Jump to content

Talk:Mahammad Amin Rasulzade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Mammed Amin Rasulzade)

Requested move

[edit]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per request. - GTBacchus(talk) 00:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Mammed Amin Rasulzade → Mehmet Emin Resulzade – Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC) per WP:COMMONNAME & WP:USEENGLISH.[reply]

According to Ngram Viewer, it's very clear that Resulzade is more common than Rasulzade in English language.

According to google books:

Takabeg (talk) 11:26, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

A random search on Google Books does not yet assign logic to the renaming of this article. This person was born in Azerbaijan and is historically known as a person who contributed to Azerbaijani history. The current spelling in the Romanized version of his Azeri name Məmməd Əmin Rəsulzadə which, I am certain, will score a lot more Google results. Parishan (talk) 19:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When there's no opposition to a move in 7 days, I generally complete the move, per our moving policy. In this case, there seems to be opposition after all, so I guess we'll see if there's some discussion that leads us to a consensus. -GTBacchus(talk) 17:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Parishan, Mammad Amin Rasulzade is not only the most common used name but its also the correct translation. Mursel (talk) 20:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MEResulzade.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:MEResulzade.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:29, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mammad Amin Rasulzadeh. 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: 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) 10:41, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mammad Amin Rasulzadeh. 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: 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) 19:23, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Məmmədəmin Rəsulzadə

[edit]

Məmmədəmin Rəsulzadə Atatürkə nə vaxt kömək etmişdi? 194.135.153.101 (talk) 10:31, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Weekly is not a reliable source

[edit]

