Talk:Shusha/Archive 10
This is an archive of past discussions about Shusha. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 14 |
Stable lead
This version of the lead has been stable for at least a year until it was messed up in August with subsequent reverts. The edit summary "a more neutral p." has been bogus, because since then one version of the town's founding is presented as a fact and is preferred more than the other. I suggest restoring the stable lead version, potential changes to it could be discussed after that. Brandmeistertalk 21:03, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Agree. Stable version should be restored, any amendments to it should be discussed here. Recent changes were made without any discussion or consensus at talk. Grandmaster 21:06, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think you have a quite good understanding of what stable version is. You're linking a month-old version, saying it is "stable" and hence "should be restored". Those month-old edits were not challenged, and enjoyed consensus, at the very least vaguely per WP:SILENCE.
- New edits being reverted are the ones that need to have consensus for inclusion, so I suggest focusing on those rather than saying a month-old edit "is the stable version". Also, I think this type of situation was already discussed in WP:AE, and editors arrived to the same conclusion basically. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- A month old version is not stable, considering that no one has ever discussed this: [1] August is the time when many editors are on holiday, and thus these POV edits went unnoticed. It does not mean that those edits became accepted. How can anyone remove the country where the city is located, and present a minority fringe version of city foundation as a fact, and claim it to be a stable version? Grandmaster 21:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- How come redacting the country in which the city is located anything but terrible editorial work? The city is both de jure and de facto located in Azerbaijan, the article link of Shusha District also says it is located in Azerbaijan. There is no reason to redact that information. Political biases should be kept out at all times. Support for reverting to stable version.DriedGrape (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: the article has 130 watchers, of which 40 have checked the article recently, you can verify this in the "page information" tab, "Everyone was on vacation" and "nobody noticed" are statistically incorrect statements. The lead is stable for me, and starting your edits by removing sourced information and adding weasel words isn't a good way of showing your good intentions towards making an encyclopedic article. - Kevo327 (talk) 23:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- I share Brandmeister's concerns. From the examination of the sources I've done so far (admittedly limited, particularly as I can't read Cyrillic and I'm reliant on machine translation for the non-English sources), the emphasis on the medieval Armenian origins seems likely to be undue, as most sources talk about a 1750s foundation. Unfortunately I've been busy over the last few days and didn't manage to borrow "Crossroads and Conflict: Security and Foreign Policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia" from my library, which is supporting the key statement
"It was one of the two main Armenian settlements in the Transcaucasus, and the center of the self-governing Melikdoms of Karabakh until the 1750s"
. I will aim to do so tomorrow. If that source is being inaccurately used, I think we should be looking at restoring a version similar to the stable one, per Brandmeister's suggestion. Conversely, if the source does appropriately support that statement, I think that it'd illustrate an acceptance among international scholarship that the town had pre-18th century origins, and so we should be looking to maintain a version similar to the current chronological one. I hope to get back to this soon. Jr8825 • Talk 00:28, 14 September 2021 (UTC)- Thanks for help. The problem with this source is that it is not a book on history, and authors are not historians, but politologists: [2] I think for claims on ancient history we need to use specialist sources, not political scientists whose specialization is modern politics. Grandmaster 08:08, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- The source is available here: [3] As one can see, it is not a historical research, but a study of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the author has never done any researches on the ancient history of the region, that is not his specialization. [4] Grandmaster 08:52, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Between the Matenadaran manuscript and various 18th century Russian sources, it seems quite obvious that the claim of being founded in 1752 is historical negationism to erase the city's Armenian origin. The lead is perfectly stable as it is, and is far more reflective of due weight than it was previously. --Steverci (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- 1752 foundation is what is generally accepted by science for centuries. How could it be "historical negationism"? It makes no sense. Now a minority view is presented as a fact, in violation of WP:WEIGHT. Grandmaster 07:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Mkrtchyan provided documented scientific proof that Shushi is much older. --Steverci (talk) 19:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- One month does not establish a stable lead, but in either case it would be good to have the specific issues more clearly laid out here, as the diff is not one that is easy to parse without wikiEd. As an aside to that issue, in both versions, the "centre of Azerbaijan's Shusha District" part needs to be revised. Shusha is both at the edge of Azerbaijan's de facto control, and in the Northeast of the asserted district. I suspect it is a holdover from previous wording on Shushi Province that wasn't properly changed. I would suggest simply removing the early mention district, as I doubt it's that significant, and isn't mentioned in the article body. CMD (talk) 03:12, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- The source listed above states: "Moreover, Shusha, along with Tbilisi (Tiflis), was at one time one of the two main Armenian cities of the Transcaucasus and the center of a self-governing Armenian principality in the 1720s.". That tends to undermine the 1752 foundation claim. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:09, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. The stable version of the article had two paragraphs in the lead about the founding. The first paragraph started with
According to some sources, the town of Shusha was founded in 1752 by Panah Ali Khan
and the second one was about Armenian version, startingOther sources suggest that Shushi, as it is known in Armenian, served as a town and an ancient fortress in the Armenian Principality of Varanda during the Middle Ages and through the 18th century
. Now that balance is gone. Brandmeistertalk 10:43, 17 September 2021 (UTC)- Ah. In which case the balance needs to be restored. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. The stable version of the article had two paragraphs in the lead about the founding. The first paragraph started with
I've been looking at the lead of this article for a while - with the main issue to me being in relation to the historical negationism of Armenian history - that the history of the town is not being taken into account properly, I would recommend using a chronological order of events as a basis as much as possible to come up with a good stable version. AntonSamuel (talk) 08:30, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Majority and minority views should be properly attributed according to WP:Weight. Grandmaster 08:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Proposal for changes
There are a few things to note here. I'm not sure the stable version which Brandmeister has identified is an unqualified improvement over the current version (see diff) – both have their strengths and weaknesses. I'm not opposed to restoring the old version, but I don't think the problematic additions are too hard to fix either, so I'd prefer to work with what we have now.
A clear problem with the current version is the removal of "Azerbaijan" from the opening sentence. However, as Chipmunkdavis points out, the previous wording was less than ideal as the city is not "central" to the district and on the edge of Azerbaijani control (also, the district is relatively unimportant). I suggest the following wording: "is a city in Azerbaijan, in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh."
I'm open to other suggestions – I'm trying to avoid the phrasing "is a city in Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan"
as I think that implies Azerbaijani control of the entire region.
Other problems with the current lead are centred around the changes to the Armenian history. As far as I can tell there are no sources which explicitly say the town of Shusha has a medieval origin. I discussed this in a thread further up page and asked if anyone could provide sources which support the medieval claim. Armenian sources referring to a medieval fortress were brought up, so I subsequently removed "town" from the medieval sentence so that it focuses solely on the fortress. That said, we're still reliant solely on a single Armenian historian (Shahen Mkrtchyan) for the explicit medieval connection – I suggest keeping this wording (as it's sort-of corroborated by the sources which attest to an "ancient" fortress) but I think it's worth keeping an open mind and looking for other sources going forward. Further to this, the sentence "it was one of the two main Armenian settlements in the Transcaucasus, and the center of the self-governing Melikdoms of Karabakh until the 1750s"
is an inaccurate representation of the source, which only gives a narrow time frame ("in the 1720s"
). Some editors, particularly Grandmaster, have questioned the reliability of the source itself (Bertsch et al.), but, as I mentioned in the above thread, I disagree. I agree it's not the ideal source (it's approaching the subject from a current affairs standpoint, and the section we're quoting (p.297) is from an explanatory endnote without a supporting cite), but it may be the best source currently available: it has a reputable academic publisher (Routledge), multiple editors with regional expertise, has been purchased by my university's library (a decent indication of the book's reputation) and the chapter author, Edward Walker, is described as "Executive Director of the University of California Berkley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies". He looks like a well-established scholar with knowledge of the region's history to me, and I'd prefer it to a journalistic source, or a book published in Armenia/Azerbaijan. Largely because of this source, I think we should be careful to completely dismiss claims that Shusha was established prior to 1752, or attribute it solely to "Armenian sources".
One improvement in the current revision, in my view, is the reordering of the lead to place the Armenian history first, which makes sense from a chronological point of view. The old version placed the post-1752 Azeri history before the earlier Armenian history. I suppose the basis for this ordering was that the documentary evidence is stronger and (perhaps) an assumption that the town may have greater cultural significance to Azeris – I don't think that's an editorial judgement we as Wikipedians want to be making, particularly in this topic. I therefore favour keeping the current order with a rewrite, so that it succinctly deals with the earlier Armenian history first, before addressing post-1752 Azeri history. I suggest breaking off the sentences on the religious/cultural/strategic importance of the town to both groups into a separate paragraph, to make it clearer that we're summarising the chronological history first, rather than presenting two "sides" one after the other.
