikipedia is not a market to bargain about edits". I am not the seller from the market, so try to be more tolerant as You have insulted me. --Ліонкінг (talk) 20:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

A)But ther is still a problem about equality of territories of Agdam rayon in Azerbaijan SSR and in present day Azerbaijan. So before mentioning 1989 census we must find sources to confirm the equality.

B) once again OR

C) you cannot compare them as they are for different dates and possibly different territories

D) Can you give me an example of my "double standards"? Such wording really insults me. I hope you will not use it anymore.

Market/compromise: OK. I will not use this word. But it seems that you are trying to exchange edits, that have no relation with each other. So I cannot call it "compromise". And you haven't answered my question about defining your position. If you don't have any arguements I see no reason to leave Armenian name for Azerbaijani rayon. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

We can mention only reliable sources. So I see the solving of the problem in the next way: 1) Mentioning of the results of the official census in 1989 and mentioning the results of the census in 1999, while Azerbaijan controls a part of the territory. All other info except the official censuses are OR or even falsifications.

It is the same if I say that You're a wikipedian. It isn't sourced by any reliable source, but it is true. Also we can't say that white is black.

Before the 1993 there were a similar territory, but as I have already mentioned the population can't naturally increase in a quart for few years. It is impossible and unlogical. There are no need to confirm an info which is understandable for everybody.

No problem. You full a template to the administrative division of NKR that they are violating NPOV, while about the old soviet rayons which wants to control Azerbaijan You don't full such template. But it is not a plot of discussion, so we shouldn't waste a lot of time on it.

Are we editing one article? So as I understand we try to find compromise. Before the final compromise we shouldn't edit the current version of the article. The most important argument is that the territory mostly controls by the Republic of Mountainous Karabakh. And as You know, the official language there is Armenian. But I repeat that if we reach the final compromise I don't think that Armenian name there is a principal. Wishes, --Ліонкінг (talk) 06:59, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

The official site of Azerbaijani authorities is a reliable source to represent their opinion.

You haven't shown any source confirming equality of territories of the rayon in Azerbaijan SSR and in Azerbaijan Republic.

We are editing differnt things. One is about name and another is about population. Don't try to axchange them. It is not a compromise. The only important thing is Wikipedia principles.

The article is not about the disputed territory but about the administrative division of Azerbaijan. Since Armenian is not the official language Armenian name has to be removed.--Quantum666 (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

As I see You only hear what I've said. You should listen what I've said. I've mentioned about everything You've wrote in the last answer. If You have a will You can read it higher. If You do not have a will, I'm not going to listen Your old arguments which You're repeating. If You have some new arguments, You are welcome to give them. According to Your answers I don't see them, You just repeat the same position and don't want to move the process. --Ліонкінг (talk) 18:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately you haven't answered any of my arguements. Don't try to use allegations against me instead of arguements abot the matter.

I write you once again: The article is not about the disputed territory but about the administrative division of Azerbaijan. Since Armenian is not the official language Armenian name has to be removed. Armenian name is to stay in Agdam article as it is about the disputed town but not about the administrative division of Azerbaijan. --Quantum666 (talk) 08:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I've answered to You on my talk page and in the noticeboard, but I see that You really have some problems to read it. Ok, I'll write it here thirdly. But it will be the last time. if You've not got any new arguments I'm not going to continue this discussion as You are not looking for compromise.

1.Q:"The official site of Azerbaijani authorities is a reliable source to represent their opinion."

1.L:"there were no any census in Azerbaijan in 1993 this information can't be used. Azerbaijan just try to falsificate the real number of refugees, so after 4 years from the census the have added 20-30% of population to all regions which they have lost. Compare: in 1989: 131,293 inhabitans according to the neutral all-Soviet official census and in 1993: 158,900 (!) according to the unknown Azeri source. I'm sure that we shouldn't mislead the reader as the second data is very doubtful, it is unavaible to have such growth in theory and in practice."

2.Q:"You haven't shown any source confirming equality of territories of the rayon in Azerbaijan SSR and in Azerbaijan Republic."

2.L:"As I know a part of the territory of Agdam rayon is under the control of Defence Forces of NKR since 1993. But smaller part is under the control of NAA. According to the administrative division of NKR Agdam rayon was included to the Martakert, Askeran and Martuni rayons, so according the legislation of NKR there are no Agdam rayon. However a smaller part (without administrative center) is under the control of Azeri forces, if You're not sure, confirm it please."

3.Q:"We are editing differnt things. One is about name and another is about population. Don't try to axchange them. It is not a compromise. The only important thing is Wikipedia principles."

3.L:You can see an answer even here in the p. 1.

4.Q:"The article is not about the disputed territory but about the administrative division of Azerbaijan. Since Armenian is not the official language Armenian name has to be removed."

4.L:"partly it is under control of Azerbaijan, while the biggest part (including Agdam city) is under the control of NKR."

If you would have even the slightest doing, you could read again my answer, but you decided to just talk to me about their case every time again. --Ліонкінг (talk) 16:15, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

This is unexpected but I think I agree with Quantum here. I'm not sure if there really is any reason to include the Armenian name (especially when it just transliterates to the exact same thing anyway, which leads me to believe it's an Armenian transliteration of the Azeri name, rather than an actual Armenian name). Agdam Rayon is a political construct of the Republic of Azerbaijan, regardless of who controls it. And especially since the other party does not have a name for a coterminous district (which is to say, they don't have anything that corresponds exactly to Agdam Rayon, they have divided it into three political constructs), I don't know why we need to include their name for a rayon that doesn't exist in their system. The city, of course, is a different matter, but political constructs can exist regardless of actual control. (see, for example, Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China) --Golbez (talk) 16:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Golbez, reading AA problems You should know that here isn't everything clear and honest. Someone is trying to mislead. Quantum created this chapter touching only one side of the medal and writing in the his way, but I have not touched it. Armenian name for official Azerbaijani province it is what he want to change. But really we are not discussing about it. We are discussing about the information about population. As You see, in the earliest my answer I've agreed to move Armenian name, so I'm just waiting a full consensus with both questions to avoid any edit wars. But Quantum don't want to gain consensus in the question we are discussing that's why he repeats again and again his old arguments on which I've answered already three times: on my talk page, on the administrator noticeboard and here. I've given very full answer, but he is repeating again and again that I've not answered on his arguments. There are only two variants: or he is doing it specially to irrigate me (avoiding consensus, repeating old arguments and saying that I've not answered on them) or there is the second variant... So please read the discussion and help to understand that in 1993 there were no any census and a database which is given on those web-site is just a propoganda as the population was increased for 4 years in a quart while there was a war. Thanks. --Ліонкінг (talk) 23:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I only have a statement about the name; for the census, I suggest just reporting the Soviet census and note that the borders have apparently changed since then. The last Soviet census is certainly something everyone can agree on. Oh, and changing the population and marking that "compromise" was not a good idea. You don't try to compromise on one thing by changing something else; we aren't looking for a pure central ground when you add up all the facts in the articles. --Golbez (talk) 12:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

1. I started this discussion to remove the Armenian name from the article. Firstly you agreed but suggested me a "compromise" (I cannot call it real compromise as we are talking about different things: names and population figures). But if you insist we can rename the section or make a new section about the population of the region.

2. As I understand the only reason not to remove the Armenian name is your opnion on sources that we must use to describe the population figures. I think it is not correct and you must write only the arguements about the disputed issue.

3. I spent one hour to clarify the problem about the population. Now I have some information.

3.1 The terriotory of the rayon in 1989 was 1093 sq. km. The teritory of the present-day rayon is 1154 sq.km. link So we cannot use 1989 census data for the present-day region's population. We must take into the consideration the changes of the territory.

3.2 I found the official data of The State Statistical Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan. www.azstat.org/. This is the latest data I have found. I don't know the methods and instruments they used to evaluate the figure and I am not a specialist in the statistics but this is the official Azerbaijani data for the official Azerbaijani rayon so I suggest to use this figure.