The user User:RaffiKojian added some information about collaborating with Nazis citing Armenian Weekly. This cannot be considered as a reliable source because the website as well as the author Harut Sassounian publish only articles that are against Azerbaijan and almost everything related to it. This can be understandable because of him being diaspora Armenian.
In article he says that:
″Rasulzade’s grandson, Rais Rasulzade, wrote in the autumn 1999 issue of Azerbaijan International magazine: “It wasn’t long until Hitler started looking for someone to represent him in the Transcaucasian region. He couldn’t find anyone suitable among the Armenians or Georgians but had heard that Rasulzade was highly educated and cultured.” According to his grandson, when Hitler met Rasulzade in Berlin, he asked him to give a speech to the Azeri soldiers in the Nazi German army.″
Here is the archived link to that magazine article. It notes that:
″It wasn't long until Hitler started looking for someone to represent him in the Transcaucasian region. He couldn't find anyone suitable among the Armenians or Georgians but had heard that Rasulzade was highly educated and cultured. When Rasulzade met with Hitler, Rasulzade again refused to get involved with any government hostile to Azerbaijan. He still longed for the day when Azerbaijan would be independent. When Hitler was organizing his troops, Rasulzade was asked to give a speech to them. He told them to fight only against the enemies of independent Azerbaijan, but not to kill others. Immediately he was ordered to leave Germany within 24 hours. This time he fled to Romania. Eventually he was able to return to Turkey where he died in 1955.″
I wonder why did they cut this part.
Another thing is, this wiki article says:
″He was involved in actively recruiting Azeri POWS to join the legionnaires of the Nazi Wehrmach" Armenian Weekly article is shown as a source, but in this article there is literally no any source that proves this claim. It only mentions that according to David Davidian (lecturer of American University of Armenia), he (Rasulzade) actively recruited legionnaires for the German Wehrmacht. Where is the source of Davidian's claims?
The last thing is that Sassounian mentions Rasulzade stayed in Germany until 1947. Any source about his? He was forced to leave Germany in one day and he ended up being in Romania. How could he stay in Germany until 1947? User:N1C4T97 12:29, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I restored stable version of the article. You are correct, this source is highly partisan and not a reliable. The magazine article you linked is also not reliable source, because it is not reliable published, the magazine itself is unknown and is not peer reviewed. You can find more information about sources and their reliability HERE. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 12:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TagaworShah, added the same information with using the same source. I think this page should be locked. N1C4T97 (talk) 17:52, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I actually included two different sources that are reliable, in addition, David Davidian, a lecturer at the American University of Armenia, is a reliable source, at least for the information sourced. I left the information from his grandson with attribution but we can work out it being deleted too if it’s too close to the subject to be reliable. TagaworShah (talk) 17:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This "source" just says that according to David Davidian At the outbreak of WWII, the German representatives notified Romanian authorities that Rasulzade was their political ally and asked that Rasulzade be issued documents permitting ease of diplomatic passage to Berlin. Where is it written? Which document or book notes that? Mentioning someone's thoughts/claims on a website is not a source.
Another thing is that that source claims that Rasulzade stayed in Germany until 1947. However, he was forced to leave the country just in one day in early years of the war.
Aren't they enough to consider this source as a not reliable source? N1C4T97 (talk) 18:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I removed that from the article, however, where does it say that he was forced to leave Germany in one day besides his Grandsons account which probably aren’t the most reliable. Please provide a reliable source. Also, Armenian weekly is not just some website, it’s a long going reliable print publication that has a editing and fact-checking team. TagaworShah (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. The wwww.armenianweekly.com is not considered as a reliable source for AA editing, especially when it is about history and biography. It is a highly partisan not independent newspaper that does not even attempt to conceal it's bias, which is nowhere close to being neutral and objective and which represents POV of one side of the AA area.
This is propaganda article written to defend one side by disparaging the other. That purpose is clear right from the beginning "Azeri media frequently disparage Armenian national hero Karekin Njdeh for having associated with Nazi Germany during World War II. However, Azeris never mention the affiliation of Mammad Rasulzade...".
Furthermore, according to much more reliable sources[1] Rasulzade was invited to Germany for a meeting in 1942, but during that meeting he realized that the idea of Azerbaijan's independence does not correspond to the goals of German policy and decided to leave Germany. However, while mentioning Rasulzade's invitation to Germany in 1942, the article deliberately ignores the fact that Rasulzade refused to collaborate with Nazi Germany. Instead, the article refers to David Davidian, "a lecturer at the American University of Armenia" who has no expertise in the subject matter and also highly partisan as source. I am not going write wall of the text (although I can) explaining why every bit of that article is inaccurate, POV, biased and propagandic. I believe above more than enough to explain my point.
The azer.com article, which claimed to be transcript of the interview with Rasulzade's grandson (Rais Rasulzade), is a primary source. Neither article, not the grandson are peer reviewed scholarly sources. Words of Rasulzadeh' grandson, who never meet Rasulzadeh and not a historian (His area of expertise is graphics design), have no weight against peer reviewed scholarly sources.