Here's my proposed rewrite:
Proposed lead (updated)
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Shusha (Azerbaijani: Şuşa, ) or Shushi (Armenian: Շուշի) is a city in Azerbaijan, in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. Situated at an altitude of 1,400–1,800 metres (4,600–5,900 ft) in the Karabakh mountains, the city was a mountain resort in the Soviet era. There are differing accounts regarding the town's origins. Most sources date Shusha's establishment to 1752, attributing this to Panah Ali Khan, founder of the Karabakh Khanate.[1][2] Panah Ali chose the site on the advice of his ally Shahnazar, the local Armenian prince (melik) of Varanda, who may have assisted in its construction in order to gain an advantage against the neighbouring princes.[3] In these accounts, the name originated from a nearby Armenian village called Shosh or Shushikent.[4] Conversely, some sources describe Shusha as being the center of the self-governing Melikdoms of Karabakh in the 1720s,[5] and others claim the plateau was already the site of an "ancient" Armenian fortification which was transferred to, or seized by, Panah Ali Khan.[6][7] From the mid-18th century to 1822, Shusha was the capital of the Karabakh Khanate. The town became one of the cultural centers of the South Caucasus after the Russian conquest of the Caucasus region from Qajar Iran in the first half of the 19th century.[8] Over the course of the 19th century, the town grew in size to become a city, and was home to many Armenian and Azeri intellectuals, poets, writers and musicians (including Azeri ashiks, mugham singers and kobuz players).[9][10] The town has religious, cultural and strategic importance to both groups. Shusha is often considered the cradle of Azerbaijan's music and poetry, and one of the leading centres of the Azerbaijani culture.[11][12] Shusha also contains a number of Armenian Apostolic churches, including Ghazanchetsots Cathedral and Kanach Zham, and serves as a land link between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia, via the Lachin corridor to the west.[13] Throughout modern history, the city fostered a mixed Armenian–Azerbaijani population. The first available demographic information about the city in 1823 suggests the city had an Azerbaijani majority.[14] However, the number of Armenian inhabitants of the city steadily grew over time to constitute a majority of the city's population until the Shusha massacre in 1920, in which the Armenian half of the city was destroyed by Azerbaijani forces, resulting in the death or expulsion of the Armenian population, up to 20,000 people.[15] After the capture of Shusha in 1992 by Armenian forces during First Nagorno-Karabakh War, the city's Azerbaijani population was expelled. According to journalist Thomas de Waal's reckoning during a visit in 2000, it was 80% ruined.[16] Between May 1992 and November 2020, Shusha was under the de facto control of the self-proclaimed Republic of Artsakh and administered as the centre of its Shushi Province. On 8 November 2020, Azerbaijani forces retook the city during the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War following a three-day long battle.[17][18] The Armenian population of the city fled, and multiple reports emerged that the Armenian cultural heritage of the city was being destroyed.[19][20][21][22] References
|
Jr8825 • Talk 13:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Support Anton's proposed re-write. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Laurel Lodged: are you referring to my proposal above, or Anton's more general proposal? Jr8825 • Talk 14:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Jr8825. let me, pls, to note some issues for your proposed version. Accually, as you note, there is no any neutral sources reg Shusha city(not fortress) before 18 centery, so it's correct to avoid using the name "Shushi" as city or fortress earlier in the article. And reg "..The Armenian population of the city was expelled,[citation needed] with multiple reports that the Armenian cultural heritage of the city was being destroyed" and 4 citations. Three of them are Armenian sources (websites). The last one is not Armenian(it's online news site), but the information is based on Armenian Users comments in Twitter. At least, this information should be noted as "according to Armenian sources", because nobody else confirm this information. Do you think that these sources from internet really relieble ones to insert it? As regards to Mkrtchan it's another subject. There is some of his articles in Armenian Soviet Encyclopedi and basing on it he's historian now. But he's graduated Pedagogic Institute, and he's not historian to his education. --Aydin mirza (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hey look who's back, exciting times! Am I seeing double tho? Hmmm, so strange. Maybe someone has memory problems, in any case I should assume good faith right? Or this is what wikipedians call the WP:PACT time? A gentle reminder to Aydin himself and others who also might find this useful, so we don't dive into similar POV focused discussions:
- Shahen Mkrtchyan is in fact historian, he's listed as one in Armenian National Library. Quote:
- SHAHEN MKRTCHYAN (1936-2020), historian, cultural figure, Director of the Nagorno Karabakh Regional State Historical-Geographical Museum (1965-1972), Director of the Scientific Museum of the History Museum of Armenia, Branch of the National Gallery of Armenia
- And he was not like a unilateral partisan figure either, he was published in Baku. Quote:
- Лит.: Мкртчян Ш. М., Нагорно - Карабахская автономная область. Путеводитель, Баку, 1970 (translation – Lit .: Mkrtchyan Sh. M., Nagorno - Karabakh Autonomous Region. Guide, Baku, 1970)
- He has published academic works, and is cited by international authors.
- Now all of this was from a discussion roughly 2-3 months. Not sure if Aydin has some serious memory issues or thinks that wikipedians wouldn't notice his bizzilion timed attempt at besmirching Mkrtchyan as “non historian” [5], [6], [7], even after he was shown all the info above already. No one finds this interesting, anyone else? @Jr8825 should find this interesting too as they were also explaining the same to Aydin in previous discussions I linked here not so long ago. Maybe WP:AA isn't something you should edit in Aydin, your conflict of interest is quite showing in every discussion, and it's oozing uncomfortably I might add, to the point of you repeating the same things over and over again in some desperate hopes that it'll just pass on somehow, and nobody would notice.
- I'll give my thoughts sometime later about your suggestions @Jr8825, thanks for the work regardless. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 21:54, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Shahen Mkrtchyan should not be used in this article. He is not third party, and moreover, he is a prominent Armenian nationalist, one of the separatist activists in Nagorno-Karabakh. Quote: He was one of the organizers of the Artsakh movement, it is no coincidence that his works concerned not only the history and culture of Artsakh, but also the liberation struggle of the Artsakh people for freedom and independence. This person wrote such works as "Nagorno-Karabakh: Anatomy of the Genocide Committed by Azerbaijan: (1920-1988)", published in Stepanakert in 2003. Clearly a very partisan author who cannot be trusted for neutrality. Grandmaster 12:42, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- You're going to need to provide a reliable source referring to Mkrtchyan as a "prominent Armenian nationalist". He's a well respected historian and awarded historian, and also a native of Artsakh. Mkrtchyan spent his entire career researching the history of Artsakh. He's infinitely more credible than a British journalist who majored in Russian literature. --Steverci (talk) 19:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Grandmaster: the only real alternative is
"the site of an "ancient" fortress within..."
(with quotes marks, which is supported by sources other than Mkrtchyan) in place of"the site of a medieval fortress within..."
. I prefer "medieval" because I think "ancient" could imply that it's even older, so in that way I think "medieval" is more likely to be giving readers an accurate impression. I don't object to use the more broadly sourced "ancient", though, if others object to "medieval". Jr8825 • Talk 13:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Shahen Mkrtchyan should not be used in this article. He is not third party, and moreover, he is a prominent Armenian nationalist, one of the separatist activists in Nagorno-Karabakh. Quote: He was one of the organizers of the Artsakh movement, it is no coincidence that his works concerned not only the history and culture of Artsakh, but also the liberation struggle of the Artsakh people for freedom and independence. This person wrote such works as "Nagorno-Karabakh: Anatomy of the Genocide Committed by Azerbaijan: (1920-1988)", published in Stepanakert in 2003. Clearly a very partisan author who cannot be trusted for neutrality. Grandmaster 12:42, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, Jr8825. let me, pls, to note some issues for your proposed version. Accually, as you note, there is no any neutral sources reg Shusha city(not fortress) before 18 centery, so it's correct to avoid using the name "Shushi" as city or fortress earlier in the article. And reg "..The Armenian population of the city was expelled,[citation needed] with multiple reports that the Armenian cultural heritage of the city was being destroyed" and 4 citations. Three of them are Armenian sources (websites). The last one is not Armenian(it's online news site), but the information is based on Armenian Users comments in Twitter. At least, this information should be noted as "according to Armenian sources", because nobody else confirm this information. Do you think that these sources from internet really relieble ones to insert it? As regards to Mkrtchan it's another subject. There is some of his articles in Armenian Soviet Encyclopedi and basing on it he's historian now. But he's graduated Pedagogic Institute, and he's not historian to his education. --Aydin mirza (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
When Armenian authors say that Shusha was mentioned in some chronicle before 1752, they forget to add that those sources mention the village of Shusha. There is indeed a village of Shusha, Shosh in Armenian and Shusha-kend (village) in Azerbaijani, which is much older than the town and the fortress. And contemporary chronicles all mention that the fortress was built on an empty spot that was used as a pasture by inhabitants of Shusha village. When Russian empire took over the region, they commissioned local historians to write history of Karabakh. There were 5 such works, so called Karabakh-nameh, 3 by Azerbaijani, and 2 by Armenian authors. They all say the same thing, that the city was founded in 1752. I will quote some of them.
