Talk:Armenian nationalism

message: There are so many serious problems with this entry that I am astonished that there have been no contributions to this talk page. Meowy 21:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed almost all of the entry. Meowy 21:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that all the garbage has been removed maybe some editors can add proper material, such as contribution of named Armenian writers, poets, politicians, etc, emergence of political movements and parties, religious factors, influences of Western political thought and revolutions, etc. Meowy 21:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored the "garbage" you removed. If you have concerns, try to explain yourself instead of blanking articles. --dab (𒁳) 06:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I have explained. It is full of propaganda, off-topic material, POV material, and material which is a word for word copy of content already on the entry for Armenian national movement. Meowy 01:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I fail to see any propaganda here, least of all Turkish. It is debatable whether there was any concept of nationhood, anywhere, prior to the 19th century, see nationalism. --dab (𒁳) 10:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Just because you don't see it, it does not mean it is not there. I suggest you read up more on this specific subject (should take you about 5 years, minimum). Because you have failed to make any response to my comment on the misuse of "irredentism" I will remove that section from the article, as well as restoring the required "in the modern period".   Meowy 23:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also note that you failed to respond to my observation that some of the material on this entry is a word for word copy of content already on the entry for Armenian national movement. I hope to return at a later date and dissect the contents of the entry sentence by sentence, explaining what I think should be removed or rewritten. If you disagree, then you (or another editor) can present an argument against that removal/rewrite. Or if you agree, you can say so. From that, a final form for this entry can probably be agreed on. BTW, if you want to have a reasoned conversation here, please don't make insulting comments on users' talk pages. Meowy 00:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

text: If it is a subtopic of THIS article, then why has it ANOTHER article all to itself? It is you who have failed to present any argument for your reverts (other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT). Address my comment on the meaning of the word "irredentism" and prove your assertion that, quote, "ethnic nationalism is an entirely modern phenomenon". Meowy 19:53, 5 October 2007 
(UTC)
I removed the first paragraph (even if it was sourced I would do so) because it implied that Armenian nationalists claim territories from Tigran's empire. Which is hogwash. I've never seen even the most uber hardcore nationalists do that. Territories that are usually claimed are Greater Armenia, Little Armenia (including Sophene) and sometimes Commagene and Cilicia. - Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 16:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: And, of course, it isn't sourced. Until it is, we should assume that it is just the personal opinion of (𒁳). 
If you look back at the earliest version of this entry, that paragraph is essentially the same, and is without a source. That is why I was so surprised that there had been no content in this talk page, given that so much of the article's content was controversial and unsupported. Meowy 16:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the "claim" that Eupator talks about is mostly a claim to recognise what Armenians see as the historical Armenian identity of those regions - it is not a serious claim that they should be incorporated into Armenia! Meowy 16:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The problem is a statement like "there is no pre-modern Armenian nationalism". That statement is plain wrong. But I don't need to explain my opinion further because you are not giving any reasons to support your statement beyond the circular "I think ethnic nationalism is an entirely modern phenomenon so there cannot be a pre-modern Armenian nationalism". Meowy 16:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Armenian nationalism

message: How national liberation movement is not nationalism? What is next national liberation was a terrorist organization? Besides it is cited information. --Anglepush (talk) 19:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, national liberation movement is surely not a nationalism, so pls do not add unrelevant info here. add only that info which is directly connected to Armenian nationalism and at least once is using this term. This article already contains some POV which should be cleared up. see the discussions above. Andranikpasha (talk) 19:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is your source for the claims that "national liberation movement" is not a source Armenian nationalism. It surely sounds like like your POV. How could you claim the OBVIOUS: "National liberation==Nationalism", is intact unrelated concepts. --Anglepush (talk) 19:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Armenian nationalism is not a composed from single element (national movement). National liberation movement was a part of this "nationalism" during 19th and first part of 20th century. These concepts are not same. Merging is not validated. The source I have given, which you removed, is a well received Armenian source for the history of "Armenian Nationalism." It is YOU which deny established source, or from my perspective the obvious connection. You have to present why this well established point should be removed. If you can not brought better citation, please stop this reverting the cited information. Anglepush (talk) 19:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: In "Looking Toward Ararat" the most important determinant of the Nationalism of Armenians was claimed to be the unity of the Armenia (unity of Armenian homeland and the "Armenian national movement" is the activities toward this unity). The goal of unification ensured that Armenian political movements would have little in common with other political movements between 1880-1914. The meaning behind "Looking Toward Ararat" is the Armenian unity. That is the national goal during this period. You need to reverse back that section you deleted. If you do not like "21th century", you can use "Recent" which eliminates the time boundary. But you have not presented any citation which will disprove my position. Anglepush (talk) 20:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: You are just arguing to argue. We are talking about nationalism, not opera or gymnastics. You are removing a period which Armenian's, who claimed that they were nationals, are acted on their patriotic feelings. These activities are called as "national liberation movement." The level of this conversation is very low. You need to fix your act. You are objecting the obvious. If you have a source that claims "Armenian national movement" is not "Armenian Nationalism," please present. Otherwise stop this behavior. The level of your discussion is beyond "Good Faith". Anglepush (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I love the "Ottoman-thought-process" displayed by Anglepush. Back when the Armenian Genocide was at its height, the Ottoman Empire produced a propaganda book titled "Armenian Aspirations and Revolutionary Movements" to try and justify the public face of the genocide, the "deportations". It is full of images that the Turks were presenting as hard proof of Armenian disloyalty and rebellion. On one page you will find a photo of piles of confiscated rifles, a couple of pages along is a photo of a relief carving in wood of Haig found in an Armenian school and confiscated. In otherwords, the Turks considered the possession of even the smallest, most innocent and harmless expression of Armenian ethnicity equal in seriousness to the possession of a cache of weapons. Like those Turks back in 1915, Anglepush seems to view any expression of ethnicity by an Armenian as an act of terrorism. Meowy 03:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  National liberation movement 

