Talk:Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic/Archive 5

message: To Armenians and Azeris alike who have contributed to this article, I respectfully apologize for my edits on the demographics section, which, ultimately, led to further disputes.  I say that the only mention of Armenians in the demographics section should be that they were forced to emigrate during the Karabakh war, while not specfifying how many exactly lived there.  Here's how I say we should do it:
As of 1990, Nakhichevan's population was estimated to be 350,000. 98% of the population are Azeri. Ethnic Russians constituted the remaining population. The Armenians living in the area were forced out during the Nagorno-Karabakh War.
End of discussion. -- Clevelander 02:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with that. --AdilBaguirov 07:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverting the demographics section

message: I say we cut up the first paragraph and totally remove it from the history section.  These first two sentences should be removed from the history section on the account that nobody has been able to cite a source for them:
The city of Nakhichevan was first mentioned in Ptolemy's "Geography" as Naksuana and was said to be established in 4400 BC.  Naksuana is ancient Greek for "the land of sweet water".
The sentence describing the history of Nakhichevan's name should be used to revise the lead:
The Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic (Azerbaijani: Naxçıvan Muxtar Respublikası, Armenian: Նախիջեվան, Turkish: Nahcivan Özerk Cumhuriyeti, Russian: Нахичеванская Автономная Республика), known simply as Nakhichevan  is an exclave of Azerbaijan.  Since it frequently changed empires, sultanates, and khanates, the name of Nakhichevan was altered many times, changing to: Nakshijahan, Nuhchikhan (the place where Noah landed), Nesheva, Nakhijevan, etc.  As part of the Azerbaijan SSR of the Soviet Union, it was known as the Nakhichevan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic.
The 5,500 km² region borders Armenia (221 km), Turkey (9 km) and Iran (179 km) and consists of 7 rayons: Babak, Julfa, Kangarli, Ordubad, Sadarak, Shahbuz and Sharur.  Its capital is Nakhichevan, home to the Nakhichevan State University.
This last sentence is not really that significant and it isn't big enough to have its own section.  Therefore, I say it should be removed:
Throughout history Nakhichevan land brought up prominent persons such as Hindushah ibn Nakhchivani, Abdurrakhman en Neshevi, Ekmouladdin Nakhchivani, Ajami Nakhchivani, Generals Ehsan, Kelbali, Ismail, Hussein, Jamshid khan Nakhichevanski, Presidents of Azerbaijan Republic Heydar Aliyev and Abulfaz Elchibey and others.
Other than that and a few grammar and disambiguation errors, those are the main revisions that need to be made to the history section. -- Clevelander 02:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot find the reference in Ptolemy either, and neither of the three relevant articles in Great Soviet Encyclopedia has any reference to it. Everything else looks good. --AdilBaguirov 08:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found several references to Naksuana - one is from Encyclopedia of Brokgauz and Efron, from 1897, St. Petersburg, Russia : "Naxcivan ... Naksuana in classical authors writings" (Наксуана у класс. пис), and Biblical dictionary of Gelley, transl. 1996 into Russian (Библейский словарь Геллея.Переведен в 1996г.) ,. --AdilBaguirov 00:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent! We finally have a reference and now we can use the first sentence. -- Clevelander 01:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As for prominent people, normally the articles about regions mention them, we can make a list at the bottom of the article, or leave it like it is, it’s quite important as two presidents of Azerbaijan hailed from this region, why not share this information with readers. Grandmaster 07:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wouldn't mind if there was a seperate listing on the page actually, so maybe we could do that. -- Clevelander 11:31, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree, we can make a list. Grandmaster 11:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reworking the history section

message: If you guys are willing to cooperate and not argue, I'm willing to request unprotection for this article.  There is a lot that I want to do in fixing it up, like including a section on the rayons of Nakhichevan, etc. I also want to do a "historical monuments" section, though I'm not sure we should do that as any mention of old Armenian relics (which have great historical significance) may bring up the khachkars issue and thus bring us into World War III. My point is, if only we could de-emotionalize our contributions, we maybe able to get somewhere. -- Clevelander 02:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The future