Mirza Adigozal bey (translation from Russian):
Panakh Khan consulted with Melik-Shakhnazar. On the advice and direction of the latter, Panakh Khan founded the city of Shusha. And since there were no flowing waters and springs in the area (where the city was to be founded), several test wells were dug. After it became possible to get water from these wells, in 1170 the foundation of the future city of Shusha was laid. The inhabitants of Shah-bulag and several villages were resettled here. Each family was assigned a place to live. After the people relocated and settled in a new place, Panah Khan built spacious buildings and high palaces for his family. Skilled craftsmen, architects and prominent specialists started building the fortress walls and towers, the remains of which have survived to this day. [8]
They shared [their] considerations with Melik Shakhnazar bey, who has always been their well-wisher. The question of the construction of the Shusha fortress was resolved on his advice and instructions. To inspect the area of the [future] fortress, [the khan] sent several experienced and knowledgeable people from among his entourage. There was no running water inside this fortress, except for two or three small springs, which could not meet the needs of a large crowd of people and residents of the fortress. Therefore, they [the khan's messengers] dug wells in several places where, in their opinion, there could be water, and found that in many [other] places [also] it is possible to dig wells and get water. They told Panah khan about everything, who was delighted about it. He went there together with several of his entourage and, having examined [the area], proceeded to build the fortress. In 1170 Muslim year, corresponding to 1754 (1170 A.H. corresponds to 1756/1757) Christian, he resettled [here] all the rayats living in the Shahbulagy fortress, as well as families of noble people, meliks, clerks and elders from the Ilats and some villages and provided them with a place to live inside the fortress. Before that, there were no dwellings here. This place was arable land and pasture that belonged to the inhabitants of Shushikend, located six miles east of the fortress. After settling the people, determining for everyone, especially for themselves, [sites for] houses and dwellings, he, together with skilled craftsmen and provident karguzars (Karguzar - an official, manager of affairs), built the walls of the fortress, which are now destroyed and their traces remain only in some places. [9]
Mirza Yusuf Nersesov (Armenian chronicler):
After some searches, by Melik Shahnazar's indication and advice they found the place of Shushi, a big town now. Panah Khan went there, walked about and examined its environs with his own eyes and praised it in every aspect. Since the area lacked rivers, he ordered to dig wells at several spots and a lot of water sprang out. In the Asad of 1765/1171 (85a) of Christian and Moslem chronology he founded the town of Shushi. [10]
Russian imperial Vasily Potto, Кавказская война. Том 2. Ермоловское время:
"...in 1752 he built the unassailable fortress of Shusha and transferred his residence there. There is still an inscription on the wall of the town mosque, showing that the town and fortress were founded by Panakh-khan in 1167 Hijri year" ("...в 1752 году он построил неприступную шушинскую крепость и перенес туда свою резиденцию. На стенах городской мечети и поныне сохранилась надпись, свидетельствующая, что город и крепость основаны Пана-ханом в 1167 году Геджры").
E.J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam
Its chiefs were called from father to son alternately Panah and Ibrahim Kbalil; it was Panah III who built Shusha in 1165 (1752) and gave It the name of Panah-abad, whence the name panah-abadi given to the coins which he struck there.
Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary
Shusha was founded in 1752 by Panakh-Ali-bek and got its name from the village of Shushikent, located not far away and existing to this day. Until 1823 it was the capital of the Karabakh Khanate. [11]
Regarding peer-reviewed modern scholarship, the top expert on Nagorno-Karabakh is Thomas de Waal. This is from Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War:
The history of Shusha contains the best and worst of Nagorny Karabakh. It is a story of joint prosperity and dynamism. But it has ended with the gene of nihilism in both communities triumphant, destroying both each other's achievements and their own. ln a sense, the ruins of Shusha are a testament to both sides' refusal to accommodate each other 's histories. The town's history begins in the 1740s, when Panakh Khan, leader of the Javanshir dynasty in Azerbaijan, made a bid to be the ruler of Karabakh. The Persians and the Ottomans were in retreat, and the Russians had not yet arrived in the Caucasus. Panakh Khan built a series of fortresses to establish himself as the khan of Karabakh. He cemented his position by a marriage alliance with one of the five Armenian meliks, or princes, Shakhnazar of Varanda. In 1750, Panakh Khan built a fortress in Shusha. The cliffs on the southern side provided a natural defense and only two gates were needed in the new city walls.
There are more sources, but as we can see from the above, the traditional and generally accepted version is that Shusha town did not exist before 1750-52. We must give preference to the majority view. Grandmaster 13:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I'm generally fine with the proposal, except the sentence
The plateau is recorded as being the site of a medieval fortress within the Armenian Principality of Varanda
. This is a controversial claim advanced only by a handful of sources, with no wider support among historians in general. To my knowledge, neither does archaeology support this - there are no surviving remains of the medieval fortress on the plateau or anything for that matter. If that claim is dropped, I'd support the proposed lead. Brandmeistertalk 14:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)- I agree with Brandmeister. In my view, the most problematic is the statement The plateau is recorded as being the site of a medieval fortress within the Armenian Principality of Varanda. There are differing accounts as to when the town was established. It has been described as one of the two main Armenian settlements in the Transcaucasus, and the center of the self-governing Melikdoms of Karabakh in the 1720s. It is clearly a minority view, and it cannot be given equal weight with generally accepted view or presented as a fact. Grandmaster 14:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Brandmeister: to clarify, I'm not at all wedded to any particular sentence and I have no objection to removing that one. I was simply trying to walk a tightrope to balance both narratives based on the sources that have been brought up on this talk page, and as I noted above I already had reservations about the strength of that claim anyway. Jr8825 • Talk 15:24, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Based on the range of sources which Grandmaster has collected above, which I think demonstrate even more clearly the weight behind the 1752 date, how about this wording for the start of the second lead para.:
There are differing accounts as to when the town was established. A range of sources place Shusha's founding in 1752, and most commonly attribute this to Panah Ali Khan; some Armenian sources claim the town was established by an Armenian prince. Conversely, Shusha has been described as the center of the self-governing Melikdoms of Karabakh in the 1720s.
(This would utilise the same sources as the above proposal). Jr8825 • Talk 15:34, 19 September 2021 (UTC)- This is better. However another problem with the quote from Edward Walker is that he appears to be the only one to claim that "Shusha was the center of a self-governing Armenian principality in the 1720s". Modern Armenian sources claim that Shusha existed already in medieval times. Grandmaster 15:40, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, WP:WEIGHT rather clearly suggests the 18th century foundation version which should be mentioned first. It's endorsed particularly by some major encyclopedias mentioned above. Brandmeistertalk 15:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with Brandmeister. In my view, the most problematic is the statement The plateau is recorded as being the site of a medieval fortress within the Armenian Principality of Varanda. There are differing accounts as to when the town was established. It has been described as one of the two main Armenian settlements in the Transcaucasus, and the center of the self-governing Melikdoms of Karabakh in the 1720s. It is clearly a minority view, and it cannot be given equal weight with generally accepted view or presented as a fact. Grandmaster 14:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Also modern scholarship similar to Edward Walker's work: Tim Potier. Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia: A Legal Appraisal. Published by Brill: [12]
During the 17th century and the first half of the 18th century, Karabakh was the arena for continuous wars between Iran and Turkey. Panakh Ali-khan founded the Karabakh Khanate in the mid-18th century. To defend it, in the 1750s, he built the Panakhabad fortress (subsequently named Shusha, after a nearby village), which became the capital of the khanate.
Grandmaster 16:33, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Oppose The town being built before the 1750s has stronger due weight.
It's impossible for it to be founded in the 1750s because it is described in Kehva Chelebi's 1725 report:
… The nearest Armenian stronghold … was Shushi. Shushi is four days' distance from Shemakhi. Armed Armenians under the command of Avan Yuzbashi guard it. After meeting with the Armenian leaders, including the Patriarch, they returned to Derbent via Shemakhi. Rocky mountains surround the town of Shushi. The number of the armed Armenians has not been determined. There are rumors that the Armenians have defeated the Turks in a number of skirmishes in Karabagh …
And there are already multiple third party sources already in the article confirming the town already existed:
In his 1769 letter to Russian diplomat Count P. Panin, the Georgian king Erekle II wrote that "there was an ancient fortress which was conquered, through deceit, by one man from the Muslim Jevanshir tribe." The same information about the 'ancient' fortress is confirmed by the Russian Field Marshal Alexander Suvorov in his letter to Prince Grigory Potemkin. Suvorov writes that the Armenian prince Melik Shahnazar of Varanda surrendered his fortress Shushikala to "certain Panah", whom he calls "chief of an unimportant part of nomadic Muslims living near the Karabakh borders." When discussing Karabakh and Shusha in the 18th century, the Russian diplomat and historian S. M. Bronevskiy wrote in his Historical Notes that Shusha fortress was a possession of the Melik-Shahnazarian clan, having been given to Panah Ali Khan in return for aid against the other Armenian meliks of Karabakh. Russian historian P. G. Butkov (1775–1857) writes that "Shushi village" was given to Panah Ali Khan by the Melik-Shahnazarian prince after they entered into an alliance, and that Panah Ali Khan fortified the village. Joseph Wolff, during his mission in the Middle East, visited "Shushee, in the province of Carabagh, in Armenia Major".