message: Meowy, as you see after I deleted the POV tag we face up here even more problems than previously. Surely we need a description to understand what about this article and should we keep here everything related to Armenia from the Armenian revolts to historian Kavoukjian and anything else, or not. I cant find a  description for "Armenian nationalism", so I'll be grateful if any other user including the authors (f.e. dab) represent any for discussion. otherwise it is a question if the topic is notable ... Andranikpasha (talk) 21:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course the topic is notable! In a way, the fact that there is some discussion about the content proves it is notable. The problem about not having a good definition for the title of the entry shouldn't be seen as too big a problem, in fact we could just ignore it for now. Get the content there, work on the entry's title later (since it can always be changed). As a rough guide I'm just going by what I said earlier: the entry should be about "the public and collective expression of Armenian ethnicity" (and responses made as a result that expression). It shouldn't cover the same ground as "National liberation movement" because that is a different topic. The latter was ultimately concerned with the creation (or rather re-creation) of Armenia as a nation-state. Meowy 02:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I have just noticed this page Armenian_national_awakening_in_the_Ottoman_Empire - it seems to be close to the content of this entry, and that of Armenian_national_movement. I think that three similar entries are one two many and something should be merged. Main difference is that this entry is not specific to the Ottoman empire and it does not take the POV approach that the only form and purpose of armenian nationalism is the striving for an independent Armenia. Thoughts? Meowy 21:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description 

message: In most of the planet, Nationalism is not a dirty word -- although its excesses are.  The problem here is that we have an English language medium dominated by Americans and by the British along with their Commonwealth descendants who view nationalism, particularly those forms that are locked in a hostile relationship (for whatever reason) with one of their allies, as a problem.  The truth of the matter is that the US, the UK, Australia etc., are some of the biggest practitioners of ideologies of exclusion -- whether cultural or racial.  English-speaking citizens of countries that are broadly part of the West should be aware that their own POV is utterly unacceptable to Armenians, Kurds, Russians, Indians, Arabs and others who have been victims of their own imperialism or that of their allies.  In other words, butt-out please, if you are an American, you have no ground by which you can come here and do a supposedly "neutral" edit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.12.203.97 (talk) 00:21, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What upsidedown worldview do you have? The reverse of your claim is true, the US, the UK, Australia etc., are some of the biggest practitioners of ideologies of inclusion whether cultural or racial. Hence the disproval of the word "nationalism" amongst their political elites. In contrast, Armenia is actually one of the most exclusionary countries in the world - and its politicians, priests, and oligarchs are constantly lecturing about what a good Armenian should be doing for the nation.  Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:29, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglo-American Bias 

message: "Armenian Genocide carried out by Ottoman Turks and Kurds in April 1915..."
The usage of the term 'Kurds' in this context implies a collective Kurdish participation in the genocide, as opposed to the widely accepted view which considers only separate, isolated segments of the ethnic Kurdish population comprised of bandits and released criminals to have been involved. Apart from it being incorrect and way off the mark for an encyclopedia, the deceitful usage of this term is insulting to say the least. Therefore I have removed it from the page and replaced it with "Kurdish bandits and released criminals" instead.
Frankly, the purpose of the term's usage in this manner is unclear to me. I demand an explanation from the user accountable for the placement of that term as to what his/her intentions were. 82.171.125.22 (talk) 19:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kurds 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Armenian nationalism. 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/20110423130744/http://archive.hetq.am:80/eng/society/h-0203-vharutiunyan.html to http://archive.hetq.am/eng/society/h-0203-vharutiunyan.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926224041/http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=11091 to http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=11091
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:55, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified