Talk:Shusha massacre/Archive 1

message: This article is WP:POV, WP:OR, and WP:SOAP, created with a purpose of attacking Azerbaijan by a new user whose only contribution was this page. The user is most likely a sock, otherwise, how would a user established on August 26th, create a Wiki article in 1 day, and then even nominate it for DYK . The material is largely unverifiable and unsourced, and references provided are information from a single side of conflict. So the insertion of POV and OR tag is relevant here.
The official name of the city is Shusha, that's the name which was accepted to this former capital of Karabakh khanate. Shushi is Armenian version of the name, which was applied after the occupation of the town by Armenian troops in 1992. Atabek 05:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "new fella" hasn't edited anything other than this one article , full of original research and unsourced claims. Atabek 07:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: Can someone move it to Shushi massacres please. --Hu1lee 17:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I move it as the article calls Shushi massacres. Its seems to be good work with proved sources. By the way In my opinion the last chapter dedicated to the Sumgait pogrom is better to be moved to "Sumgait" page. Lets discuss it! Andranikpasha 20:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

text: You can see there 8 (!) reliable sources six of which are non-Armenian authors included an official speech in the House of Lords, UK, also an Implementation of the Helsinki Accords by United States Congress. Is it not enough for you? Andranikpasha 10:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name 

message: I have seen andranik provide ample sources by non-Armenians, and according to grandmaster, every source Andranik has provided is pro-Armenian. Seems quite dubious.Hetoum I 06:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is good 

message: This article is a collective work! It hasnt one author but some. Hu1lee created another one (a text with the name "Shushi pogroms" which differs from this, significally contributed by me and some other users). The most important is that this name - "Shushi Massacres" is also created by me, and I used some parts of old "Shushi pogroms" article as anyways the facts and sources represented there are available and easy to check out (also mark, I do it as Hu1lee wasnt blocked in that time)! Andranikpasha 12:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see  Also please note criterion # 5 here:  Grandmaster 12:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Created by 

message: Good then, since the article is to be kept, then WP:NPOV shall be observed. Provided this requirement for editing of the articles, I don't see how appearance of reference to nkrusa.org (website on unrecognized separatist "NKR") is supposed to be a reliable and neutral references in either title of the article or references for it. I inserted POV tag, as well as a fact tag, seeking references that claim events to be "mostly known" as massacres. Atabek 00:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed 'mostly' dear Atabek, I have removed POV template since it is according to the Karabakh/Armenian chair man. Like Khojaly has 'genocide' reference also, best regards. --Deutschie 02:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tags 

message: I placed a POV-title tag on the page due to the fact that:
# The city has never been officially called or referred to as Shushi.
# The choice of the word massacre remains unexplained. The sources provided look ambiguous, such as the one named Implementation of the Helsinki Accords: By United States Congress. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, United States, p.69. There is a reference to the US Congress. When was this hearing? Who made that speech?
On the other hand, there are reliable sources pointing to the fact that the what happened in Shusha was merely an outcome of a militant Armenian rebellion. And here they are:
*The situation was to alter following the events of 4 April, when a mass exodus of Armenians from Shusha to nearby Khankende (Stepanakert, today the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh), following an Armenian uprising put down by Azeri forces, transformed, almost overnight, Shusha into an Azeri city. Tim Potier. Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia: A Legal Appraisal. ISBN-10: 9041114777
*The latter group was mainly concentrated in Shusha, but both groups were killed or expelled when an Armenian rebellion was brutally put down in March 1920 with a toll of hundreds of Shusha Armenians. Thomas de Waal. Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War. 
*  1920.03.22 - An Armenian rebellion in Nagorno-Karabakh. The fightings took place in Shusha, Khankendi, Tartar, Askeran, and later spread to the Zangezur, Nakhchivan and Ganja uyezds.
In light of this, I doubt that the word massacre in the title is applicable. The killings of Armenians were rather the outcome of a military operation aimed at putting down a rebellion.
As far as the death toll is concerned, I find the claim of 20,000 victims backed up by a source indicated as U.S.S.R. Speaks for Itself - Page 24 1941 hardly reliable. Let's look at the numbers from real sources:
*Two more sackings in the twentieth century ended Shusha's greatness. In March 1920, an Azerbaijani army sacked the town, burning the Armenian quarter and killing some five hundred Armenians. Thomas de Waal. Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War.
*The sacking of Shusha by Azeri forces resulted in the burning of hundreds of homes. According to the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Third Edition, 1970), these events contributed to the death of 2096 (notice that there is no indication of the ethnicity of the killed, meaning altogether 2096 Shushavians were killed - Parishan) of the city's population. Subsequently, only a few Armenian families remained. Great Soviet Encyclopedia, vol. 17, London, Collier Macmillan, 1973, p. 301. Tim Potier. Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia: A Legal Appraisal. Parishan 08:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see nothing about de Waal below. It is a reliable source. So is Potier. As for BSE, it is a reliable source when it comes to these events, because Bolsheviks were not involved. GSE had a strong pro-communist bias, therefore it is not reliable when it comes to March massacre, but in this particular caseit has no reason for bias, especially considering that editor in chief was son of Stepan Shaumian. Grandmaster 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shushi Massacres? 

