Talk:Armenia/Archive 3

message: Thanks to all of those who supported me in my RfC, Don't worry Armenia is not in Europe, so says 99.9% of every reference book on earth. I am going to go for mediation, wish me luck!----Caligvla 05:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thanks

message: Does anyone prefer this image? Image:LocationArmenia.png
the currnet map makes Armenia look insignificant way off in the corner,
This page is about Armenia and Armenia should be proudly placed in the center of the map.--Hamparzoum 05:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the new map—it doesn't really matter if Armenia is in the center or not, because it's highlighted. Khoikhoi 05:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Something like this 
http://www.metametrics.com/images/armenia.gif would be really cool, 
but it's not very consistent with other articles
but hopefully you get the idea, Armenia should be the center of the world in this article.--Hamparzoum 05:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you claiming that Armenia is in the center of that (probably copyrighted) map? Are you kidding us?--Tekleni 08:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The map stays.--Eupator 13:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did I say to use THAT map, NO! I said to do something like it, where Armenia really pops out.--Hamparzoum 19:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This one is just fine where it is.--Eupator 19:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: Moved from << User talk:Walton monarchist89. - Francis Tyers · 12:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This poll should be moved to Talk:Armenia and conducted in the orthodox manner. - Francis Tyers · 20:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Francis. Never seen that before in my wiki-life! •NikoSilver• 20:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd be prepared to bet my monthly wage that Hamparzoum is a sockpuppet of Caligvla. I mean it seems to be a single purpose account entirley devoted to supporting Caligva's POV, and taking Calivla's place when he is blocked for disruption.--Tekleni 12:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a racetrack. If you've got an legitimate evidence, take it to RfCU. --InShaneee 18:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

text: We are not deadlocked nor is there any "clear feeling" that there should be a change. I count 2 (the other two new user votes are debatable) vs 8, and if I were to inform various users of the ongoing vote as caligvla did (he didn't canvass just said there is a vote to selected users) we would have a few dozen extra votes in support. In addition, the existing version is already a compromise.--Eupator 18:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Debateable" or not, there does appear to be sentiment that there needs to be a changed. I didn't ask your opinion on who was 'right' (you've made that painfully obvious to everyone), I was asking any 'oppose' voters if they have any suggestions on wording that everyone could agree on. --InShaneee 20:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't appear to be so at all. Where you got that notion, I couldn't begin to assume. The Oppose header clearly states:Leave this sentence Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe where it is. When you vote for oppose, you are not voting against the other sentence you are voting against any changes. As for the debatable votes, i'm sure you know very well that single purpose account's of new users cannot vote. --Eupator 20:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am aware of this, but the fact is that this poll shows that not everyone is happy with that sentence, thus some sort of change remains the best way to get everyone back on the same page. Since CLEARLY you're not happy with the current proposal, I thought one of the oppose voters might want to suggest something else that the 'support' voters might be able to get on board with. --InShaneee 20:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you ever seen a poll conducted here with a unanimous result? Of course the initiator of the problem is not going to vote for opposed nor would the two suspicious new users. So there is one actual user(Augustgrahl), and even he isn't exactly onboard with that suggestion. The only thing that will satisfy caligvla is the removal of this sentence. I can't see how that is ever going to happen therefore I don't see how I could offer a suggestion to satisfy caligula's demands. But hey, lets see what others say, if they say something at all.--Eupator 21:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Calm down, and don't make accusations. No, not every poll ends unanimously, but that doesn't mean you should just take an "I'm right, you're wrong" stance and ignore/belittle the opposition. The suggested new wording is what's called a 'compromise'; it's where each side steps down just a little to something that both can live with. I ask again, any 'oppose' voters want to suggest a better phrasing to help end this? --InShaneee 21:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm calm as a quiet sea on a sunny day, i'm not the one making accusations or shouting for that matter. As far as i'm concerned a "compromise" is not a requirement nor is there anything here that can warrant a call for compromise, not to mention that not all raised disputes are closed with a compromise. Like I said lets see if any of the oppose voters disagree with me here. --Eupator 21:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's precisely the problem; you don't see the need to make compromises when you can just dub someone 'right' and everyone else 'socks'. You could always...you know...give it a try this once. --InShaneee 21:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that a fact? Enough with the accusations already...