3.3 If you have reliable source about the population of the Agdam rayon we can discuss it's adding to the aticle. --Quantum666 (talk) 08:39, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Lionking, I have already told you and I can repeat once again: using allegations against your opponent instead of arguements will never help you to prove anything. --Quantum666 (talk) 08:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

We can speak a lot about it. I don't want to speak more, as You don't give new arguments. I've told a lot of times that Agdam rayon mostly is out of the control of Azerbaijan. And I'm more than sure that You know it very well before I said about it. But You continue Your position that it is not a disputed area... It is not a constructive position and that's why we can't move on. Then You says So we cannot use 1989 census data for the present-day region's population. As WE know the population of the Agdam region know is very small. As I've visited former Agdam rayon, I can confirm that there are only some populated villages, mostly by Armenian refugees from Azeri-controlled part of Martakert region. I understand that You don't want to recognize any other point of view but after 1993 Azeri authorities don't control the biggest part of the rayon and after all-Soviet census 1989 there were census only in 2005 by the governments of NKR, but as You know the territory of former Agdam rayon is divided to three other rayons, so for this region we can not use nor "Azeri official database" as they don't control the territory and they can't know the real number of the population, nor official census in NKR, as there are no such administrative division there. So there are only one solution of the problem: to use all-Soviet census of 1989 which is really represent the real number of population and which is recognized by everyone. If even every Azeri source says that the population know is some 158,900 we can't use this database as it is a propoganda.

Finally. I recommend to use this version of the article: without Armenian name of the rayon and with real number of population according to the last most reliable and recognized by all parties source.

P.S. You can repeat as many times as You want. I know who You're and according to Your anti-Armenian contribution I see Your goal. --Ліонкінг (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

1. OK about the name.

2. We should start the mediation process about the population figures we must use in the articles about official Azerbaijani rayons controlled/partly controlled by Armenians. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:51, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I've proposed a final variant as consensus. And You've agreed... but on Your version. Please don't do such editing while we're discussing and more that that don't name it as "consensus". You spoil the constructive discussion with it. As You see, I don't make new edits in the articles, because I want to gain FULL CONSENSUS. If both of as continue to do new edits we'll never gain a consensus. If You really want to gain a compromise, please be more constructive with Your position. Thanks.

It is Your right to make a mediation request. --Ліонкінг (talk) 10:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Lionking, you just suggested a version without the Armenian name. Quantum agreed. How can you now say there's no consensus to make that change? The population change is 100% independent of the name. You don't get to say, "well you get your fact but I get mine". They are two different things. Do you want to withdraw your support of a version without the Armenian name? --Golbez (talk) 12:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Golbez, the think is that we are discussing different questions about one article. Know we have two questions, but who know if during the discussion we have the third or fourth one? In this case can start war edit. So I've just proposed to gain a final consensus which will be recognized by both parties. I've not changed my opinion about the name, but I'm sure that we must wait to gain a final consensus. As faster we'll gain a compromise, we'll close this question for some period of time. --Ліонкінг (talk) 13:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

But if you've already agreed that the Armenian name shouldn't be there, why shouldn't it be removed? Isn't there a final consensus on that, since I and Quantum agree with you? Or did you not really support that and, if so, you should probably strike your comment above where you recommend a version without it. But either way, changing the name doesn't impact any other discussion. --Golbez (talk) 13:20, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

If the question is why the Armenian name is under the discussion I can answer that the region is under the control of Armenians, so this question must be discussed as the territory is disputed. We have agreed that there are no need in the Armenian name. But there are also a second question and I want to solve it while Quantum don't want. I have a good experience when pro-Azeri users stop discussion when they have no interest. And You, Golbez must remember it as You also have participated in such discussion. As we know there are no result from the Spring as they ignore everything. If now we delete Armenian name Quantum can continue his position which he has know or he can just stop the discussion because he is not interested in any more changes. So that's why I want to get a full consensus to close this question, because it can continues for ages... --Ліонкінг (talk) 16:16, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

If we have agreed to drop the Armenian name, then why can that edit not be made? That has nothing to do with the population discussion. Period. --Golbez (talk) 16:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Because if we do it now, we will loose a chance to gain a final consensus. The problem not in the name (we have already solved this problem, the problem is in the population). I've written already what can Quantum do. At the moment I don't see any intention to gain the compromise in the question. I've not proposed to use any Armenian database, I've proposed to use neutral database which is real and recognized by both parties. While all of us know that there were no such population as written in the Azeri census. --Ліонкінг (talk) 17:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Lionking, do you hear yourself? You say that the problem with name is solved but continue to revert. It's absurd. --Quantum666 (talk) 18:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Quantum the absurd is in the situation when You don't want to make any compromise. I have an opinion that You thinks that I want to add to the article Armenian database, not neutral. If You want to return to the name problem, as I've said there are no problem. But we have a two problem in one article. If You want to separate them, You can make a mediation request as You have proposed and we will close this talk on temporary version without Armenian name and with current population. But firstly You should make a mediation request for population problem for Azerbaijani division which are under the control of NKR as You've proposed and then I'll delete the name by myself. --Ліонкінг (talk) 19:22, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