message: In the article there re 5 references- Shushi massacres [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. you can see and discuss them here!Andranikpasha 09:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not seen a single source that spelled the name of the town as "Shushi". And you cannot say that there's a consensus to call these events a "massacre". Parishan provided sources that prove that there was a revolt of local Armenians, which resulted in clashes and casualties on both sides. In addition, I provided a quote from Armenian scholar Havonanissian, who also says that there was a rebellion. Considering all that, the title should be moved to "Armenian uprising in Shusha" or better yet "Ethnic clashes in Shusha in 1920". --Grandmaster 09:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I knew something was wrong with Implementation of Helsinki accords, and it is. That source says: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Mourad Topalian and I am the National Chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA). And what follows after that is presentation of the Armenian view of the issue. Topolian is not a reliable source. As for the other source, it is not a historical research, and you cannot base this whole article on one source. Grandmaster 11:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This is the full title of the section of the above document that your are quoting: Prepared statement of Mourad Topalian, Chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Room G-50 Dirksen Senate Office Building. Washington, DC. March 8, 1993. Of course, this source cannot be considered reliable. Grandmaster 11:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Smith is a professional historian, professor in an American university. You cannot compare him with the sources presented by you. Again, only one source spells the name as Shushi, while most spell it as Shusha. I think this cannot be disputed. The name selected by you was never official, neither in Russian, nor in the USSR. As for your sources, they are all well known for pro-Armenian bias. Zubov was a good friend and disciple of Galina Starovoytova. Giovanni Guaita we discussed above, and New England Center for International Law & Policy is also a well known pro-separatist organization. Only Mandelstamm can be considered neutral, but she was not a witness of the events, she only saw the aftermath a few years later. Grandmaster 17:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Andranikpasha, the quote you claim belongs to Nadezhda Mandelstam was taken straight out of an Armenian source; either this or this. However the original source reads "На рассвете мы выехали на автобусе из Гянджи в Шушу", which makes a lot more sense. She simply could not have written Shushi. Parishan 05:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

text: The spelling is important. This is a Wikipedia article. Shushi is not a generally accepted spelling for the name of this city. The Shushi spelling with regards to Mandelstam appears only on Armenian websites. Saying Titievsky corrected the name of the city is original research. I can provide one more excerpt from a different web-source where Mandelstam names it precisely Shusha, and not Shushi, or Shushu, or Shusho, etc. : "В те годы мы на каждом шагу видели следы мусаватистских погромов (одна Шуша чего стоила!)." Parishan 10:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, so you're saying, Mandelstam is out, because she travelled to Shusha in 1930. Then be kind to provide a source from 1920, where Shusha is named Shushi. Parishan 10:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Again about the name... 