--Eupator 21:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, that was a fact. --InShaneee 21:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Call it what you will, it still is nothing more than a personal attack.--Eupator 21:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's an explanation of why these 'discussions' always devolve into chaos. --InShaneee 04:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting that nobody seems to share your opinion.--Eupator 15:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oddly enough, it's still correct. --InShaneee 19:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You saying it's correct doesn't make it so. It's not a dictatorship.--Eupator 19:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nor does you throwing out attacks like that make it untrue. --InShaneee 21:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tohmahto, pohtatho...--Eupator 21:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Straw poll-Armenia

message: *Support:I have support, for this statement.--Hamparzoum 00:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: *Neutral for now. I've not seen good enough sources (though they may exist) that we need to change the status quo. - Francis Tyers · 12:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutral

message: *Strong Oppose The proposed change is very ambiguous while the current version is very clear and concise as well as neutral. The transcontinental portion already covers the "crossroads" issue in a much less ambiguous manner.--Eupator 15:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose

message: :This poll should be moved to Talk:Armenia and conducted in the orthodox manner. - Francis Tyers · 20:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Francis. Never seen that before in my wiki-life! •NikoSilver• 20:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd be prepared to bet my monthly wage that Hamparzoum is a sockpuppet of Caligvla. I mean it seems to be a single purpose account entirley devoted to supporting Caligva's POV, and taking Calivla's place when he is blocked for disruption.--Tekleni 12:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a racetrack. If you've got an legitimate evidence, take it to RfCU. --InShaneee 18:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

text: We are not deadlocked nor is there any "clear feeling" that there should be a change. I count 2 (the other two new user votes are debatable) vs 8, and if I were to inform various users of the ongoing vote as caligvla did (he didn't canvass just said there is a vote to selected users) we would have a few dozen extra votes in support. In addition, the existing version is already a compromise.--Eupator 18:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Debateable" or not, there does appear to be sentiment that there needs to be a changed. I didn't ask your opinion on who was 'right' (you've made that painfully obvious to everyone), I was asking any 'oppose' voters if they have any suggestions on wording that everyone could agree on. --InShaneee 20:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't appear to be so at all. Where you got that notion, I couldn't begin to assume. The Oppose header clearly states:Leave this sentence Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe where it is. When you vote for oppose, you are not voting against the other sentence you are voting against any changes. As for the debatable votes, i'm sure you know very well that single purpose account's of new users cannot vote. --Eupator 20:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am aware of this, but the fact is that this poll shows that not everyone is happy with that sentence, thus some sort of change remains the best way to get everyone back on the same page. Since CLEARLY you're not happy with the current proposal, I thought one of the oppose voters might want to suggest something else that the 'support' voters might be able to get on board with. --InShaneee 20:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you ever seen a poll conducted here with a unanimous result? Of course the initiator of the problem is not going to vote for opposed nor would the two suspicious new users. So there is one actual user(Augustgrahl), and even he isn't exactly onboard with that suggestion. The only thing that will satisfy caligvla is the removal of this sentence. I can't see how that is ever going to happen therefore I don't see how I could offer a suggestion to satisfy caligula's demands. But hey, lets see what others say, if they say something at all.