1.I don't need to separate the two problems cause they have no relationship with each other. Please read what Golbez said to you. --Quantum666 (talk) 19:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh really? Don't You think that we're speaking about one article? It seems to me that we are speaking in different languages. Quantum, please stop repeat me to read smth. I've read and answered already and there are no need to remind it to me again. While You don't give any new arguments to the question about the population. If You think that I can't read, You're wrong. So there are no need to repeat anything. --Ліонкінг (talk) 19:44, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

NKR forces

but one makes sense grammatically. :P "nagorno-karabakh forces" is a valid short-hand, just as "azerbaijani forces" is for "republic of azerbaijan forces" Actually "Armenian forces" is more valid short-hand description used by many sources. --Quantum666 (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

It's not the Armenian army though, it's the Karabakh army. That they are ethnic Armenian doesn't matter. --Golbez (talk) 20:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

It's your understanding of "Armenian". But sources use Armenian or Karabakh Armenian about these forces. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I suggest to use Karabakh Armenian forces. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

That redundant, I don't see why we can't say Nagorno-Karabakh forces. We don't say Azerbaijani Turkish forces. --Golbez (talk) 13:38, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Then why can't we say Karabakh Armenian forces? --Quantum666 (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Because the name of the country is not Karabakh Armenia, it's Nagorno-Karabakh. --Golbez (talk) 15:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The name of the country is not Nagorno-Karabakh but NKR and it represents only Armenians. Nagorno-Karabakh is the region's name and the region is the motherland not only for Armenians but for Azeris and other nationalities. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:25, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

The country's long-form name is Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. The country's short-form name is Nagorno-Karabakh. I don't see why we have to repeat "Republic" for every mention of it, we never do for Azerbaijan. And I don't know what your second sentence has to do with this. --Golbez (talk) 12:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that Nagorno-Karabakh is a disputed territory and actually means territory but not a state or a community which has a conflict with Azerbaijan. Since Nagorno-Karabakh is a disputed territory when saying Nagorno-Karabakh instead of NKR you show your opinion to whom the territory should belong. --Quantum666 (talk) 12:56, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Not really, but thanks for accusing. Many before you have tried. But would you be fine with changing it to "NKR forces"? And heck, a large chunk of the Republic of Azerbaijan is also disputed territory, having been controlled by Nagorno-Karabakh for nearly 20 years. --Golbez (talk) 13:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

You've misunderstood me. There is no accusation at all. Everyone has a right to have his own opinion. But writing your opinion in WP articles is not a good idea I think. I have my opinion as well but I try to forget about it when editing articles. I think you do too but "forgetting" is really difficult. --Quantum666 (talk) 13:33, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I quite assure you, none of this is my opinion. Shall I find some quotes from people who have accused me of being an Azeri sympathizer? What annoys me is when people accuse me of caring. All I care about is keeping the nationalist bullshit out of Wikipedia. --Golbez (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I apologize if my words insulted you but as I have already explained above your position was not neutral in this case. At least your choice between the terms used by different sources was not an example of perfect neutrality and was closer to the Armenian POV alhough you haven't used arguements Armenian wikipedians usually use. Maybe "keeping the nationalist bullshit out of Wikipedia" also affects your neutrality and you see threats where nothing "nationalistic" exists. --Quantum666 (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Although a large chunk of the Republic of Azerbaijan is a disputed territory nobody pretends to have "Azerbaijan rayon". --Quantum666 (talk) 13:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

"NKR forces" is OK for me at the moment. --Quantum666 (talk) 13:38, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Absheron Rayon which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Agdam District. 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/20140222054150/http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/sng89_reg1.php to http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/sng89_reg1.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101114180124/http://www.azstat.org/statinfo/demoqraphic/en/010.shtml to http://www.azstat.org/statinfo/demoqraphic/en/010.shtml

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: 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) 22:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)