I'm utterly surprised we're even discussing these here. It's just the fundamentals of WP:RS. Anyhow, the sources that you provided are not reliable enough and insufficient to support such an exceptional claims. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 17:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Abrvagl: I would suggest you read WP:BIASEDSOURCES as what you are saying does not correspond with how sources are deemed reliable on Wikipedia. Tadeusz Swietochowski isn’t exactly the most neutral historical either, that doesn’t mean his work isn’t reliable. In addition, any content that could possibly be deemed “exceptional” is sourced by reliable, neutral, secondary sources. Eurasianet and the historian Simon Sebag Montefiore are undoubtedly reliable sources. As for the grandson, I agree it is a primary source, and we can delete it if you want, but primary sources used with proper attribution, that don’t draw OR conclusions, are permitted in most cases, I would assume you’d want to keep that as it is defending his Nazi collaboration but you can replace what his grandson said with Swietochowski if you like. TagaworShah (talk) 20:04, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would suggest you read WP:BIASEDSOURCES as what you are saying does not correspond with how sources are deemed reliable on Wikipedia. - For future, instead of simply linking it and suggesting that people read it, I would suggest that you point out exactly what you are referring to from the policy. Moreover, I never said that source should not be included because it is biased. I raised concerns about its reliability and brought up bold reasons of why it is unreliable. Also, according to the NPOV policy This does not mean any biased source must be used; it may well serve an article better to exclude the material altogether. So if you are still not convinced you can take it to RSN.
  • Tadeusz Swietochowski isn’t exactly the most neutral historical either, that doesn’t mean his work isn’t reliable. - Are you comparing peer-reviewed materials written by an historian Tadeusz Swietochowski, which were published by Columbia University, to a propaganda newsletter article written by Harut Sassounian, a human rights activist, who essentially just quotes David Davidian, a software engineer? I am confused to be honest, can you specify which part of the "Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition" book you believe is biased and why?
  • Eurasianet and the historian Simon Sebag Montefiore are undoubtedly reliable sources. - You have confused me again. Did I say anything about them? I think I was quite specifically talking about armenianweekly and Rasulzadeh's grandson.
  • I would assume you’d want to keep that as it is defending his Nazi collaboration - Lets not make any unfounded assumptions. All I want is for articles to be written using reliable sources and in accordance with Wikipedia policies.
I am going to rewrite the material you had added while excluding/replacing sections sourced by Armenianweekly and Rasulzadeh's grandson. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 08:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Abrvagl: Calling Hairenik/Armenian weekly, a well respected publication that’s been around for almost a century and is cited in reliable sources (such as the Thomas De Waal source I added) as “Armenian propaganda” is not good practice. What exactly would make the source unreliable? Sure i’ll give you that David Davidian isn’t exactly a subject-matter expert, although he does seem to be shifting his focus to policy analysis and has been published in reliable sources for such things, however, calling it propaganda when Armenian weekly is not linked to the Armenian government or any government is simply incorrect. I’m sure there are better sources for the information sourced by the Armenian weekly article, however due to most of it being in a different language, it’s rather hard to find. Davidian was referencing official documents from that period. Nevertheless, I have rewritten a substantial part of that section with new reliable sources and removed the information from bai grandson. I will try to find a source to replace Armenian weekly. TagaworShah (talk) 15:08, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Calling Hairenik/Armenian weekly, a well-respected publication that’s been around for almost a century and is cited in reliable sources (such as the Thomas De Waal source I added) as “Armenian propaganda” is not good practice. - I never used the phrase "Armenian propaganda" to describe Armenian Weekly. Please be more attentive.
  • is cited in reliable sources (such as the Thomas De Waal source I added) - The fact that Armenian Weekly was cited in a reliable book does not automatically make everything it publishes reliable. This specific article we're discussing based on the words of a software engineer who has zero expertise in the subject area. This article has not been cited in any credible peer-reviewed publications.
  • What exactly would make the source unreliable? - In addition to the points I already made in my previous comments, we should also consider the fact that ArmenianWeekly is, according to themselves, owned by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation and "reflecting" the Armenian National Committee. I hope I don't have to explain to you why any source directly owned by these two organizations is not considered reliable or high-quality for AA2. Aside from the fact that Harut Sassounian lacks expertise in the subject matter, he also has direct conflict of interest with the subject as he's the owner of the Armenia Artsakh fund. Such sources have an apparent conflict of interest and are not suitable sources for contentious claims about others.
I'll be rewriting the section shortly to get rid of low-quality or primary sources such as ArmenianWeekly and Rasuzadeh's grandson. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 18:02, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Swietochowski, Tadeusz(1995) Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition, Columbia University, p. 133—134, ISBN 0-231-07068-3.

    The attempts at the creation of an Azerbaijani political representation on the German side began in the spring of 1942, with the invitation of luminary emigres, including Rasulzadeh, to Berlin for exploratory talks. In his negotiations with the Germans, Amin bey insisted that the Reih as the first step should declare its unconditional commitment to the restoration of the Transcaucasian states. When his interlocutors acted evasively, he left Berlin, the soundest political decision he ever took. Eventually, he made his way to post-Kemalist Turkey, which extended him its hospitality for the rest of his life.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahammad_Amin_Rasulzade&oldid=1207656669"