--Eupator 21:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Calm down, and don't make accusations. No, not every poll ends unanimously, but that doesn't mean you should just take an "I'm right, you're wrong" stance and ignore/belittle the opposition. The suggested new wording is what's called a 'compromise'; it's where each side steps down just a little to something that both can live with. I ask again, any 'oppose' voters want to suggest a better phrasing to help end this? --InShaneee 21:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm calm as a quiet sea on a sunny day, i'm not the one making accusations or shouting for that matter. As far as i'm concerned a "compromise" is not a requirement nor is there anything here that can warrant a call for compromise, not to mention that not all raised disputes are closed with a compromise. Like I said lets see if any of the oppose voters disagree with me here. --Eupator 21:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's precisely the problem; you don't see the need to make compromises when you can just dub someone 'right' and everyone else 'socks'. You could always...you know...give it a try this once. --InShaneee 21:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that a fact? Enough with the accusations already...--Eupator 21:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, that was a fact. --InShaneee 21:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Call it what you will, it still is nothing more than a personal attack.--Eupator 21:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's an explanation of why these 'discussions' always devolve into chaos. --InShaneee 04:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting that nobody seems to share your opinion.--Eupator 15:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oddly enough, it's still correct. --InShaneee 19:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You saying it's correct doesn't make it so. It's not a dictatorship.--Eupator 19:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nor does you throwing out attacks like that make it untrue. --InShaneee 21:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tohmahto, pohtatho...--Eupator 21:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional Comments

message: I would like to point out that I have adjusted the disputed sentences in such a way as to (I hope) satisfy all parties. Remember, the "border" between Europe and Asia is wholly arbitrary, and my version makes that point explicitly. DS 16:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me.--Eupator 16:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: NO! The geographic and cultural borders of Europe have been clear for 1000s of years, to call the border arbitrary is original research.--Caligvla 17:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How have they been clear for thousands of years?--Tekleni 17:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How can the borders have been clear for thousands of years when thousands of years ago nobody had a precise knowledge of the landmasses of the globe? Can you provide a source that has clear, undisputed, universally agreed-upon borders between Europe and Asia? -- Augustgrahl 17:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (edit conflict)Calling the borders "clear for 1000s of years", as you have done, Caligvla, is too a violation of OR|riginal research policy, should you fail to provide a source. Martinp23 17:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is just Caligvla's POV pushing nonsense (the true "nonsense" around here). There is no universal agreement on continents even today (their definition can vary from country to country).--Tekleni 17:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you please give any source that defines the border of Europe such a way that Armenia cames out to be situated in Europe?--Nixer 18:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an arbitrary boundary. Here's an example:Where is the border between Europe and Asia? The artificial boundary between the continents of Europe and Asia lies along the Ural Mountains south to the Ural River and the Caspian Sea and the along the Caucasus Mountains to the Black Sea. Europe and Asia are physically one great landmass commonly called Eurasia.--Eupator 18:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Another interesting link:http://www.insideeurope.org--Eupator 18:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if it is arbitrary, there is not source that puts Armenia (or India, or Afghanistan) in Europe. Most souces draw the line along Caucasus. I do not know other ways used to define borders of Europe in the region. If you know - please give souces. Is there any source defining the border such way that puts Armenia in Europe?--Nixer 18:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well yes. COE, EU and all member states, BBC, the Canadian government, the Armenian gov obviously etc. --Eupator 18:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? How they define the borders of Europe?--Nixer 18:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With Armenia in it.--Eupator 18:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where the border between Europe and Asia lies in this version? Or is Armenia an exclave?--Nixer 19:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not an exlave because Georgia is within Europe as well. --Eupator 20:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Georgia is only partially in Europe. Or according your definition all Christian states in the Middle East are entirely European and the border between Europe and Asia lies exactly along the state border?