Talk:First Republic of Armenia

message: In German and Russian the first republic is known as “Armenian Republic” and the current as “Republic of Armenia”. Is this correct in English as well? Does anybody know the official name of the first one? Were the flag and the coat of arms exactly the same? Ulf-S. 13:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian Republic? 

message: @Neftchi  
"This was already discussed?"
What kind of discussion is this? I practically see no referenced arguments here. In any case, let the discussion begin, for real:
My source, for that map precisely, is from here:
http://conflicts.rem33.com/images/Armenia/disp.htm
Read the page, especially the end.
Here are some other maps (old and contemporary) that show the Democratic Republic of Armenia:
Old maps:
Western Source, 1918:
http://grossmanproject.net/images/Europe%20pre%201918.jpg
Check the boundaries. This is a map from 1918. Western Armenia isn't abolished yet. Notice Nakhichevan, Karabakh, Syunuk, all part of Armenia?
Western Source, 1919:
http://anamnesis.info/resources/Europe_map_1919.jpg
Russian source, 1919:
http://s42.radikal.ru/i097/0807/53/c8316ecefa99.jpg
Russian source, 1919 on Armenian web site:
http://www.hayastan.com/armenia/history/armenia/files/sevres_agreement1.jpg
Unknown date, but definitely before 1922:
http://prints-4-u.com/store/images/A1991920/A1991920010.jpg
Considering the fact that there were continuous territorial changes between Armenia-Azerbaijan from 1918 to 1921, this map shows a period when Karabakh and Zangezur was part of Azerbaijan. Still, most of Nakhichevan is part of Armenia.
Contemporary maps:
Georgian source, 1918, 1919:
http://conflicts.rem33.com/images/Georgia/arm_geor_war/map%206.JPG
http://rus.expertclub.ge/_Expertclub/image/Armeno-Georgian%20War/map%202.jpg
http://rus.expertclub.ge/_Expertclub/image/Armeno-Georgian%20War/map%203.jpg
http://www.conflicts.rem33.com/images/Georgia/arm_geor_war/R15.html
What Azerbaijanis often use as evidence is false
Azerbaijanis often use this map. Read what it says:
http://karty.narod.ru/great/g-az/1ST_AZ_REP.GIF
"Official map issued by the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, 1919"
This doesn't mean that that's how Azerbaijan was recognized, nor the territories it controlled. That's what Azerbaijan claimed to be its republic, and what it tried to establish through war with Armenia, but that's not the territory that it controlled. No one's denying this is what Azerbaijan claimed.
Conclusion
Basically, my map is objective. It doesn't claim that all of Nakhichevan, Karabakh, Syunik were part of the republic. It claims that Syunik and part of Karabakh and a small region north of Nakhichevan was mostly under Armenian control, while 80% of Nakhichevan and other regions mostly under Azerbaijani. Plus, I have provided numerous non-Armenian sources to prove my point, I have more (text based) but I think this should be enough for now. You can't refute maps that date from 1918 or 1919 anyway, unless, of course, they are map proposals or claims. These maps don't show claims, they show the political situation of the time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by KentronHayastan (talk • contribs) 20:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, one more thing. Here's the map of Armenia from the paris peace conference. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Armenia_1919.jpgKentronhayastan (talk) 23:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest Map Discussion (2010) 