message: Adil, your distortions leave them in your website.
Noone of the points I have raised, the relevant materials I have provided have ever been addressed. Grandmaster is just making up things. Urdubad was deserted just before Abbas, he build up a majority which he can not substenciate. Not only does he question the authors and the works I cite, which is original research at best, but he is just making up things which he still has to source.
What I have documented is that Armenians were resettled permanently, Arakel just like the various other sources I have provided document this.
What I have documented is that they were resettled for reasons nothing to do with the Muslim population.
I have provided at least two sources making mention of Nakhochevan as a land which its Armenian population had been resettled under Abbas but does not mention anything about its Muslim population.
Adil either is manipulating or doesn't understand Arakel, Arakel is clear that those are groups which he is including. Also, non-Believers were either Christians or Sunni Muslims, I already covered the crime perpetrated against the Sunni under the pretext of comploting and supporting the Ottoman Empire. Arakel is known for his total ignorence of Islam, Lewis the Islamologist and historian in one of his works depict Armenian historians of the past total ignorance of Islam. Adil is simply innacurate when he suggest who those non-believsr might be.
There is no issue there, Grandmaster now is not only requesting the deletion of any mention which differenciate what happened to the Armenians (which is POV pushing), but now he request to present the Muslims first as if they were the specific target when it was quite the opposit.
We should stick to the relevant materials, and as I have documented, records in relevant scholarly publications only mentions the Armenians when referring to resettlement of population, restricting themselves to the permanency of the policy. Extrapolations, insinuations etc., just doesn't make it. Fad (ix) 15:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fadix, please stop your incessant and baseless attacks, which are all alike and more of the same. Try to argue with facts - we've never seen any facts from you and definitely have not seen any refutation of the simple truth: 1) Julfa had only 20,000 inhabitants in Shah Abbas times; 2) only 1,000 Armenian families (5,000-7,000 people) were living there, and thus were resettled to Iran; and 3) the rest were Muslims, Jews, other Christians such as Georgians, Albans, Greeks, Syriacs, etc. I've requested admins to interfere and put an end to this abomination of yours. --AdilBaguirov 15:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: That source had some interesting info: Intermarriage with Georgians and Circassians, Koords, Arabs, Albanians, Sclavonians, Greeks, and Armenians, has no doubt modified the frightful Mongolian features of the genuine Turk. --Eupator 17:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This woman traveled to Isfahan in 19th century, long after shah Abbas resettlement. She says Their number was then estimated at twelve thousand families, which are supposed to be now reduced to six or eight hundred. Estimated by who? And what happened to those thousands, did they return to Nakhichevan or what? As for Eupator’s quotes, there are even funnier quotes about Armenians, which I’m not going to cite here, because it’s not relevant to the topic. Grandmaster 18:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have provided two records of Abbas period of families resettled. Fad (ix) 19:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  From Nakhichevan? We still have no statistics on the region. Grandmaster 19:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it seems as though you guys have completely ignored my calls for a peaceful discussion above in favor of an argument over POV pushing.  I say we end this new topic right now before it gets any worse. -- Clevelander 20:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. It's too late today, but tomorrow let's work on a new version of the disputed paragraph. Take care. Grandmaster 20:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, so I am the POV pushed, pathetic, falsifier -- all for citing authoritative and even biased (in favor of Armenians) sources! As a note, if we are to accept that woman's estimate that was given to her by Armenians among whom she lived, then 12,000 families becomes at no less than 60,000 Armenians from Julfa if we accept a 5 person average family, or 84,000 Armenians from Julfa if we raise the estimate to 7 person average family. Obviously this is ridiculous - neither had Julfa ever been so big, nor does it correspond to what the Armenian-edited Great Soviet Encyclopedia wrote: 20,000 total population at the beginning of 17th century, right before Shah Abbas' resettlement. I was generous enough to up the estimate of Armenians there from 5,000 to 10,000, and thanks to such anecdotal evidence as presented here by Fadix, it reaffirms that I was correct, or actually, that Arakel was correct in testifying that only 1,000 families of Armenian origin lived there. --AdilBaguirov 22:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Adil, please, I don't want to see this discussion steered into another argument or dispute.  Let's just leave this particular discussion alone.  It's not getting us anywhere and it's a waste of all of our time.  -- Clevelander 22:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fully agree! Thanks, --AdilBaguirov 23:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV pushing has no limit

message: This article only says one side of the destruction of cemeteries and hides the fact that Armenians are destroying cemeteries in Yerevan themselfs, see here
:Baku, we're already discussing this at length above.  In fact, we've discussed it several times. Furthermore, read the article closely and you'll see that nowhere does the author mention that Armenians destroyed khachkars in Nakhichevan, thus making it completely irrelevant to the topic. -- Clevelander 21:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Clevelander, you are talking of different things with Baku87. He said "hides the fact that Armenians are destroying cemeteries in Yerevan themselfs", whilst you reply "nowhere does the author mention that Armenians destroyed khachkars in Nakhichevan" Meanwhile, the HETQ author does say that those destroyed khachkars in Yerevan "The headstones had been brought here from somewhere else". --AdilBaguirov 20:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Once again, so what? Damaged khachkars in Armenia do not help you in any way to whitewash destruction of khachkars in Nakhijevan.--Eupator 20:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also, Mr. Baghdasaryan does not specfically state that they were destroyed in Nakhichevan.  It has no relevance to this article. -- Clevelander 20:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not to mention - these are NOT Khachkars!!!!  --RaffiKojian 03:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I didn't realize it until now, but Raffi is absolutely right.  Nowhere does the article mention that the stones discovered in Yerevan were even khachkars.  In fact, he only mentions the word "khachkars" when speaking of the destruction by Azeris in Nakhichevan.  "Stone fragments with Armenian letters inscribed on them" does not automatically make the Yerevan stones khachkars (actually, examining the photographs, they look a lot different then the ones seen in Nakhichevan prior to the destruction). Also, how do you explain the destruction of whole churches in Nakhichevan? -- Clevelander 12:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cemeteries 

message: I removed image that I saw as POV. I am sure that Azeri people can also post many images in which Armenian soldiers destroying their graves. This is an geographical article, and it is not place for such images. A images showing landscape and places of the region would be more suitable here. PANONIAN (talk) 23:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't call the image "propaganda."  It's a piece of information that illustrates the dispute.  However, I'll concede to this anyway as I can see how it may bring up further disputes in the future.  I'll re-add the old khachkars image in its place. -- Clevelander 23:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This new image is quite nice. Although, I propose that new section about ethnic groups in Nakhichevan could be written and there could be presented both, Azeri and Armenian heritage of the region. PANONIAN (talk) 23:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyway, my point is that the presentation of cultural heritage of different ethnic groups of the region should not be connected with political and territorial disputes of the two countries. I know that it is often used in connection with these disputes, but if we want NPOV article, we should have separate section where we will write about disputes and another section where we will write about Azeri and Armenian cultural heritage. Cultural heritage and political disputes are very different things. PANONIAN (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, that whole story with alleged destruction of gravestones takes way too much space. The issue of cultural heritage destruction by both sides of the conflict can be dealt with in a separate article and accusations against Azerbaijan are already reflected in the article about Julfa, why wasting so much space in this article as well? Grandmaster 11:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I still say that it should be included in this article.  It's still a dispute on Nakhichevan.  I don't like the idea of starting a whole new article as that would create even more problems that we don't need.  I do agree though, that we need to cut the paragraph down a bit. So, I cut it down further more and I think this latest revision will work the best (I removed Charles Tannock's equation of Azerbaijan to the Taliban as well as the name of the U.S. Ambassador to Azerbaijan).  -- Clevelander 11:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me.  I agree, I say that we should place that in there instead of noting the opinion of individual deputies. It's more neutral.  -- Clevelander 12:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A friend of mine is going to visit Nakhichevan this summer so I'll be uploading loads of pictures of Nakhichevan then Baku87 13:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Propaganda image

message: The latest additions on communist history of the area are not accurate. There was actually a referendum held in Nakhichevan, and the people decided to be in Azerbaijan. See: 
In July 1920, the Red Army occupied Nakhichevan and declared it Nakhichevan Soviet Socialist Republic with “close ties” to Azerbaijan SSR. However, in November of that year, a declaration by Azerbaijani Revolutionary Committee, celebrating the “victory of Soviet power in Armenia”, proclaimed that both Nakhichevan and Zangezur should be awarded to the Armenian people as a sign of Azerbaijani people’s support for Armenia’s fight against the former Dashnak government. Lenin, although welcoming this “fraternal act”, did not agree and called for the people of Nakhichevan to be consulted in a referendum. This referendum, held at the beginning of 1921, demonstrated that “nine-tenth” of Nakhichevan population wanted to be included in Azerbaijan “with the rights of an autonomous republic”. Thus, the December 1920 treaty between the RSFSR and Armenia, which recognized Armenian claims to Zangezur, but not Nakhichevan, was upheld. 
Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia: A Legal Appraisal by Tim Potier. ISBN: 9041114777 
Grandmaster 08:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with you including that.  It sounds credible to me and you have references.  I don't think that the information presently included is totally inaccurate, just not complete.  It seems that you found the missing puzzle piece. -- Clevelander 10:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, Grandmaster, could you give me the page number from the Potier book where that paragraph is specfically mentioned? Thanks! -- Clevelander 19:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Isen't it amazing that you guys highlined Karabakh referundum Tartar boycott in every given occasion even though had they voted 100% for its incorporation to Azerbaijan would not made any differences, and now of course the exclusion that the 40% of the population of Nakhichevan prior to the war were Armenians, were totally excluded by such a consultation which may have contrary to the Karabakh cases made a differences demographically speaking? Will help Grandmaster if one day you do provide us your standards rather than limiting ourself on your unpredictable additions which picture simply double standard. Fad (ix) 17:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What is the double standard here? Reporting that such referendum took place? We should present the facts the way they are, we included information about referendum in NK in the relevant article, we do the same here. We don't draw any conclusions here, just state the fact. Grandmaster 18:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK then, let do the same, and state that the 40% of the pre-war population was not consulted. If stating 'facts' is all that matters afteral. Fad (ix) 18:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How do you know that it was not consulted? Cite your sources. Grandmaster 20:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Statistics don't need sources, I don't need sources to claim 1+1 = 2. To claim 90% of total votes when Armenians constituted 40%, it doesn't take a genious to do the math. Fad (ix) 20:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You know the rules. The edits should be based on reliable sources. Grandmaster 20:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So Armenians have voted 70% for the incorporation of Nakhichevan in Azerbaijan then. Fad (ix) 21:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Look, guys, I really don't want to see the Nakhichevan page turn into another huge argument again.  I'm interested in finding out what really happened during the Bolshevik invasion of Nakhichevan.  Fadix, if you have a source that you would like to cite then please present it.  We can then work together and evalute our revisions.  Thusfar, Grandmaster's source explained a little bit more than I knew before, but if you say that the Armenians boycotted the referendum, then I'm interested in seeing your sources.  We shall have a complete and fully-accurate history of Nakhichevan yet! -- Clevelander 00:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest edits