message: I removed some of the dubious quotes from the article. I'm posting them here for discussion:
“Ermenistan that you have seen is now burnt down, just about five or ten houses were left…“
“After killing the prominent Armenians, their severed heads were carried and displayed during rounds made at the marketplaces…”
“You will see no more Armenians in our area; neither will you meet a Turk who has brought less than one hundred thousand’s worth of loot”. (Excerpts from the originals of Ottoman letters written in Arabic letters)http://www.nkr.am/rus/mid/bull/text1_00.htm State Historio-cultural museum of NKR, f.11, p.107.
Two prominent Armenian-Russian Communist activists- Anastas Mikoyan and writer Marietta Shaginyan "Here during the 3 days in March 1920, 7000 houses were destroyed and burnt, and the people are marking different numbers of that who were massacred...". (in Russian) Marietta Shaginyan, "Soviet Transcaucasus", Armgiz, 1947, p. 254 wrote about this pogroms in their memoirs. Mikoyan, who was in that region, later marks: "According to the reconaissance information, at Azerbaijani Mousavatist government's disposal was army of 30-thousands, of whom 20 thousants deployed near the border of Armenia... The army of Azerbaijan shortly before that massacred the Armenians in Shusha, Karabakh"  (in Russian) Микоян Анастас. Так было (воспоминания), http://biblioteka.org.ua/book.php?id=1121020105&p=19.
In 1 July, 1997, in her speech in the House of Lords, United Kingdom, Baroness Caroline Cox marked: "Armenians have repeatedly suffered atrocities at the hands of Turks and Azeris, including the murder of 1.5 million Armenians by Turkey in the genocide of 1915; the massacre of 20,000 Armenians in the ancient Armenian city of Shushi in 1920; and massacres in Sumgait and Baku in 1988 and 1990" Lords Hansard text for 1 Jul 1997 (170701-19) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldhansrd/vo970701/text/70701-19.htm.
One of the Komsomol leaders of Soviet Azerbaijan- Olga Shatunovskaya later wrote in her memoirs: "Azerbaijan dont want to lose the power as Nagorno-Karabakh is a great region. Its autonomous but only nominally, during these years they ousted many Armenians, closed schools, colleges. Earlier the main city was Shusha. When in 1920s there was a massacre, they burnt all the central part of the town, and then they even didnt restored it."   
(in Russian) Шатуновская О. Г . Об ушедшем веке. Рассказывает Ольга Шатуновская / сост.: Д. Кутьина, А. Бройдо, А. Кутьин. – La Jolla (Calif.) : DAA Books, 2001. – 470 с., c. 71
The documented records provide more than sufficient evidence for stating that the massacre of the Armenians in Shushi was thoroughly prepared by the Azerbaijanian authorities, under the command of experienced Turkish emissaries (Khalil pasha) (in Russian) Нагорный Карабах в 1918—1923 гг.: сборник документов и материалов. Ереван, 1992, стр. 376, документ № 254. Otherwise it would be hard to believe that the peaceful population that was amid sending its prayers to God could in a wink of an eye, without arms, rush out for an attack upon hearing the shooting noise, and start the beastly destruction of everybody and everything "For example, also in the 1920s, Azeris brutally massacred and evicted Armenians from the town of Shushi, which had been a famous and historic centre of Armenian culture." Nagorno Karabakh: forgotten people in a forgotten war, Contemporary Review, Jan, 1997 by Caroline Cox. 
Grandmaster 07:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Collection of sources should be a thrid party publication, which can be checked by anyone.  Нагорный Карабах в 1918—1923 гг.: сборник документов и материалов. Ереван, 1992 is not such a source, and neither is State Historio-cultural museum of NKR. Third party sources are prefered here, and in fact this is what  Wikipedia:Verifiability says: If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. Grandmaster 16:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I'm unable to travel to Yerevan to check Armenian State Archives. Have you read that document yourself? Can you provide a scan?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandmaster (talk • contribs) 11:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