--Nixer 08:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I urge everyone to read this (including nixer and caligvla):http://www.libertas-institut.com This covers absolutely evrything!--Eupator 18:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny paper. The author says that restricting EU membership to only European countries is racism. No comments :-) --Nixer 19:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no such thing in there. It said restricting EU membership to "core" European countries is quasi racism. By core the author meant Western Europe obviously, read carefully. That's obviously history now since the accession of Cyprus and soon Romania and Bulgaria.--Eupator 19:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I know that Wikipedia isn't a forum, but would you class Azerbaijan as European? It fits many of the criteria you list above. If not, where do you draw the line? - Francis Tyers · 00:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not all of them, and those aren't my criteria. My criteria are very very different and I rather not share my pov.--Eupator 03:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: As I have pointed out, all the countries of the Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) can be considered European. -- 00:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with you. To be honest I don't really cut much ice with any kind of exclusion.  - Francis Tyers · 00:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Not true about Russia. Yes, it was considered something barbaric (before Ivan the Great), just as Germany was considered barbaric in the past, but never considered Asiatic.--Nixer 08:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * You might want to reread your Russian history. —ExplorerCDT 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: *:Which page?--Nixer 16:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: This is only one of multiple reasons for why Armenia is considered to be a European country; I gave a whole list of scholarly sources placing Armenia partially or wholly in Europe. -- Augustgrahl 04:27, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The debate has not been that simple. There is a full archive if you're interested in seeing the arguments that have been put forth. -- Augustgrahl 05:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * I know the arguments, it's on you're approaching this with a blatant POV.  I have no stake, and thus no bias. —ExplorerCDT 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * I know a Chinese guy named "Shmuel" that doesn't make him Jewish though. —ExplorerCDT 20:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * The only chief european part of the culture is in the religious constitution of Armenian culture with its orthodox/catholic influences, as with its connection to greek.  Everything else is basically turkic. —ExplorerCDT 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dare you to name one turkic element in Armenian culture. Unlike Albania, Russia, Bulgaria etc. Armenia has no turkic elements at all. Zero.--Eupator 17:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * If that's the case, since Armenia's more turkic than european, it must have a negative integer value of European elements. —ExplorerCDT 20:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? Please be serious.--Eupator 21:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: *I don't know about Armenians, but Greeks certainly have Turkic elements in their culture, e.g. Karagiozis. Now if I've understood the position of Nixer and CDThieme correctly, that makes them Asian.--Tekleni 21:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that does not make them Asian. Culture itself cannot make somebody European or Asian. You pointed that Armenia has European culture and I dispelled this thesis.--Nixer 06:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How exactly did you "dispell this thesis"? You brought claims, not facts. There's a difference.--Tekleni 10:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continental dispute 

message: Eupator and CO. have the POV pushing issue, if the Armenian Govt. is perfectly fine with defining Armenia as contained within Asia Minor. See http://www.gov.am/enversion/links.htm & http://www.armeniainfo.am/about/?section=people
And yes the 2nd link may well be publically traded but content is still controled by the govt. Armenia is still a developing nation and still in the transition process from an controled economy. So, what is the big stink about?
*Could it be that Armenia is at conflict with ALL their neighbors. 
*Could it be that possible membership in the EU would have great economic benefits? 
*Could the desire to be European, be an intentional backhanded insult to other Asians? 
*Could it be that the Middle East is not that trendy of a vacation spot and sharing a border with Iran hurts tourism? 
If you want to pretend to be Europeans, great! It's a better way of life, and I am sure it will work to your benefit.
But it still doesn't put Armenia geographicly in Europe and if you are geoographicaly in Asia Minor you are part of the Asian family of cultures. For generations, part of Nagasaki Japan has a Dutch speaking community with Dutch style homes, and people wear Dutch clothes and eat Dutch foods, They have windmills and if you saw a photo you would swear it was in the Neitherlands. But it's not is it? You are still in Asia!
This Article is not the place to push a political agenda, or a racist POV, it should contain factual information and avoid controversy. There is a reason why this site http://www.armeniainfo.am/about/?section=people
doesn't say Armenians are Europeans, because it's nonsence.--Caligvla 22:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Armenia is not a developing nation according to official classification (all former Soviet republics were declared developed, but this classification used rarely at present).--Nixer 08:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Empty anti-Armenian rhetoric. Yes, racist pov is wrong as you say, help us get rid of it by ceasing to spam. What does your unsourced, unreferenced and baseless orignal research have to do with anything? And for the last time, the government has nothing to do with that company.--Eupator 23:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My God, where to begin. Armenia is not in conflict with all of its neighbors, cordial relations with Georgia and Iran are vital to the economy of the country. How does sharing a border with Iran hurt tourism? If anything, I'd think the fact that Armenia and Azerbaijan have yet to agree upon peace terms to be the biggest factor affecting tourism to Armenia. The sites you provide neither say that Armenia is entirely in Asia nor that Armenians are Asians. You keep talking about how the notion of Armenians being Europeans insults you, Europeans, and Asians. Could you not consider the idea that your attempts to disown the Armenians as Europeans can be seen as hurtful and racist by them? Saying that we are "pretending" to be Europeans is nothing less than a personal attack on the Armenian editors here, and saying that's it's better to be a European is also racist. -- Augustgrahl 22:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Cold Truth

message: I keep seeing Nixer speaking of Asian culture; what the heck is "Asian culture"? Asia is not like Europe, Europe is far more smaller and homogenous than Asia. With a few exceptions, Christianity is the main religion in Europe and this has had significant influence in shaping the people and culture. As for Nixer equating "Asia" with "barbaric", LOL. I'd bet that the medieval Arabs and Chinese were more civilized (from our point of view) than e.g. the medieval Danes. In searching for a definition of this "Asian culture", I tried to find what cultural elements Arabs and Chinese have in common. Would Nixer care to enlighten me?--Tekleni 09:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did you find me equating "barbaric" and "Asian"? Just the opposite: I pointed that Garmany for example was barbaric at some stage of its history, but not Asian. Just the same Russia. It was ExplorerCDT who equated the two (different in my opinion) terms.--Nixer 09:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes. Armenia co-existed long with great kingdoms of Ancient East and interfered with them. Armenian language consists many Persian borrowings, especially related to government and politics. The Bible also consists some ancient legends related to Armenia. Christianity cannot be counted as European influence because when Armenia adopted it there were no country in Europe to confess Christianity. Just the opposite: at that time Christianity could be considered only as Asian influence in Europe.--Nixer 11:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So Persian loanwords are that which make Armenia Asian. I guess England is also in Asia, see list of English words of Persian origin.--Tekleni 11:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of these words related to Persian culture and unique Persian and Indian features. In Armenia these words became generic for the language and constitute the major layer of the language, playing the same role as Greek and Latin words in European languages.--Nixer 11:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's incorrect Nixer. You need do your research better. The loanwords first of all are not Persian, they are Iranic mostly Parthian and Scythian. Many Russians themselves today claim Scythian therefore Iranian descent! Again, the combined Greco-Roman loanwords wouldn't be much less (for example most religious words in Armenian are of Greek origin such as the word for Church which is yekeghetsi derived form the Greek ekklesin). Also 90% of those Iranic words are only available in Armenian and no other language on earth including any of the surviving Iranian languages. Now, that means absolutely nothing. Magyar is an Asian langauge entirely. So is Maltese. Russian alone has just as many Tatar and other Turkic loanwords. At least all those loanwords in Armenian are of IE origin.--Eupator 15:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you correct, it's Iranian, not specifically Persian borrowings (although Parthia is an old name for Persia). Russian language being Slavic in no way related to the Iranian branch other than that both descending from PIE. There are very little Iranian borrowings in Russian. In fact that many Armenian borrowed words have unclear origin. They were borrowed from non-Indo-European languages. Magyar, Komi and Finnish belong to Finno-Ugric family, which cannot be said to be Asian because the majority of speakers live in Europe, but I agree the origin of the language says little about the contemporary culture of the country. What says much more is the borrowings which reflect the cultural impact in historic perspective.--Nixer 16:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Parthia and Persia are two very different things, but that's bdesides the point. Russian is closer to Iranian languages than say German or Italian. There aren't many iranic loanwords in Russian but there are many many Turkic loanwords in Russian and very few of those loanwords are a result of the Mongol-Tatar yoke but they are part of Russian ethnogenesis. We are not talking about Finnic, we are talking about Ugric, Ugric languages are completely native to East Asia while Finnic is both antive to Europe and Asia.