Talk:Shupria

message: this is just a region or province of Urartu mentioned a couple of times in Assyrian sources. Should redirect to  Urartu. --dab (𒁳) 15:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

message: The IPs from 75. are socks of the banned user Ararat arev and can be removed with impunity. Dougweller (talk) 10:34, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected 

message: This article seems to be plagued with claims that cite no evidence. Just going down the article from top to bottom, there is no source cited whatsoever that shows "Armani-Subartu" was attested in Akkadian sources from the 3rd millennium B.C. Additionally, there is no source cited demonstrating that it was Hurrian speaking. The term Proto-Armenian is also misleading since it seems to imply that Shupria was inhabited by speakers of the theoretical proto-armenian language for which there is no evidence cited. If proto-armenian is interpreted to mean that the people of Shupria contributed to the ethnogenesis of Armenians then that is more probable, but this should be stated explicitly and backed by a source. This seems to be already done later on so the use of proto-armenian in the first paragraph should be removed. Going further down, again there is no source cited for the attestation of Subartu in 3rd millenium B.C. Also, I don't understand the rationale behind hyphenating Armani and Subartu and treating them as a single entity, because although some of the sources supposedly show historians have related them before (I haven't had a chance to check those sources), I don't believe they establish them as a single entity. The use of "kingdom of Ararat" to refer to Urartu is also fairly questionable since although following trends in the translation of non-semitic names into Akkadian shows that "ar" becomes "ur" in Akkadian (for which i dont have a source right now), the usage of "kingdom of Ararat" seems to imply a relationship with the biblical "ararat" which  I believe was not even attested until well after the fall of Urartu. In order to establish a relationship between urartu and biblical ararat sources must be cited. A citation would be nice for the last sentence too even though i'm pretty sure you can find a source if you follow the wiki link to the esarhaddon article. This article needs to pretty much be rewritten with only claims that are backed by evidence.24.17.216.223 (talk) 19:25
After reading the subartu article I realized this article should just be deleted since everything in this article that is supported by existing evidenced is already expressed and cited in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subartu 24.17.216.223 (talk) 19:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Lack of Evidence 

message: The second part of this sentence (after the second comma) makes no sense to me:
"Some scholars have linked the district in the area called Arme or Armani, to the name Armenia, although the Hurrian language was a language isolate, whereas the far later appearing Armenian language is a Indo-European language."
To me, it makes as much sense as:
"Some scholars have linked the word 'kanata' meaning village or settlement, to the name Canada, although the Iroquoian language was a language isolate, whereas the far later appearing English language is a Indo-European language."
What's the point? Perhaps "Armenia" is not an Indo-European name in origin. Mexico isn't an Indo-European name either, and yet the majority speaks an Indo-European language called "Spanish." Egypt is an Indo-European name, used by the Copts who speak Afro-Asiatic. Even "Hay" or "Hayastan" themselves are probably not even Indo-European in origin, and yet Armenians, who speak an Indo-European language, use that word to describe themselves.
Kentronhayastan (talk) 15:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does the place name have to do with the Armenian language not being Hurrian?