text: At the official site of State Archive of Armenia I found a publication which seems to be similar to the marked book:"The Armenian massacres in the Baku and Elizavetpol governorates in 1918-1920", a collection of documents and materials, State Archive of the Republic of Armenia (official publication), Yerevan, 2003, 523 p. (in Armenian and Russian), ed. Dr A. Virabyan. . I can mark some of materials (in Russian) which are similar to those used in the article:
*N 198 A letter by G. Bagaturov to the Armenian National Council of Baku about the siege of Karabakh Armenians and necessity of help
*N 271 The report of the informational bureau of Armenian National Cauncil of Baku to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia about the situation of Armenians in Baku and Azerbaijan (May 22, 1919)
*N 296 A circular by Karabakh and Zangezur compatriotic unions to the Commander of British Military forces in Transcaucasia (June 14, 1919)
*N 358 A report by Kh. Vermishev about the "material losses of Armenian population during the past war" (1920, Tiflis)
*N 387 The letter of Diplomatic representative of Armenia in Georgia (April 14, 1920, Tiflis). 
Andranikpasha 22:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious sources 

message: Grandmaster, once again: Pls stop to delete important sources from the article and make changes lake the deletion of commonly used and proved name. lets stop the original reserches, and look for more reliable sorces proving your tags! And if you find even one reliable source directly asking the inhabitants died from both sides (without your original comments, you see I dont comment my sources) I promise to try represent that version in the article for a full neuthrality! I also promise to help you to change the name from Shushi Massacres to Shusha Massacres if you prove that most sources call these events Shusha Massacres or massacres, pogroms in Shusha). The memoirs of prominent Soviet political leader's must remain here. Even no need to call them Armenian! They were and are ruling and outstanding persons of their times in the foreign countries and never participated in Shusha events they just asked what they see or know about Shushi massacres, they are important documantal documants (mark- I dont mean historiological researches which going to prove anything at Wiki). And pls be more tolerant to the widely-known human rights activists publications (Caroline Cox is an Armenian?? are you sure? Olga Shatunovskaya was a famous anti-stalinist and human rights activist, also a Communist party member. Is it means she partisan in the Armenians massacres... during an Armenian-Azerbaijani war which happened even before Sovetization of these countries?)!  Andranikpasha 20:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cox is well-known for her extreme pro-Armenian bias, therefore she is not a reliable source. And the issue of the town's name is not that important, because Shusha is internationally accepted spelling and Wikipedia article about the town is called Shusha. Therefore any articles referring to the town should use the same spelling. The problem here is that you have not proven that most sources call these events a "massacre". Therefore the article should be moved to a neutral title. Grandmaster 16:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

text: It is not my POV. She advocates separation of NK from Azerbaijan, attends all the meetings of Armenian separatists and is being praised as a true Armenian nationalist. You can find all that info in sources. I don't think any other evidence of her pro-Armenian bias is required. Grandmaster 11:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The tag about the name being disputed is necessary, it shows that not only the content but also the title are in dispute. Grandmaster 05:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of important reliable sources 

message: The article contains this paragraph:
The documented records provide more than sufficient evidence for stating that the massacre of the Armenians in Shushi was thoroughly prepared by the Azerbaijanian authorities, under the command of experienced Turkish emissaries (Khalil pasha) [30]. Otherwise it would be hard to believe that the peaceful population that was amid sending its prayers to God could in a wink of an eye, without arms, rush out for an attack upon hearing the shooting noise, and start the beastly destruction of everybody and everything
The first line is referenced to some source published in Yerevan, which is not a third party publication and cannot be verified by anyone.  (ref # 30) Second one uses as a reference these: 
"For example, also in the 1920s, Azeris brutally massacred and evicted Armenians from the town of Shushi, which had been a famous and historic centre of Armenian culture." Nagorno Karabakh: forgotten people in a forgotten war, Contemporary Review, Jan, 1997 by Caroline Cox. See also: "Fighting broke out in 1920 over whether Shusha would be part of the newly declared republics of Armenia or Azerbaijan. Thousands died and the Armenian population fled the city." Jerusalem of Karabakh" at the heart of Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, by Michael Mainville, Agence France Presse, 7/25/07
Cox is not a reliable source, plus, neither of the sources says anything about "peaceful population that was amid sending its prayers to God could in a wink of an eye, without arms, rush out for an attack upon hearing the shooting noise, and start the beastly destruction of everybody and everything". I think this should be removed in accordance with WP:NPOV. --Grandmaster 06:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious claims 

