Talk:Hasan-Jalalyan

message: Marshall, do not delete the info about ancestry of Hasan-Jalal. It is verifiable info that should remain in the article. What is your problem with mentioning all the ancestors of this house? And we have unresolved issue about the country where Khachen was located and whether or not 5 meliks of Karabakh were descendants of Hasan-Jalal’s house. Until those issues are resolved, the tags should remain. Grandmaster 06:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored the info about the origins of the dynasty, which was deleted by Marshall and which he failed to discuss here on the talk page. --Grandmaster 07:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sigh ... it's sad to see such sad and desperate blind reverts. Did you actually see what you were reverting? Balk is a territory in Afghanistan, Baghk is an Armenian region in Artsakh and Syunik. As for list of descendants of Dola, I said to you dear friend, create an Article for this individual and include the data there. Also, why are you randomly including paternal heritage? What about maternal? Heritage claiming trace thousands of years is not exactly relevant. He was also of Zakarid extraction, who were originally Kurds. Can I call this dynasty Kurds too? What point are you trying to make? Assume good faith, and create an article about Dola. Hetoum I 18:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I restored the same info, deleted by Hetoum. Grandmaster 09:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of verifiable info by Marshall 

message: I really like this article - well done! Merjanov (talk) 01:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great article! 

message: I want to know more about the alleged real name of Hasan Jalal - Haykaz/Haykazi (Հայկազ?). You may send me a personal message or develop on that topic right here. Merjanov (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Haykaz Vakhtangian?

message: The title inknakal (ինքնակալ) was translated "self-ruling or autonomous leader". That seems to be fault. It must be autocrat or absolute sovereign / ruler / monarch. (source: Ժամանակակից հայոց լեզվի բացատրական բառարան, հատոր Բ, էջ 325։"Ինքնակալ - Միահեծան թագավոր՝ որի իրավունքները չեն սահմանափակված"). Vacio (talk) 09:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hasan-Jala... autonomous leader? 

message: Sorry for the long wait!
*Please move all free images to Commons so other projects can use them (I can help with this if you need)
*"in what is" --> "in what are" (plural)
*Origins of the dynasty section should be ==L2==
*"According to Robert H. Hewsen..." - the following quote is sourced to Thomas de Waal, am I missing something?
*"and prosperity until the appearance of the Mongols" - might want to say when this was, otherwise it doesn't make as much sense as it could
*"The image of Hasan-Jalal on the drum of Gandzasar's dome has him sitting cross-legged, which Eastmond remarks was a "predominant device for depicting power at the Seljuq court."" - is this only one man's opinion, or is there generally some idea attached to one sitting cross-legged?
*"Gandzasar also became home to" - don't start a section with "also"
*"and the document issued by the khan failed to uphold its promises." - probably needs a reference
*"however, died on the way as" - I think "as" should be "and", and should have a comma before it
*External links section goes after refereces
Overall, a very good read. I really enjoyed it - something different! :) Please leave a note on my talk page when done. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Passed. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 00:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Curious why the house is purely Armenian when the last ruler was called Allahverdi II Hasan-Jalalyan, not to mention why the entire dynasty is Hasan. May be Hasan is original Armenian name as well. Seems like related edits evaporated once again. --Brandспойт 12:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Next time before disrupting a good article with ridiculous tags and posting inflammatory and ultra nationalist language in the talk page do try and read the article first. But i'll help you with that task, look up note 21 for the names.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 16:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just read this post of mine, and come back if you need more proofs. --Vacio (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GAN on hold

message: Since this article is supposed to be about both Hasan-Jalal Dawla and his dynasty, it would seem logical that the title of the article should be moved to Melik-Hasan-Jalalyan, just like the other four melik families that controlled the region (e.g., Melik-Beglaryan, Melik-Shahnazaryan, etc.) Does anyone have objections to such a move?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 04:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do. This dynasty emerged in the 13th c. as the senior line of the House of Khachen, while the princes of Karabakh used the title "melik" only in the 16th century. Besides the Hasan-Jalalyans continued to exist as a noble familiy after 1828 when th mdom of Khachen came to an end. Even today there are many peoply both in NK, Am and the Am diaspora who belong to this family. --Vacio (talk) 12:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I concur. They were around long before the title of 'melik' came to be.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 17:25, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move

message: Hello. How is this NPOV? The Hasan-Jalalyan family was able to maintain its autonomy throughout several centuries of foreign domination of the region by Seljuk Turks, Persians and Mongols as they, as well as the other Armenian princes and meliks of Khachen, saw themselves of holding the last bastion of Armenian independence in the region.[3]
I understand its an Armenian topic/subject, but what is written above is simply not a neutral point of view. If an invader is stronger and wants the region, he gets it, simple as that. Mainting autonomy should be changed in something neutral.
Regards
- LouisAragon (talk) 23:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not always as simple as that. Some powers, however strong, feel it more prudent to strike deals or make arrangements with minor potentates, not wanting to waste resources and men in reducing fortified positions if, in exchange for autonomy, they receive taxes and loyalty. History abounds with such examples. Even the Armenians in Greater Armenia were typically left alone by the Persians and Arabs, who preferred that the aforementioned arrangement be made. If you have ever been to this region, you'll see why it is so unalluring and inhospitable for invaders.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV of this article? 

message: Substituted at 20:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment