Talk:Karabakh carpet

message: I added more information on Azerbaijan Karabakh Carpet Making as well as picture of comparison between different schools. Im having a problem with Armenian claims here since they are biased on dubious claims and books which i cant access, even if they were available they are still very biased and present the armenian point of view i believe this article should follow the steps of Dolma or Sari Gelin where Armenian "Historical claims" which are based on their sources are not allowed to put there. Lets be honest and not make wikipedia to armepedia the whole purpose is to present factual claims not what your historians think of particular subject so i believe Armenian historian claim here are unnecessary since they carry political agenda! But please lets argue here in a civilized manner since i believe we can reach concencus on this subject as on the above articles. Agulani (talk) 07:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azerbaijani Part  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Karabakh carpet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150408234611/http://www.azcarpetmuseum.az/006.html to http://www.azcarpetmuseum.az/006.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Dear , what exactly you did not like about my last edit ? The historic Karabakh region includes territories outside of de-facto Artsakh, such as Agdam, Fuzuli, Kalbajar and other Azerbaijani districts. --Mastersun25 (talk) 22:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: And it was already mentioned?  ZaniGiovanni (talk) 23:03, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It was mentioned in my version to better fit the reality, yet you undid the revision. --Mastersun25 (talk) 23:10, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You understand that historically, similar argument applies to Artsakh. The initial description was finely representing both countries, and historically as well most importantly. Meanwhile your edit was minimizing Artsakh/Armenians regarding the Karabakh region. I think you should restore the page back as it was. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 09:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, the wording "de-jure Azerbaijan" and "de-facto Artsakh" implies that the whole Karabakh region in controlled by Artsakh, which is not true. Karabakh includes territories such as Agdam, Fuzuli, Jabrayil and other districts, that are both de-jure and de-facto Azerbaijan. Hence I insist that the wording should be corrected. --Mastersun25 (talk) 11:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sorry to barge in like this, but is it truly necessary to mention the political status of the Karabakh region, especially in the introduction? This article is more cultural / geographical than anything else, after all... (This is a question to both of you, by the way.) BaxçeyêReş (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of status of the region