message: Grnadmaster, according to this your adding: "do not redirect the page until consensus is reached"  ther're only 2 variants:
#to move this article to the prev name before consensus,
#to delete pov-title tag as if we accepted its changing so its a consensus also by you! Thanks in advance! Andranikpasha (talk) 15:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common standards for Wiki 

message: Hello all. I was asked to copyedit this article and look at its NPOV. I have done this to the best of my ability, hopefully helping this article achieve better neutrality. I do not at all think that these edits are infallible, so, please change them in keeping with the spirit of collaboration, civility, and NPOV. I do think that the grammar of the article is much better now, hopefully, that will make working on the actual content easier. Regards, Keilana 20:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you vey much, Keilana! For us, who edits this article for a long time and have some biased views such a first-time participant's copyedits are surely helpful for future work! PS- Just one of "fact" tags (related to the monument in Shusha/Shushi) is related to the next sentence's source so if you're agree Ill delete that one "fact" tag. Thank you again and always welcome to participate at our discussions! Andranikpasha (talk) 21:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi Keilana, and thanks for joining. This article is in a very bad shape. It uses unreliable sources and ignores those sources that do not support a certain point. I raised a number of issues above, please see for example section called "Dubious claims" above. None of my concerns have been addressed so far. I also restored the tag on the article tag, as I don't think it should be called pogrom either. I would appreciate your help in making this article POV free and factually accurate. Grandmaster (talk) 06:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you all, just drop me a note if something's urgent; I'm going to try to stay out of the dispute so I can be an unbiased eye. I do think that it's less egregiously biased now, but it's definitely got a way to go. Good luck to you all; I'll keep an eye on the article and pop by periodically to do some revising. Regards, Keilana 16:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your contribution, Keilana. I hope you will remain involved with this article. Grandmaster (talk) 05:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My copyedits 

message: These tags were added some months ago and as we see, no any discusssions are going on. Please, lets assume good faith and finish al last our talk. To Grandmaster and all other users: pls add here: a) what sentences are discussed (point by point), according to which Wiki rule, also are there other sourced versions which we can use! Just concrete points! Thanks in advance. Andranikpasha (talk) 23:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Andranik, you cannot remove neutrality and reference tags without discussion, consensus and/or sources. Please, provide references and discuss the changes to achieve consensus and then edit. And also please, provide explanation why are you removing number 500 from the third party neutral source of Tom de Waal? Thanks. Atabek (talk) 08:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