--Eupator 18:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. How do you determine that Russian is closer to Iranian than German or Italian? :-) And there are very few turkic words in Russian in fact.--Nixer 06:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Guys, loan words are totally irrelevant to this discussion.  Contact waxes and wanes, influence rises and falls, common identification grows and dies.  The vocabulary of modern English is largely French, and while the Normans influenced and changed English culture a great deal, England is not French. English is still a Germanic language (loan words can't change that) but here's the kicker: England isn't German either.  England is English.  Armenia is Armenian.  Is Armenia European?  I dunno, but its loan words aren't going to give you the answer. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 14:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: See WP:OR.--Tekleni 11:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See --Nixer 11:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's your point?--Tekleni 11:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Armenian language is a separate Indo-European tongue sharing some phonetic and grammatical features with other Caucasian languages, such as Georgian. The Iranian languages contributed many loanwords related to cultural subjects; the majority of the Armenian word stock shows no connection with other existing languages, however, and some experts believe it derives from extinct non-Indo-European languages.--Nixer 11:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So?--Tekleni 11:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See above.--Nixer 11:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, very interesting question. This is not neutral opinion, dont you agree? Of course this opinion may be mentioned in Wikipedia (if well sourced). As I already said Russian living in Moscow will say he is in Europe. Russian, living in Novosibirsk will say he is in Asia. And what will say Armenian in Yerevan?--Nixer 17:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's easy. Why don't you go to Yerevan and take a survey?--Eupator 18:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet, but the rose itself doesn't get to chose its own identity.  Armenians can't fiat their European-ness by saying they're European. No matter how hard they concentrate on their ruby slippers. —ExplorerCDT 20:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: So Caligula, based on that definition you agree that a Frenchman of Nigerian descent is European? :)--Eupator 21:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In first meaning - yes, in second meaning - no.--Nixer 06:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Eupator, this is not about race, I also find it odd you like to bring up Nigerians a lot...  --MCMLXXI 08:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Armenia is on the cultural boundary of European and Near Eastern ( as opposed to generically "Asian") culture. Geographically it is situated in Asia Minor (SW Asia). I really fail to see how pages of discussion can go into such obvious points. dab (ᛏ) 21:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as there are xenophobes who can’t stand the thought of Armenians being connected to Europe, they will do everything in their power to push it the Armenians away, despite public consensus or any former decisions.The Myotis 23:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody says Armenia is not somewhat connected to Europe (just as most countries in the world). The issue is whether Armenia is European which is not true.--Nixer 12:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've said before, there are two POVs on the issue and therefore both get represented in the article (as is done at present, with including both  and  and saying Armenia is in Eurasia rather than Europe or Asia). You remember the statement of the Armenian Foreign Minister cited above: "Armenia is in Europe; this is a fact"?--Tekleni 12:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are two opinions: that Armenia is both in Europe and in Asia and that Armenia is wholy in Asia. The second (the only correct) opinion is not represented. The minister's words are influenced with contemporary politics and intention on European integration rather than actual situation, geography and history.--Nixer 12:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: May I ask something? Is Armenia a member state of the Council of Europe?--Yannismarou 15:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. The Council of Europe (as well as European Union) is already trans-continental organization. The terrnitory of Council of Europe's member states belonging to Asia is greather than that lies in Europe.--Nixer 18:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which goes to prove that there is no Europe or Asia as a static concept and that the border between Europe and Asia is only political and cultural.--Eupator 19:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not prove anything. Council of Europe is only one of regional organizations and accepts not only European countries. Membeship in an international organization does not make a country Asian or European.--Nixer 20:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't happen to have a source for that do you? Membership is only open to European countries.--Eupator 20:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cyprus being Asian is also a member. And Greenland was a member in the past. Anyway the Council can allow exceptions from the rule such as in case of Armenia and Cyprus.--Nixer 20:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no wording in any official document that Cyprus, Armenia or Georgia are exceptions. Not one! That's your assumption based on your pov.--Eupator 21:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asian culture? 