Nersesov is not an Armenian source, he is obviously an assimilated Iranian. Potto just says a fortress was built, and an inscription claims that was the founding of the town. We already know Azeris want to ignore all history of the town before they began settling in it, but we also already know this is UNDUE. Same with Edward Walker, who differentiates the fortress and town. de Waal has been criticized countless times for his subtle pro-Azeri bias. He's not a top expert in anything, except maybe Twitter blogging. --Steverci (talk) 19:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Chelebi was clearly referring to the village of Shusha, which existed before the town. But again WP:WEIGHT. You can see from the number of sources that I quoted that the vast majority of sources attributes foundation of Shusha to Panah Ali khan in 1752. Nersesov was an Armenian, check his biography here, and so was Raffi, who wrote:
Shahnazar needed an ally, and he found one ready to his hand in the Jevanshir. Panah advised him to build another fort for greater security, choosing the site on Shahnazar's private property, and the two constructed a fort on the banks of the river Karkar as quickly as they could in the intervals of fighting the four Meliks. Shahnazar laid the foundation stone, and the fortress was completed in 1752, the people of the village of Shoshi were brought to live there, and it was named Shoshi or Shushi fortress. Panah had now succeded in establishing himself in the heart of Karabagh, to carry out his infamous plots for breaking up the league of the Meliks, with the aid of his ally, the traitor and villain, Shahnazar of Varranda. [13]
- De Waal is considered top expert on Karabakh. His work is praised by international scholarly community, and received no serious critisism outside of Armenia. I can cite many more sources about foundation of the city in 1752. It is generally accpeted version, and the article must reflect that, according to Wikipedia rules. Grandmaster 08:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I think Walker should not be used in the lead, as other modern sources such as de Waal and Potier do not agree with his version, and Walker is a minority view, because no other source says that Shusha was a center of a principality in 1720. I propose the following rewrite:
It is widely accepted that Shusha was founded as a fortress in 1752 by Panah Ali Khan. However some sources claim that the town existed before.
Or something similar. According to the rules, we must properly attribute majority and minority views in accordance with their weight. And it is quite obvious that vast majority of sources support 1752 foundation by Panah Ali Khan. Grandmaster 08:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- The crux of the matter when it comes to a subject like this is who has access to sources closest to the subject matter? Thomas de Waal is by no stretch of the imagination an expert on the early modern urban history of the South Caucasus. His political analysis and interviews are what truly stand out in his book, but when it comes to the pre-1923 history of the region he's at the mercy of what actual scholars have written before him. Case in point: He never set out to archives to uncover documents that would reveal more about Shushi's founding nor participated in archaeological digs to gain first-hand knowledge of the town itself. It's rather breathtaking how his work over the past 20 years has come to be considered the most authoritative political and historical study in the region whereas in reality Black Garden is not a scholarly work: it's rather a popular history written in very eloquent prose by someone who at the time was a journalist and who himself admitted the debt he owed to other scholars whose work allowed him to dip into medieval, architectural, and other sub-fields. Ohannes Geukjian, Vicken Cheterian, Arsene Saporov, Lori Khatchadourian (Cornell) -- these are serious academics with many peer-reviewed articles under their belts and yet whose works, remarkably, are almost never cited on these pages. Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 10:03, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- De Waal did study the history of the region, and consulted experts on this subject. If we refer to someone like Edward Walker, who only makes a passing remark on the subject, to make claims about history of the town, then why not refer to de Waal, who is a much more respected authority on the subject? Potier is also as good as Walker. Others mentioned by you are certainly not third party. But in general, the main rule that applies here is WP:Weight. It is quite obvious that it is generally accepted by reliable third party sources that the city was founded in 1752 by Panah Ali Khan. We cannot give the minority view an equal weight with the majority view. But the present version of the lead does not even present the majority view, let alone give it a proper weight. How is that even possible? Grandmaster 14:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Btw, Arsene Saparov, mentioned by you, also says that Shusha was founded by Panah Ali Khan.
- But an opportunity for Panah emerged when, as a result of a feud between the Armenian meliks, one of them sought help against his rivals by inviting Panah to build a fortress at Shusha in the mountains of Karabakh in 1750. At around this time Panakh Khan proclamed himself khan of Karabakh and was confirmed by Nader's descendant.
- Arsene Saparov. From Conflict to Autonomy in the Caucasus: The Soviet Union and the Making of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno Karabakh. 2014
- That is pretty much what everybody says, with minor exception. Grandmaster 15:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) De Waal is still a journalist by education. He's not a historian or some other sort of specialist (e.g. Caucasologist, Middle Eastern Studies scholar, Iranologist, political scientist, Turkologist, Armenian Studies scholar, Russian Studies scholar, etc.). De Waal's works should therefore be dealt with as such, and yes, that does include WP:DUE weight and due attribution. His works are inferior compared to those written by western specialists with degrees. Edward Walker at least has degrees in political science and international studies. Tim Potier has a PhD in Law; citing his works for anything but law-related content is not good editing. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Saparov is a good source for the topic area and I recommend users citing his works (same goes for Laurence Broers). - LouisAragon (talk) 15:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) De Waal is still a journalist by education. He's not a historian or some other sort of specialist (e.g. Caucasologist, Middle Eastern Studies scholar, Iranologist, political scientist, Turkologist, Armenian Studies scholar, Russian Studies scholar, etc.). De Waal's works should therefore be dealt with as such, and yes, that does include WP:DUE weight and due attribution. His works are inferior compared to those written by western specialists with degrees. Edward Walker at least has degrees in political science and international studies. Tim Potier has a PhD in Law; citing his works for anything but law-related content is not good editing. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- That is pretty much what everybody says, with minor exception. Grandmaster 15:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. It's remarkable that after more than a decade "third party" in this context is still a misabused label come to mean by some as "non-Armenian/non-Azerbaijani." You can be of either ethnic heritage and still produce sound scholarly material. Geukjian, Cheterian, Saporov, and Khatchadourian are each experts in their field (political science, Soviet history, architecture, etc.) not because of their ethnic lineage or countries of residence, but their competence (Saporov, by the way, works on modern and Soviet history) Like LouisAragon says, De Waal is a journalist and now a political analyst, but in this case he doesn't have the final say on matters relating to eighteenth-century architecture and urban history. Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 15:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - Agree with the points raised above by Steverci and MarshallBagramyan, the town being built before the 1750s indeed has strong weight. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment all relieble encyclopedic publishers note Shusha as "the city was built by Panakh khan in the middle of 18century". Another versions are also noted in any case. No doubt that majority sources (mid 18 century) is strong weight, because they're encyclopedi, neutral. As to Th.Waal, it could be accepted that he's not historian, but jurnalist. But in this case, let me again and again back to Sh.Mkrtchan, who is not historian also (the tourist guidance is not argument. Acually the editions no need historians assistence to arrange the brochure for tourists). Aydin mirza (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I came across this topic from WP:ANI. This dispute is much ado over nothing — we cannot consider 100 year old sources and recent scholarship in the same tier. If there are modern scholars, who explicitly claim that the town was estb. by Armenians, provide them. Armenians having settlements in the plateau etc. mean zilch. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:12, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Did you even follow the discussion so far or are you just here to edit-war? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- I think that you might benefit from reading WP:NPA. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Did you even follow the discussion so far or are you just here to edit-war? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Moving forward: revised proposal
I think this discussion above has been helpful in gathering the sources in one place. The next stage is to build on what we have and create a well-sourced compromise text. I've revised my intial rough draft above to more closely follow the sources that have since been brought up. You can find the new text in the same place (the collapsed green section – direct link). Is this an acceptable compromise version? Does it reflect the sources accurately? (I've added more ref quotes and shuffled some inline cites around, so they hopefully support the text more closely.) Does it reasonably reflect the weight of sources? Pinging main discussion participants: @ZaniGiovanni, MarshallBagramyan, LouisAragon, Grandmaster, Brandmeister, Steverci, and Laurel Lodged: Jr8825 • Talk 18:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Reject - Uses multiple sources, older than a century. I do not see an absence of modern scholarship to bend over backwards and accommodate fringe POVs. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Why is Edward Walker, with a background in IR, even considered to be a reliable source on the history of contested territories? [I have the same feelings for De Waal, who writes pop histories with a profound lack of academic rigor.]
- I suggest that everybody in this dispute search for scholarship produced by credible academic historians and read WP:FALSEBALANCE. And, we cannot interpret hundred year old sources for ourselves to dispute a narrative. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Panah brought Melik Shahnazar into his service and installed himself in the melik's domain of Varanda, forcing him to cede the fortress of Shosh, the future city of Shushi or Shusha.
— The Caucasian Knot: The History & Geopolitics of Nagorno-Karabagh. ed: Levon Chorbajian, Patrick Donabédian, and Claude Mutafian. 1994. p. 74- Donabédian is a professor of Archeology at Aix-Marseille University and has led archaeological missions in Armenia. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Was there some fort in or around where the current town stands? Very likely, yes. Does a fort make a city? No. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:41, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- @TrangaBellam: the revised proposal suggests there wasn't a city prior to 1752, and I think it largely reflects Donabédian's statement, are you definitely reading the right text? I'm also concerned about false balance, and perhaps the proposed text needs to focus on the 1752 founding date in an even stronger way – it's a case of getting the due weight right, why I invited this discussion. I'd also note that my proposal minimises the alleged medieval Armenian "city" to a greater extent than the previous long-standing version of the lead, and the current lead, too.
- I've changed my view about Walker over the course of the thread, as his claim does seem to contradict most other sources, which is why I've consequently cut down the space given to his statements in this revised proposal. Perhaps this can be further emphasised by removing
"There are differing accounts regarding the town's origins"
, so the paragraph opens with"Most sources..."
. I'm not yet convinced that the weight balance is strong enough to entirely exclude him, as he is, after all, a recent, reliably published source and a scholar with regional knowledge, even if his expertise is IR rather than history. What has he read that caused him to make such a confident statement? Are there more sources which echo that view? If you do know of other sources such as Donabédian, please put them forward and make suggestions, rather than suggesting there's a deliberate absence of modern scholarship – I've said pretty clearly this isn't my area of expertise, and I'm trying to determine the weight of sources as I go along reading them. Perhaps you could make a constructive suggestion for rewording it, rather than blocking my attempt to take something positive from the above, long-winded discussion?