text: And how many sources from the ones you have used come from professional historians and were published in 1920 (i.e. are not modern)? Parishan (talk) 08:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed, since when the Armenian lobbyist Cox is a historian? Very strange argument, considering that 99% of sources used in the article are not professional historians. And the number of 500 is supported by the Armenian author Hovanissian, who is a historian. Grandmaster (talk) 09:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text:  Also, Wikipedia rules don't say that the sources should be historians only. If there's such a rule, please show me. Now that Hakob is back to his old tactic of never taking part in any discussion but reverting the articles nonetheless, I think it is a very good time to ask for the admin investigation. Grandmaster (talk) 13:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I stated the reason for my revert. Assume good faith. Hakob (talk) 22:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Please explain now why did you delete de Waal again? He is a lot better than "Armenian nationalist" Cox (in the words of Frank Pallone), at least he wrote a critically acclaimed book about the Karabakh conflict. Grandmaster (talk) 12:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Thomas de Waal is a critically acclaimed British author, who wrote the best book about the history of NK conflict. I do not agree to removal of the figures provided by him, they should remain in the article. There's no rule in wikipedia prohibiting using sources written by journalists. If there's such a rule, please show it to me. If you can prove that de Waal has any links with Azerbaijani side, as Cox has with Armenian, then please do it. But you cannot delete verifiable info, it is against the rules. Grandmaster (talk) 06:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Andranikpasha, we cannot delete the numbers just because you think that they are unreliable. De Waal is neutral and reliable source, and it cannot be removed fro the article. Plus, Armenian source Hovanissian provides the same number, and it is a very nationalistic Armenian source. As for Cox, it is not a reliable source and should go. She is a modern politician with a very strong bias in this issue, and we do not use politicians as sources on historical issues. Unlike Cox, de Waal is the author of the critically acclaimed book on the history of NK conflict and as such should remain in the article. Grandmaster (talk) 06:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Andranikpasha, why do you keep removing the reference to sourced material including number 500 from Tom De Waal. This material is deemed neutral by both sides of the conflict, hence his reference is quite valuable for encyclopedia. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 00:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: De Wall is not qualified in this article. He's a journalist not a historian. VartanM (talk) 00:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Atabek, I cant understand if the last editions by Grandmaster and you are because of lack of attention, or a special editwarring? If you read the article you will find deWaals quote both in the article and in my prev. post here! Pls remove your last POV-pushing and discuss if the repeating of deWaals text is justified! Andranikpasha (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  De Waal's figure should be in the intro, along with any other estimates. I don't understand your persistence in removing it. Leave it there, it provides the whole range of estimates and is a lot more realistic than the fantastic figures with many zeros. After all, even Armenian historian Hovanissian provides the same number as de Waal. Grandmaster (talk) 07:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I will say it again, De Waal is not qualified in this article. VartanM (talk) 07:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  De Waal wrote a book on the history of the conflict, so he is different from Goltz, who was an eye witness to the modern phase of the conflict, but did not write about its history. Grandmaster (talk) 08:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how that supports your position, he's still a journalist and not a historian. VartanM (talk) 08:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  So what? He is an expert on the history of the conflict. Grandmaster (talk) 08:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What happened in 1920 is not his specialty. VartanM (talk) 08:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why? His book covers quite a large period of history, since the ancient times to modern era. Grandmaster (talk) 08:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He is a modern journalist. He is not a specialist on Armenian or Azerbaijani history, so he cannot be used as a reference. VartanM (talk) 08:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  He is a specialist on the history of NK conflict, so he is a good source. In fact, he is a much better source than the law school that Andranik uses as reference. Grandmaster (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: De Waal is a journalist. Show me his historical works, if there are any. VartanM (talk) 09:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Black Garden is a book on the history of NK conflict. We have no rules that do not allow us using journalists as sources. Also, if you are so picky about sources, how come NESL is used as a source, they are not even journalists, let alone scholars? De Waal is much more reliable than any other source used here, his book received much critical acclaim and is regarded the best source on the history of NK conflict. Grandmaster (talk) 10:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Anyone can write a book on history, its not mean we can use it like a serious reliable source (this journalist didnt even cite any source for 1920). Especially if all the other sources (they are too many, not only the NESL, a respected institution on Int'l Law: as I know you like to refer to Intl' and even the Soviet Law to prove anything related to NKR...) says about 20-30.000 deaths. de Waal is not more reliable, than the social scientist and human rights activist Caroline Cox which was deleted. And the "source" by Chrono is surely not reliable, its criticized many times here as obviously unreliable, anyways you done this POV-pushing which must be reverted. Andranikpasha (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are not allowed to revert sourced info. And why you added "dubious" to the line about Armenian revolt? Do you deny that there was one? Grandmaster (talk) 07:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I am wondering, what is the notability of De Waal, to include him in a dozen (?) articles as the sole source for a claim. Has he written anything other than that work, in journals, or other peer reviewed publications about those specific years of history? So I concur with Vartan, and any neutral user can't do otherwise when De Waal has been used more than his notability would allow as sole source in countless articles. As he is a sole source, he can therefore be considered as having fringe position and removed unless Grandmaster or Atabek have any other works substantiating the personal opinions of De Waal who supports fringe positions in various issues including Shushi or the Armenian Genocide. The fact that he presents the Armenian Genocide as an Armenian position and compares it to a fabrication of the 60s of an alleged 2.5 million Azeri exterminated by Armenians alone would be enough to dismiss his position for that particular period of history. I'm afraid this time around, the adding of De Waal has reached the limit. This is not De Waal encyclopaedia to have his position on everything, especially when he is the sole source for the position he represents. - Fedayee (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  De Waal wrote the best and critically acclaimed book on the history of the conflict, and the figures provided by him are also supported by an Armenian source, Hovanissian. De Waal perfectly fits the criteria for a reliable source, and deleting it from the article is not an option. You can add any other figures that you like, but the figure cited by de Waal is to remain. I think this was discussed long enough, let's move on please. Grandmaster (talk) 06:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