message: Don't you think this is starting to get insulting to Armenia? It seems that many here feel that the most important thing about Armenia is that it's "European". Armenia is ARMENIAN first! The Armenian cutlure is very special and unique to the world and one of the world's greatest jewels. We should say that Armenian, politics, culture, language, and people are unique not European. Europeans are not the ultimate people, Armenians are! I am very tired of this. Our culture took the best of ALL our neighbors past and present and made something better.--Hamparzoum 16:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOFEEDING--Eupator 16:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone had been overfed it's those who are trying to "white-wash" our culture. The winds of time have made us stronger, better, and inriched our culture. To show open shame for part of us doesn't serve our culture. It's it clear that this debate has nothing to do with Armenian's location but has everything to do with a small minority that can't stand who they really are. I am proud of who I am, all of me!--Hamparzoum 17:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good for you :)--Eupator 17:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What about Armenia

message: The article is heavily biased and lacks NPOV. There is no mention of Khojaly genocide took place the night from February 25 to 26, 1992. It is very important for countries to acknowledge the facts and only the facts for historical events.Srhlg
:The Khojaly Massacre has its own article. If you want to read about it you can go there. There's no reason to include an extremely specific event in a very broad overview of Armenia when the overall impact it had on Armenian history was limited. -- Augustgrahl 17:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not an article about the Nagorno-Karabakh war, and the rivalry between Armenia and Azerbaijan constitutes about ten out of three thousand years of Armenian history. Saying that the article should focus on negative things that were done by Armenians is simply pushing a POV, however you look at it. -- Augustgrahl 18:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Srhlg, the war is mentioned. Anything more than that would be silly. I mean even the Azerbaijan article doesn't mention it and for Armenia it's a very insignificant event unlike Azerbaijan. Both main articles mention the war, not every single battle or massacre during the war. It's like saying why doesn't Azerbaijan article link to the Maraghar Massacre--Eupator 18:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It's a minor event during war overshadowed my many other parts of the war, 90% of the population of Armenia or in the diaspora is unaware of its existence at all. The most famous event was the Battle of Shushi and even that is not very well known. Bottom line is that other than the fact that a war occured no other information is necessary to be included.--Eupator 21:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: There was nothing minor about the Khojaly massacre, it was a terrible war crime. However, the impact of the massacre was minor on Armenian history as a whole. There are only a few lines about the Nagorno-Karabakh war in both the articles for Armenia and Azerbaijan. Mentioning the massacre is giving undue weight to the event in the larger scope of things, and if we're going to mention the crimes committed by Armenians, why not also the terrible things done by Azeris? All of this can be saved for the article on the Nagorno-Karabakh war. -- Augustgrahl 21:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think people in general are ignorant about the Nagorno-Karabakh war, and it's sad that such a tragic and devestating conflict which still threatens stability in the region goes relatively unknown. But, as I said, a more specific analysis of the war should be left to the article on the topic. -- Augustgrahl 22:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me put this into perspective Srhlg.  The Armenian Genocide, which completely changed the history of Turkey AND Armenia, continues to cause a freeze in relations, and is a major taboo in Turkey, plus affected all of Anatolia and is not mentioned on the Turkey page, and you think that Khojali (one village) must go on the Armenia page?  I mean, I haven't thought about it one way or the other, but I do think I'd like to see you focus your efforts on getting the Armenian Genocide mentioned on the Turkey page, then bring up this possibility.  --RaffiKojian 17:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Khojaly genocide