- I've changed my view about Walker over the course of the thread, as his claim does seem to contradict most other sources, which is why I've consequently cut down the space given to his statements in this revised proposal. Perhaps this can be further emphasised by removing
- I'd appreciate it if you could provide a list of the modern scholarship by academic historians on the topic, but I strongly suspect there's not that much – which is why we're having to rely on a combination of sources: tertiary encyclopedias, modern secondary-source regional overviews and a mix of historic secondary- and primary-source documents. WP:PRIMARY sources are not "banned" – although they're definitely not ideal sources, they still have a role to play in the absence of secondary source alternatives, if used carefully and appropriately. This is particularly with medieval and earlier history, where any secondary sources will also be reliant on the same primary sources unless someone undertakes an archaeological dig at a specific site (unless Donabédian has excavated at Shusha, he is relying on the same documentary evidence as everyone else). While some of the sources used here are old, age isn't a definitive indication of unreliability – I'm not convinced the history of Shusha is a field which has undergone substantial reevaluation in recent decades. Jr8825 • Talk 19:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
This is particularly with medieval and earlier history, where any secondary sources will also be reliant on the same primary sources.
We, as laymen, cannot critically evaluate primary sources and situate them in context. Esp. when they arise of acrimonious areas like these with every claim having an (apparently valid) counter-claim.What has he read that caused him to make such a confident statement?
We are not mind-readers. Scholars make all sorts of unintentional but dubious statements on particular facts which are not very integral to their work. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)- Donabédian may be reliable but the source TrangaBellam is citing is not. The Caucasian Knot has received quite negative peer reviews, in part for its extremely partisan presentation of events [14]. Furthermore, the book is published by ZED Books, a non-academic publishing company, which has been described as an outlet for expressing "marginal" and "radical" views (see Lena Khor. Human Rights Discourse in a Global Network: Books Beyond Borders. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2013, pp. 235–236). Parishan (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- They accuse the book of being too pro-Armenian. And, we are using it to negate a fringe pro-Armenian pov. Hardly any issues: I would not have cited this work if the viewpoint, under question, was pro-Azeri.
- Zed is a reliable publisher and one academic denigrating it means nothing. Please raise a thread at WP:RSN if you gather evidence of multiple scholars finding the publisher to be unreliable. I can find several acclaimed chair-proffesors being published by Zed. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- Donabédian may be reliable but the source TrangaBellam is citing is not. The Caucasian Knot has received quite negative peer reviews, in part for its extremely partisan presentation of events [14]. Furthermore, the book is published by ZED Books, a non-academic publishing company, which has been described as an outlet for expressing "marginal" and "radical" views (see Lena Khor. Human Rights Discourse in a Global Network: Books Beyond Borders. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2013, pp. 235–236). Parishan (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- I'd appreciate it if you could provide a list of the modern scholarship by academic historians on the topic, but I strongly suspect there's not that much – which is why we're having to rely on a combination of sources: tertiary encyclopedias, modern secondary-source regional overviews and a mix of historic secondary- and primary-source documents. WP:PRIMARY sources are not "banned" – although they're definitely not ideal sources, they still have a role to play in the absence of secondary source alternatives, if used carefully and appropriately. This is particularly with medieval and earlier history, where any secondary sources will also be reliant on the same primary sources unless someone undertakes an archaeological dig at a specific site (unless Donabédian has excavated at Shusha, he is relying on the same documentary evidence as everyone else). While some of the sources used here are old, age isn't a definitive indication of unreliability – I'm not convinced the history of Shusha is a field which has undergone substantial reevaluation in recent decades. Jr8825 • Talk 19:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I think Jr8825's proposal is generally good. We can use it as a basis and improve it further by consensus at talk. Regarding modern scholarship on Shusha, it is almost non-existent. Modern authors simply refer to what is known from historical sources. The foremost sources on history of Karabakh khanate and Shusha are considered chronicles by Mirza Jamal Javanshir, Mirza Adigezal bek and to lesser extent Mirza Yusuf Nersesov. We simply cannot ignore these major sources, which are the cornerstones of historical research on Karabakh. Regarding Donabedian, Chorbaijan, etc, it is not the best source. It is more of nationalist type scholarship, plus Donabedian himself is an art historian. As I understand, he mixes the village of Shosh/Shushakend with the city of Shusha. But then again, as TrangaBellam noted, a fort is not the same thing as a city. Arsen Saparov is a better source, I quoted him above. Encyclopedia of Islam is the best scholarly source, the later versions of 1970 and 1993 contain the same information as I quoted above. Also, there is this source:
Shusha. Regional center in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. The town was founded in 1756-7 when the Karabakh potentate Panah 'Ali Khan built a fortress on a rocky area surrounded by the mountain streams Dashalty and Khalfali-chay. The eponymous fortress Panakhabad was later renamed Kala or Shusha-qalasy and finally Shusha. Situated in the strategic and economic center of Karabakh, it became the capital of the Karabakh khanate. The town was surrounded by stone walls with round towers protecting the gates. The khan and his court lived in a rectangular citadel surrounded by bazaars, a Friday Mosque and residential quarters.
Grove Encyclopedia of Islamic Art and Architecture. Oxford University Press. 2009
Also, I agree that ""There are differing accounts regarding the town's origins"" should be removed, so the paragraph opens with ""Most sources..."" It makes more sense without that line. Grandmaster 21:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- I've removed that sentence as I agree it could suggest there's less acceptance of the 1750s than there appears to be. Jr8825 • Talk 21:18, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I've temporarily put Jr8825's lead as it's still better than the previous one, further changes could be agreed here, I think. By the way, the Russian equivalent of Shusha fortress has a detailed section on dating, ru:Шушинская крепость#Вопрос датировки крепости. It shows that nearly all sources, even the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia, agree on the 1750s dating of the fortress. Brandmeistertalk 19:35, 22 September 2021(UTC)
@Jr8825: Is there reasonable cause to say that "most sources" date Shushi/Shusha's founding as a "city" from the 1750s and onward, that it was then considered to be more than a fortress, with adjoining civilian settlements - which may very likely have also been the case of a previous Armenian fortress at the same site beforehand? From another point of view, the locality would be considered to be an actual full-blooded "city" much further ahead in time. AntonSamuel (talk) 22:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but the 1750s date does appear to be agreed upon by the majority of sources as the founding of the modern town (as can be seen from above). Many of these sources say there was an Armenian population/village nearby before this date. There may have been an earlier fortification, and some Armenian sources are more explicit about this, but my current impression is that, overall, most sources seem to imply that Panah Ali built what was effectively a new fortress in 1752. There are editors here who are more familiar with the source than me, though. Jr8825 • Talk 22:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Jr8825: The current wording of your proposal (and the current version of the page) implies that from the 1750s and onward, Shushi/Shusha was now considered to be a city/town/settlement and not just a fortress. If you look at the history section of the page, the late 1700s were pretty stormy for the locality with numerous battles, sieges and most mentions of the locality being with regard to its nature as a stronghold or fortress. Few fortresses beyond the modern world have been able to exist without some immediate adjoining civilian settlement and there is plenty of sourced material with regard to the importance and significance of the site for the local Armenian principality - which is what I wanted to convey in my previous statement. I would say that the section regarding the founding of the town needs to be amended in order to be considered to be neutral and factual with regard to the sources used. AntonSamuel (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- @AntonSamuel: I haven't seen many sources which demonstrate the
importance and significance of the site for the local Armenian principality
pre-1750s, could you please link/quote some more? Steverci mentioned some primary Russian sources which support the idea there the fortress wasn't built from scratch in the 1750s, and this is reflected in the text's sentence"others claim the plateau was already the site of an "ancient" Armenian fortification"
, which is supported by cites to Chelebi (1725) and Ashkharhin (1863). Aside from the fact that Parishan says the Chelebi translation is inaccurate – in which case that cite should be removed (the Ashkharhin seems OK?) – none of these sources give any details about the fortress's history before it came under the control of Panah Ali. The only two sources I've seen so far which do discuss earlier history are Walker and Mkrtchyan. Walker is the stronger source, and is still given space in the new text ("some sources describe Shusha as being the center of the self-governing melikdoms of Karabakh in the 1720s"
– although other editors here are arguing he's being given too much space, as he seems to be an outlier (most tertiary sources point towards the 1750s) and his expertise is politics rather than history. Then there's Mkrtchyan, who wrote that the fortress was medieval. As I mentioned above, the text mentions the possibility that there was "already" an "ancient Armenian fortification" – I don't see how we can give any more weight to this unless there are more sources for it – again, could you link/name some to support your argument this is the case? Regardless of Mkrtchyan's reputation as a scholar within Armenia, he is obviously a well-known activist on the topic, so other editors' objections to using him as the sole source for statements is entirely reasonable. If other sources corroborate his claims then I'd be OK using him for those. Also pinging @Kevo327: – this is your opportunity/invitation to bring sources to the table to demonstrate weight for pre-1750s history. Are we missing sources? Jr8825 • Talk 00:25, 23 September 2021 (UTC)- I checked the links provided by Parishan, and indeed Chelebi mentions the "village of Shosh" (деревня Шоша), which modern researchers identify with the village of Shosh/Shushakend. So Chelebi is not an appropriate source for the claim. Grandmaster 14:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Grandmaster and Parishan: could you offer a translation of the passage
"Потом паки как патриархи, так и юзбаши собрались в помянутю /л. 24/ ж деревню Шошу и из оной ево отправили. И ехал он оттуда паки на Шемаху и Дербень и крепость Святаго Креста. Оная деревня Шоша окружена каменными горами. / Войска их армянского, конницы и пехоты, многое число [во] оружейного только подлинно сказать, сколько всего войска, не может."