text: If you like this modern journalist book on 1920 so much it also shows how much biased is this work, isnt it? and lets to not ask about additional statistics from a war period, and to not do other OR when we have too many reliable historians researches! And I will reccomend also to stop this anti-Christian biasement. It is obviously not a good behaviour, if even you have no any sources to prove anything. Imagine if according to Atabek we start to delete all the Christian and Muslim sources from the NK article... Andranikpasha (talk) 15:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored the tags that seemed to have been removed without any rationale, but rather as undiscussed part of another edit. Parishan (talk) 08:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV and references needed tags 

message: Which ethnonym should be used: Azerbaijanis, Azeris, or Caucasus Tatars? Hakob (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency 

message: At first, special for Parishan: pls read the talk carefully to not ask why tags were "removed without any rationale". Im repeating my explanation (which never answered!) esp. for you:"These tags were added some months ago and as we see, no any discusssions are going on. Please, lets assume good faith and finish al last our talk. To Grandmaster and all other users: pls add here: a) what sentences are discussed (point by point), according to which Wiki rule, also are there other sourced versions which we can use! Just concrete points!".
De Waal is a modern journalist, not scolar and his unsourced number of those who were killed in 1920 is not a historiographical fact. Anyways we already added the quotes (and numbers, as he aslo marks some hundreds) by him to the article, so no need to repeat it everywhere. Anyways if youre not aggree pls at first leave a note for Admin's "Reliable sources" section.
The version of Armenian revolt is not the only one (a too much dubious "Hrono" site, again added by Grandmaster, says fightings happened before pogrom, not revolt), and it is related to the Pogroms background, as pogroms, killings of peaceful population, burning of the whole Armenian quarter have nothing related to a "revolt suppression". And the most of reliable sourced represented here dont mark even any fightings by Armenian side so its not seems something notable. Andranikpasha (talk) 22:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Andranikpasha, this probably the twentieth time you removed De Waal from the article. I explained many times that it is a reliable source and cannot be deleted. The same with tags, you cannot remove them without consensus. This article makes many outrageous claims without citing any reliable sources. The tags are to remain until the problems with this article are resolved. Grandmaster (talk) 05:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Its your unexplained editwarring and pogrom denial that must be stopped not my sourced one!  Andranikpasha (talk) 13:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please refrain from personal attacks. It is a fact not denied even by Armenian sources that the fighting in the city was initiated by Armenian forces. Now why don't we follow some dispute resolution procedure on this? If you don't mind, I will file a request for mediation today. Please tell me if you agree or not. Grandmaster (talk) 06:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Grandmaster, your continuous citing of de Waal would be both more encyclopedic and more credible if you would start to cite actual page numbers. If you are using a direct quote, you should always give the page in which the quote can be found. Meowy 17:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure, I will add the page numbers a little later. Now please explain why you removed Hutchinson encyclopedia? Who says that the text should be available online? Here's he quote for you: In 1920, inter-ethnic clashes in the Karabakh town of Shusha resulted in the deaths of 30,000 Armenians and 15,000 Azeris. Now please restore the reference that you deleted, you cannot delete it just like that. Thanks. Grandmaster (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, it is not "Hutchinson encyclopedia"; secondly, to see the article requires a paid subscription - wikipedia recommends the avoidance of such sources; thirdly, it is a tertiary source, again wikipedia says to avoid such sources. Meowy 00:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are also cherry-picking casualty figures. You wish to continue to use the laughable de-Waall figure of 500 Armenian dead, yet you do not wish to use the online encyclopedia's figure of "30,000 Armenians" dead, choosing only to use the figure for "15,000 Azeri" casualties. Meowy 01:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  First, it is Hutchinson encyclopedia. You can access the full text by searching the line that I quoted in google. Second, the use of tertiary sources is not prohibited, third, the number of 30,000 is in the intro, and fourth, the number of 500 is the most realistic and is cited in addition to de Waal by the Armenian scholar Richard Hovanissian. Now who is that IP reverting to your version? Grandmaster (talk) 06:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: This article is about the pogrom of Shusha's Armenian population, there was no pogrom of the towns Muslim population so your inclusion of an unverified figure for "Azeri" deaths, taken from a tertiary source that cannot be readily checked, is both unencyclopedic and off-topic. Also, your revert reads  "resulted according to various estimates in 500[12][dubious – discuss] to 20,000 Armenian[13][4][14][15][16][dubious – discuss] and 15,000 Azerbaijani deaths" - I see no 30,000 figure there. Meowy 17:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, the more I read the version you desire, the more un-amusing it becomes. 15,000 Azeri deaths are certain, according to you, yet 20,000 Armenian deaths are "dubious", and the 30,000 Armenian deaths figure (derived from the same source as your 15,000 Azeris figure) isn't worthy of mention at all. Meowy 18:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Check the line right after that one. It quotes some Italian author who claims the number of 30,000, and there's no  after that. You can add it to both figures. Grandmaster (talk) 10:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've changed the 20,000 Armenian deaths figure to the 30,000 given in Hutchinson encyclopedia. And since I take it you believe that the Hutchinson encyclopedia figures are not dubious, I've removed the dubious tag that was placed against the Armenian deaths figure when it was 20,000. You may want the dubious tag to remain, but it could only remain if you also placed the same tag against the Azeri deaths figure since both figures are derived from the same sentence of the same source. Doing this would also mean that you considered the whole Hutchinson encyclopedia citation to be dubious, which would make your earlier argument for the validity of its inclusion somewhat strange (to say the least). Meowy 20:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

text: There was no deception or "sock-puppetry" in the revert you talk about, and your implication of bad faith is completely unjustified and reveals much about your character. I did the revert. However, unknown to me, my account must have timed-out and my IP address appeared rather than my name. Meowy 17:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: De Waal is not the only source, Armenian scholar Richard Hovanissian provides the same number. And since de Waal is an author of a critically acclaimed book, his figures cannot be suppressed. All figures with many zeros are dubious, if indeed so many people on either side had died, there would not have been many people left in Karabakh. The figures from de Waal/Hovanissian and Great Soviet Encyclopedia are the most realistic. Blown-up figures come from dubious sources such as Guaita, Babanov and other obscure sources. So the number of 15,000 of Azerbaijani casualties is as good as the number of 20 or 30,000 Armenian casualties. Grandmaster (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" is not really a credible source to use for events that took place in recent times (i.e. 20th century). During the Soviet period it was the policy to minimise the reporting of, and the size or importance of, ethnic conflicts that had taken place within what was now the Soviet Union, and whenever possible to blame such conflicts on outside influences.  Meowy 20:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The citation from GSE is not direct, and marks it was issued... in London. A possible mistake and we have all the articles of BSE online, no such a quote! Andranikpasha (talk) 00:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some corrections