? I'm using Google Translate, and it I'm unsure whether this text implies the village had a large garrison? (In which case, might that support the idea that Shosh was a relatively important site or fortification, as Walker suggests)? Or is it not specifying the location of the garrison, or saying it was located somewhere else? Also, is the "the fortress of the Holy Cross" clearly a different place? Thanks in advance, Jr8825 • Talk 14:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)- My translation: Then again both the patriarchs and the yuzbashi gathered in the aforementioned village of Shosha and from there they sent him. And he rode from there again to Shemakha and Derbent and the fortress of the Holy Cross. That village of Shosha is surrounded by stone mountains. Their Armenian troops, armed cavalry and infantry, are many, but he cannot say precisely how many in total troops there are. Russian fortress of the Holy Cross was located in Dagestan, and destroyed in 1735. There is an article about it in Russian wiki: [15] Armenians were informing Russians that they could mobilize a certain number of troops, and Chelebi was their messenger. The village of Shosh was used as a place of meeting of Armenian elders, but the source does not say that there was actually a garrison there. Grandmaster 14:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've moved the source from two sentences it clearly doesn't support (those describing an "ancient fortress"). The same passage is still being used in the history section though, with a translation (supposedly) from Bournoutian's 2001 book Armenians and Russia, 1626-1796 : a documentary record of "деревня" as "town". This likely needs to be examined and removed as well, but I don't want to move too quickly on such a controversial topic. It does cause me to question the reliability of Bournoutian as a source, and he's also used as the sole source for other claims in that section (thhere are, however, other sources which call it an "ancient" fortress). Jr8825 • Talk 15:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- The article contains a large quote from Chelebi, which clearly does not match the original Russian text. And even a modern Armenian scholar cited by Parishan confirms that the village in question was Shushikend. Pre-1750s foundation of Shusha appeared in modern Armenian sources after the Karabakh conflict started, especially in 1990s. They deliberately confuse the village of Shusha with the town, which are two different locations, even though not far from each other. And Bournoutian's translation of деревня as town is weird. I think modern Armenian and Azerbaijani sources, including those from diaspora, should be used with caution. Nationalist sentiment is evident in vast majority of them. Grandmaster 17:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- The word "ancient" can simply mean old, it doesn't necessarily refer to antiquity. I don't see the need for scare quotes. --Steverci (talk) 03:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've moved the source from two sentences it clearly doesn't support (those describing an "ancient fortress"). The same passage is still being used in the history section though, with a translation (supposedly) from Bournoutian's 2001 book Armenians and Russia, 1626-1796 : a documentary record of "деревня" as "town". This likely needs to be examined and removed as well, but I don't want to move too quickly on such a controversial topic. It does cause me to question the reliability of Bournoutian as a source, and he's also used as the sole source for other claims in that section (thhere are, however, other sources which call it an "ancient" fortress). Jr8825 • Talk 15:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- My translation: Then again both the patriarchs and the yuzbashi gathered in the aforementioned village of Shosha and from there they sent him. And he rode from there again to Shemakha and Derbent and the fortress of the Holy Cross. That village of Shosha is surrounded by stone mountains. Their Armenian troops, armed cavalry and infantry, are many, but he cannot say precisely how many in total troops there are. Russian fortress of the Holy Cross was located in Dagestan, and destroyed in 1735. There is an article about it in Russian wiki: [15] Armenians were informing Russians that they could mobilize a certain number of troops, and Chelebi was their messenger. The village of Shosh was used as a place of meeting of Armenian elders, but the source does not say that there was actually a garrison there. Grandmaster 14:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Grandmaster and Parishan: could you offer a translation of the passage
- I checked the links provided by Parishan, and indeed Chelebi mentions the "village of Shosh" (деревня Шоша), which modern researchers identify with the village of Shosh/Shushakend. So Chelebi is not an appropriate source for the claim. Grandmaster 14:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- @AntonSamuel: I haven't seen many sources which demonstrate the
- @Jr8825: The current wording of your proposal (and the current version of the page) implies that from the 1750s and onward, Shushi/Shusha was now considered to be a city/town/settlement and not just a fortress. If you look at the history section of the page, the late 1700s were pretty stormy for the locality with numerous battles, sieges and most mentions of the locality being with regard to its nature as a stronghold or fortress. Few fortresses beyond the modern world have been able to exist without some immediate adjoining civilian settlement and there is plenty of sourced material with regard to the importance and significance of the site for the local Armenian principality - which is what I wanted to convey in my previous statement. I would say that the section regarding the founding of the town needs to be amended in order to be considered to be neutral and factual with regard to the sources used. AntonSamuel (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Comment. I apologise for joining the discussion late. I agree with the above suggestion that the claim of there existing a mediaeval fortress some time before 1752 is highly dubious and most likely is due to confusion with a nearby village with a similar name, and here is why.
The English translation of Kehva Chelebi's letter cited above by Steverci is inacurate (I do not know if Steverci copied it from somewhere or if it is their own translation). You can find the Russian translation of the letter as published in Сношения Петра Великаго с армянским народом (1897) by Gerasim Ezov, a Russian orientalist of Armenian origin here: [16]. Nowhere in the text does Chelebi mention a "fortress". He talks about a "village" he calls Shoshe, which, as it turns out, refers to the modern village of Shushikend, called Shosh in Armenian and located a few kilometres north of modern-day Shusha. Chelebi uses the word "village" (and not "fortress") multiple times. Meanwhile, Armenian historian Ashot Hovhannisian, himself a native of Shusha, in the foreword of Part I of Volume II of Армяно-русские отношения в первой трети XVIII века (1964), mentions explicitly (p. lxxxix) that what is referred to as "the village of Shusha" and described as Avan Yuzbashi's stronghold in Varanda, is in fact Shosh or "modern-day Shushikend": [17]
The same can be said of "Suvorov's letter", which (if it indeed exists) is a primary source, on top of everything not referenced by any secondary source except Mkrtchyan. How is it that a letter containing such a revolutionary statement has been ignored by all other sources, including (to my knowledge) the above-mentioned Армяно-русские отношения, a multi-volume compilation (each volume between 500 and 1000 pages) of Russian documents dealing with Armenian affairs and the most comprehensive reference of this sort to-date? Even so, who is to say that the settlement Suvorov referred to as Shushikala is Shusha and not Shushikend, as suggested by Hovhannisian for a similar mention?
As for Mkrtchyan, the fact that he is cited by Western authors does not automatically suggest that he is reliable. We do not know the contexts in which his works have been cited. Sources can be cited to be disagreed with or to illustrate a point of marginal relevance. He is not a peer-reviewed author, nor has he published in any reputable journals, even within the Soviet Union. The fact that one of this nearly twenty works, a travel guide of Nagorno-Karabakh, was published in Baku is barely surprising: for political reasons, such a guide could have hardly been published anywhere else in the Soviet era. I would not even get into the titles of some of his works, which border extremism, such as referring to Azerbaijan's control over Nagorno-Karabakh in 1920–1988 as "the anatomy of genocide". A clearly partisan source published in Armenia soon after the most heated phase of the Nagorno-Karabakh war, whose claims are not supported by any reliable source, cannot possibly outbalance the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Iranica, Brockhaus and Efron, the Great Soviet Encyclopaedia, and even some fellow Armenian authors, who make no mention of any prior settlement and agree that Panah Ali Khan built Shusha in 1752, or even be mentioned next to them as "an alternative opinion". Parishan (talk) 23:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Another notable source, which is considered one of the top sources on the history of Caucasus.
- Спустя несколько времени Мелик Шах-Назар Веренский, враждовавший долгое время со своими соседями — другими меликами армянскими, просил Панах-хана построить крепость на месте нынешней Шуши (Панахабад) и избрать ее своим местопребыванием.
- Some time later, Melik Shah-Nazar of Veren, who for a long time had been feuding with his neighbors, other Armenian meliks, asked Panakh Khan to build a fortress on the site of present-day Shusha (Panakhabad) and choose it as his residence. [18]
- Abbas Qulu Aqa Bakikhanov. Golestan-e Eram
- And then Encyclopedia Iranica:
- In the second half of the century, Ebrāhīm Khan built a strong fortress in Shushi/Shusha, which was referred to, during his lifetime, as Panahabad (idem, p. 72). [19]
- There’s a typo in the online version, as it says Ebrahim instead of Panah in the above sentence, but I think it is simply an error by the person who did the typing. The town was founded by Panah, of course, which is why it was initially called Panahabad. Btw, I think the lead should also reflect the original name of the town, Panahabad, attested by almost all the sources. Grandmaster 13:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- I think that kind of detail (the name Panahabad) isn't important enough to topic as a whole to warrant inclusion in the lead summary. It's mentioned in the both the etymology and history sections. Shosh/Shushikent village is a slightly different case because it's likely to have lent its name to (or perhaps even borrowed its name from) the modern town, and may have been the predecessor settlement. Jr8825 • Talk 13:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- According to sources, the town of Panahabad indeed later took its name from Shosh/Shushikent village. Both the town and the village exist now. They are a few kilometers apart. According to Mirza Jamal Javanshir, who is considered the most important source on the history of Karabakh khanate, the town of Shusha was built in an empty place, where previously there were no buildings, and villagers from Shushikend used it as a pasture. Grandmaster 14:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- I think that kind of detail (the name Panahabad) isn't important enough to topic as a whole to warrant inclusion in the lead summary. It's mentioned in the both the etymology and history sections. Shosh/Shushikent village is a slightly different case because it's likely to have lent its name to (or perhaps even borrowed its name from) the modern town, and may have been the predecessor settlement. Jr8825 • Talk 13:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
And another important historical chronicle, mentioned by Iranica as well:
В силу этих соображений, находя нынешнее место города Шуши как-раз соответствующим объясненным условиям, он, в 1754 году, основал в нем свою резиденцию, назвав её в честь свою Панах-абадом (**). Под этим-же названием начали чеканить в Шуше серебряную монету 15-копеечного достоинства. (**) Но впоследствии город этот стал называться Шуша-каласы, т. е. Шушинская крепость, приняв это название от армянской деревни по соседству, Шуши-кенды, т. е. Шушинская деревня.)
Ахмед-бек Джаваншир. О политическом существовании карабахского ханства (с 1747 по 1805 год).
Due to these considerations, finding the present place of the city of Shusha precisely meeting the aforementioned requirements, he, in 1754, founded his residence there, naming it after himself Panakh-abad (**). Under this same name, a 15-kopeck silver coin was minted in Shusha. (*But later this city was called Shusha-kalasy, i.e. Shusha fortress, taking this name from the nearby Armenian village, Shushi-kend, i.e. Shusha village.)
Ahmad bey Javanshir. On the Political Affairs of the Karabakh khanate in 1747–1805.
Grandmaster 15:15, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- Iranica is not a good source. It has Armenian Genocide deniers like Hamid Algar as one of its top contributors. --Steverci (talk) 03:15, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- It's really funny that you (and some Armenian users) always use Armenian genocide as an argument even it's not related with topic. Iranica is considered one of the most reliable encyclopedias out there. View WP:RSP. If you're questioning it, take it to RS/N. NMW03 (talk) 11:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- No, what's funny is that there seems a new Azeri account in these discussions every day now, when there is a known Discord channel dedicated to brigading iVotes. --Steverci (talk) 03:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
- The article in Iranica is written by George Bournoutian. If you think that he has anti-Armenian bias, I beg to differ. Quite the contrary, he pushes an Armenian POV, by referring to the region of Karabakh as "present-day de facto Nagorno-Karabakh Republic", etc. Grandmaster 12:37, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- It's really funny that you (and some Armenian users) always use Armenian genocide as an argument even it's not related with topic. Iranica is considered one of the most reliable encyclopedias out there. View WP:RSP. If you're questioning it, take it to RS/N. NMW03 (talk) 11:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Reject Why does the lead now only highlight Panah while making no mention of Shahnazar? Even in the narrative of it being founded in 1750s, it was built on territory controlled by Shahnazar, and multiple contemporary Russian sources cited in the article. Seems like it was written to erase any mention of Armenians. I fixed the header to be more neutral. I've noticed that only Azeri sources use language attributing "building" or "founding" solely by Panah, while more non-partisan sources will use terms like "fortifying". Also, both the Soviet Encyclopedia and Encyclopaedia of Islam should not be considered deciding sources. The latter has an obvious bias, and the Soviets gave Shushi to the Azeris so they would naturally endorse Azeri historical negationism. --Steverci (talk) 03:15, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- Your edit does not reflect what most of the sources say. You see that most sources, including encyclopedia of Islam, Iranica, Brokhaus, etc say that Panah Khan founded the city. Some also say that Shahnazar suggested a place. That is a generally accepted version. Please do not revert to you proposed version before consensus is reached here. I don't see how encyclopedia of Islam is unreliable. It is written by best Western experts. I cited here dozens of sources, primary, secondary and tertiary. They all say that Panah Khan founded the city, and Shahnazar was his advisor. You are trying to introduce a minority view, which is not line with WP:WEIGHT.Grandmaster 10:05, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Steverci: I don't understand how the leads makes
"no mention of Shahnazar"
? He's mentioned twice, and the possibility that he gave Panah advice on the location for a new fortress, and the possibility he already owned a fortress that came under the control of Panah, are both discussed."Only Azeri sources use language attributing "building" or "founding" solely by Panah"
– the sources Grandmaster presented in their above comment (timestamp 13:57, 19 September 2021) has convinced me this isn't the case, as it shows a broad range of sources which say Panah "founded" Shusha, including non-Soviet/non-Azeri ones. Jr8825 • Talk 10:13, 25 September 2021 (UTC)- Potto differentiates between the town and a fortress. He confirms it was fortified, but only says an inscription claims it was founded. Islam and Brockhaus encyclopedias only provide brief summaries that omit Shahnazar entirely, but even Azeri sources acknowledge Shahnazar, so these should be considered not having an opinion. These encyclopedias should only be given secondary importance due to a lack of specialization in the subject anyway. Only Azeri sources (Adigozal bey and Javanshir) try to minimize Shahnazar's role as "offering advice". Raffi writes that it was actually Paneh who merely offered advice. And no, Nersesov is not an Armenian source, he converted to Islam and married an Azeri woman. This would be like calling Eisenhower a German general. On the other hand, Shahnazar being a co-founder is consistent with Butkov. And lets not forget Bronevskiy, Erekle, Suvorov, and Wolff state both the town and fortress already existed. --Steverci (talk) 03:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Nersesov
- Potto says that Panah Khan built a fortress. It is true, it was originally a fortress, which grew bigger over the time. That is why it is called Shusha kalasi (i.e.fortress) to this day. Nersesov was an ethnic Armenian, he converted back to Christianity later in life. Many sources say that Shahnazar suggested a place for the new fortress, and it is reflected in the article. But as you noted, encyclopedias and some other sources make no mention of Shahnazar, so the present wording is accurate. The article says that the town was founded by Panah Khan, while some sources suggest it was done by advice of Melik Shahnazar. Grandmaster 09:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
- Potto differentiates the fortress and town, which is consistent with pre-1750s sources that state it was only fortified, not built, in the 1750s. Do you have a source for him converting back to Christianity? He's an assimilated Iranian either way, hence why he is called Mirza Yusuf Nersesov and not Hovsep Nersisyants. In the encyclopedias, Shushi is given a passing mention by authors without expertise in the subject. Even Azeri sources mention Shahnazar, so sources not mentioning him at all have secondary importance. Armenian sources say Shahnazar fortified the pre-existing town at Panah's suggestion, while Azeri sources say Panah built the town with his own hands on a spot Shahnazar suggested. Third-party sources do not have a consistent interpretation. --Steverci (talk) 02:16, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Shusha was founded by Panah Khan as a fortress, it became a city later. Potto confirms that, along with other sources. Matenadaran says that Nersesov was an Armenian. [20] Do you have any source to prove that he was not an Armenian? If not, then there is nothing to talk about. As for foundation, Armenians Nersesov and Raffi said that the city was built on an empty space, from scratch. And encyclopedias all say that Panah Khan built the city. They are all consistent in this regard. Grandmaster 08:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Your interpretation for Potto is WP:OR. The Matenadaran says he "was an Armenian named Hovsep", before he was assimilated as a Persian. It also says he worked for the Shah and later the Russian army. But he was never affiliated with any Armenian organization or cause, so he cannot be considered an Armenian source. Raffi never said that and the encyclopedias are lacking in expertise. --Steverci (talk) 03:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Why my interpretation of Potto is OR, and yours is not? Matenadaran does not say that he was Persian. If you have a source that Nersesov was not Armenian, please provide it. Otherwise it is your personal opinion that does not count. And encyclopedias are lacking in expertise? How so? Grandmaster 09:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's WP:OR to assume anything other than what he said. He only mentioned the date for the fortress, and differentiated it from the town. It's simple. Nersesov was abducted as a child, had his name changed, and grew up outside of Armenian society, therefore he isn't representative of Armenian sources. This should be obviously to anyone editing with good faith that isn't WP:NOTHERE. He's also just one person, not only is he not nearly enough weight, but saying "Armenian sources" would be false even even if we pretend he is representative of Armenian sources. And because someone specializing in Islam or Soviet propaganda is not going to be as qualified to write about Artsakh as someone specializing in Artsakh. Another thing that should be obvious. --Steverci (talk) 04:29, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- I repeat my question. Do you have any source to attest that Nersesov was not Armenian? You personal opinion of who Nersesov was cannot be used in the article. If you wish, we can write Armenian author Nersesov, in a singular form. Or not mention any ethnicity at all. Grandmaster 08:36, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- I believe assigning Nersesov the label "Armenian author" would result in giving credibility to the same sort of fallacy which one often sees at problemating topic areas on Wikipedia, including WP:AA2. I.e. "because he was of X origin, he must have represented X interests". The label Armenian author should remain reserved for historic figures such as Eznik of Kolb, Arakel of Tabriz, Khachatur Abovian, etc. I fail to see how Nersesov, although of Armenian origin, could possibly represent an Armenian narrative on such a contentious topic, given the WP:RS that describe his life. It would put him on equal footing with guys who are solidly known to represent the Azerbaijani narrative like Mirza Adigozal bey. This, in turn, would violate WP:NPOV. Indeed, its probably best to remove mention of "Armenian". Another option could be: "Mirza Yusuf Nersesov, a writer of Armenian origin who grew up in Iran, served there as a civil servant, and converted to Islam (...)". Or something along those lines. In short; one needs to give due attribution, or provide a WP:RS which states that he was an "Armenian author". - LouisAragon (talk) 11:26, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with Louis, Nersesov should be described as an Armenian source. Jr8825 • Talk 11:42, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- Sources on Nersesov are not abundant, but this one from Matenadaran says: He was an Armenian named Hovsep, born in Hadrut, a village of Qarabagh. [21] He converted to Islam, and later back to Christianity. I have not seen any source to attest that he was not an Armenian. But as a compromise, I proposed another option, which you can see in my post below. Grandmaster 20:47, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- I believe assigning Nersesov the label "Armenian author" would result in giving credibility to the same sort of fallacy which one often sees at problemating topic areas on Wikipedia, including WP:AA2. I.e. "because he was of X origin, he must have represented X interests". The label Armenian author should remain reserved for historic figures such as Eznik of Kolb, Arakel of Tabriz, Khachatur Abovian, etc. I fail to see how Nersesov, although of Armenian origin, could possibly represent an Armenian narrative on such a contentious topic, given the WP:RS that describe his life. It would put him on equal footing with guys who are solidly known to represent the Azerbaijani narrative like Mirza Adigozal bey. This, in turn, would violate WP:NPOV. Indeed, its probably best to remove mention of "Armenian". Another option could be: "Mirza Yusuf Nersesov, a writer of Armenian origin who grew up in Iran, served there as a civil servant, and converted to Islam (...)". Or something along those lines. In short; one needs to give due attribution, or provide a WP:RS which states that he was an "Armenian author". - LouisAragon (talk) 11:26, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- I repeat my question. Do you have any source to attest that Nersesov was not Armenian? You personal opinion of who Nersesov was cannot be used in the article. If you wish, we can write Armenian author Nersesov, in a singular form. Or not mention any ethnicity at all. Grandmaster 08:36, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's WP:OR to assume anything other than what he said. He only mentioned the date for the fortress, and differentiated it from the town. It's simple. Nersesov was abducted as a child, had his name changed, and grew up outside of Armenian society, therefore he isn't representative of Armenian sources. This should be obviously to anyone editing with good faith that isn't WP:NOTHERE. He's also just one person, not only is he not nearly enough weight, but saying "Armenian sources" would be false even even if we pretend he is representative of Armenian sources. And because someone specializing in Islam or Soviet propaganda is not going to be as qualified to write about Artsakh as someone specializing in Artsakh. Another thing that should be obvious. --Steverci (talk) 04:29, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- Why my interpretation of Potto is OR, and yours is not? Matenadaran does not say that he was Persian. If you have a source that Nersesov was not Armenian, please provide it. Otherwise it is your personal opinion that does not count. And encyclopedias are lacking in expertise? How so? Grandmaster 09:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Your interpretation for Potto is WP:OR. The Matenadaran says he "was an Armenian named Hovsep", before he was assimilated as a Persian. It also says he worked for the Shah and later the Russian army. But he was never affiliated with any Armenian organization or cause, so he cannot be considered an Armenian source. Raffi never said that and the encyclopedias are lacking in expertise. --Steverci (talk) 03:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Shusha was founded by Panah Khan as a fortress, it became a city later. Potto confirms that, along with other sources. Matenadaran says that Nersesov was an Armenian. [20] Do you have any source to prove that he was not an Armenian? If not, then there is nothing to talk about. As for foundation, Armenians Nersesov and Raffi said that the city was built on an empty space, from scratch. And encyclopedias all say that Panah Khan built the city. They are all consistent in this regard. Grandmaster 08:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Potto differentiates the fortress and town, which is consistent with pre-1750s sources that state it was only fortified, not built, in the 1750s. Do you have a source for him converting back to Christianity? He's an assimilated Iranian either way, hence why he is called Mirza Yusuf Nersesov and not Hovsep Nersisyants. In the encyclopedias, Shushi is given a passing mention by authors without expertise in the subject. Even Azeri sources mention Shahnazar, so sources not mentioning him at all have secondary importance. Armenian sources say Shahnazar fortified the pre-existing town at Panah's suggestion, while Azeri sources say Panah built the town with his own hands on a spot Shahnazar suggested. Third-party sources do not have a consistent interpretation. --Steverci (talk) 02:16, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Potto says that Panah Khan built a fortress. It is true, it was originally a fortress, which grew bigger over the time. That is why it is called Shusha kalasi (i.e.fortress) to this day. Nersesov was an ethnic Armenian, he converted back to Christianity later in life. Many sources say that Shahnazar suggested a place for the new fortress, and it is reflected in the article. But as you noted, encyclopedias and some other sources make no mention of Shahnazar, so the present wording is accurate. The article says that the town was founded by Panah Khan, while some sources suggest it was done by advice of Melik Shahnazar. Grandmaster 09:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
It all boils down to how the information is being presented. There's a tendency among some editors to allude to a source's bias by way of subtly and primarily referring to them by their ethnic label. What their profession, credentials, experience, etc. were are in reality far more important than them being from the X tribe (and therefore almost ineligible for expressing a particular view). Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 12:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- That is a good point. The chroniclers like Mirza Jamal or Nersesov lived before modern Armenia and Azerbaijan came into existence as independent states, so they were not motivated by nationalism in a modern sense. The only one who might be more nationalistic was novelist Raffi, who wrote in late 19th century and was more of a patriotic revolutionary type. But he was the only one not from Karabakh. Btw, Nersesov converted back to Christianity upon return to Caucasus. I proposed instead of writing "Azerbaijani and Armenian authors" simply write "19th century sources", [22] or "19th century chroniclers", but my edit was reverted. But I think it would be better not to mention ethnicity for the 18-19 century chroniclers. Anyone can check who they were by clicking links to their respective articles. Grandmaster 20:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- Even if we're going to consider Nersesov an Armenian source, he alone is not enough due weight to claim "19th century Armenian sources". And just "19th century sources" would be false because a lot of Russian primary sources confirm the pre-1750 founding. --Steverci (talk) 02:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- We write which exactly sources say that. But presenting Nersesov as Azerbaijani when he is not is a violation of Wikipedia rules. You have not provided a single source to attest that he was not an Armenian, and personal opinions do not count. It is WP:OR. Therefore I propose to write "19th century sources", followed by the list in the article. Grandmaster 10:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- And you're violating Wikipedia rules by pretending not to understand WP:UNDUE. "19th century sources" is also a problem because many Russian sources state the town existed before 1750. --Steverci (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
- But you wrote in the article that Nersesov is Azerbaijani. Where is your source for that claim? I asked you this question multiple times already, but so far you haven't provided a single source to support you claim. When we write "19th century sources", we say exactly which ones. We do not say that all 19th century sources say that, but that the following 19th century sources write certain thing about the foundation of Shusha. Grandmaster 13:31, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- Then Nersesov should be separated from them. If he is going to be identified by anything though, it should be as a "Qajar writer" or something similar. --Steverci (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Do you have a source for Qajar writer? So far we only have sources that he was an Armenian. Grandmaster 08:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- He grew up in Tabriz, was given the rank of Mirza, and wrote his most notable work in Persion. --Steverci (talk) 03:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- WP:OR. Sources say that he was Armenian. Grandmaster 09:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's not original research that his WP:COMMONNAME has an Iranian title. --Steverci (talk) 02:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Looks like we'll have to take this to WP:DRN as well. Grandmaster 17:57, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's not original research that his WP:COMMONNAME has an Iranian title. --Steverci (talk) 02:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- WP:OR. Sources say that he was Armenian. Grandmaster 09:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- He grew up in Tabriz, was given the rank of Mirza, and wrote his most notable work in Persion. --Steverci (talk) 03:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Do you have a source for Qajar writer? So far we only have sources that he was an Armenian. Grandmaster 08:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Then Nersesov should be separated from them. If he is going to be identified by anything though, it should be as a "Qajar writer" or something similar. --Steverci (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- But you wrote in the article that Nersesov is Azerbaijani. Where is your source for that claim? I asked you this question multiple times already, but so far you haven't provided a single source to support you claim. When we write "19th century sources", we say exactly which ones. We do not say that all 19th century sources say that, but that the following 19th century sources write certain thing about the foundation of Shusha. Grandmaster 13:31, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- And you're violating Wikipedia rules by pretending not to understand WP:UNDUE. "19th century sources" is also a problem because many Russian sources state the town existed before 1750. --Steverci (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
- We write which exactly sources say that. But presenting Nersesov as Azerbaijani when he is not is a violation of Wikipedia rules. You have not provided a single source to attest that he was not an Armenian, and personal opinions do not count. It is WP:OR. Therefore I propose to write "19th century sources", followed by the list in the article. Grandmaster 10:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- Even if we're going to consider Nersesov an Armenian source, he alone is not enough due weight to claim "19th century Armenian sources". And just "19th century sources" would be false because a lot of Russian primary sources confirm the pre-1750 founding. --Steverci (talk) 02:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)