message: Who wrote this? Where are the sources for these horrific claims that Georgians were supported by Ottomans and they wanted Armenian to be slaughtered? I studied that period and nowhere did I see such claims (neither from Armenians or any other historical sources). This is terrible POV. Plus written in bad English. Somebody intentionally makes provocations. This section is provocative POV and it should be modified in respects with NPOV and truthfulness of Wiki. What a shame :( Ldingley 21:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole section about Ottoman-Georgian co-operation against Armenians is wrong and somebody's provocative POV. Also nobody in Georgia desired for Armenians to be slaughtered by Turks. Its ridiculous claim and should be modified and re-edited. In fact, Georgians sheltered fleeing Armenians from Turkish controlled territories. Ldingley 23:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hear you! Hope the reference was usefull. --OttomanReference 00:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A section-NPOV would not be out of place here. It was a war between two nations and there was no "brave militia war." Furthermore, the section is based exclusively on what "Armenian historians claim." Should not we mention a Georgian point-of-view at least in a few words? While Georgia allegedly received aid from Turks (which is not true as Georgia's relations with Turkey was far from peaceful), Armenia was supported by Denikin and symphatized by the UK mission. Text should be objective. Tell me what you think about it. Thanks, --Kober 05:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just modified the text. I hope now it is more neutral.--Kober 05:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are correct Kober. UK actually halted the Georgian (Kutaisi battalion) advance on Northern Armenia and warned Zordania to withdraw. Actually, Georgians defeated Armenian troops and moved south of Lori. English saw it as a threat for Armenia and warned Georgians with possible reprisals from His Majesties Government. There was no collaboration or aid from the Turkish side to the Georgians. On contrary, Georgians had an open conflict with Turks. Not to mention the fact that Georgia was attacked by Denikis Ultra-nationalist “Whites”, Azeris in Borchalo, Armenians in south, Turks (and their Muslim allies in Ajaria) and infamous Bolsheviks (of all nationalities).  Denikin was an open hardcore anti-Georgian and he was directly involved in Georgian-Armenian conflict. OttomanReference, you should use reliable sources and differentiate between primary and secondary historical sources. Nice job Kober! Ldingley 14:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Georgian-Armenian War

message: Okay, our Georgian counterparts on Wikipedia have turned me on to a website called Atlas of Conflicts (the source for the map as seen on the DRG article).  The page presents a fairly accurate history of the territorial disputes in the Caucasus during World War I.  I replaced the Armenian map I made (based on Hewsen's work) with the one used on their website.  This map accurately depicts all of Armenia's territorial disputes during this period. -- Clevelander 19:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map issue solved

message: There seems to be something wrong with the format of the reference to Hewsen in the infobox (the population item). I an unable to fix it. Can someone please try to deal with it? --Zlerman (talk) 02:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I left a message on the Talk page for the Template:Infobox Former Country... The error seems to be there. Serouj (talk) 07:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to Hewsen in infobox 

message: The efforts of establishment of ADR includes the promises given by Nicholas II of Russia to Armenians. Especially, the 2nd Prime Minister of the ADR was involved. This historical fact is documented by very important sources "Hovannisian" and "Stanford." The promise was publicly declared to Armenians. --Անդրանիկ (talk) 13:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ADR? Was that freudian? You are adding undue weight to matters which are only indirectly associated with DRA or its establishment. -- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 15:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The DRA was established in Russian Armenia. You can personally hold the idea that "promises given by Nicholas II of Russia" is indirectly linked but these events are cited by Hovannisian in the book "Armenia's Road to Independence." Don't you have to respect cited source or proven otherwise, bring another source that falsifies Hovannisian. --Անդրանիկ (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? I'm not disputing the source.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 16:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You are removing an information, which is included in a credible source (non-disputed source by you), based on credible facts (non-disputed facts by you), which is written to tell the story of this period. This removal is based on your personal action, WP:POV. You are "personally removing a significant view that have been published by reliable sources". This is WP:NPOV violation. I'm stating that in the establishment of DRA: as it was part of Russian Armenia, as it has the involvement of Russian Armenians; as the recognizer of these events were Nicholas II of Russia; as also cited by an Armenian historian "Hovannisian" and an independent historian "Stanford" being part of events in the establishment... You are wrong in your reversal. I also remind that beyond the conclusion of these respected historians, the involvement of 2nd Prime Minister of the DRA to these events creates an indisputable objective link. If you have hard time, we are done with Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and we should continue with Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. --Անդրանիկ (talk) 18:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Is everyone agree, no more objections or clarifications? --Անդրանիկ (talk) 01:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyone would agree with your edits here. You are trying to push into this article statements that are not directly related to the ADR while you bring them artifically in connection to the establishement of the ADR. What you are trying to do is Original synthesis per WP rules. Information about Russian-Turkish relations, Western Armenia, Van resistence etc. must go to the relevant article when not directly related to the ADR. --Vacio (talk) 05:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement "anyone would agree with your edits here" is a personalization of the argumentation and a violation of a wikipedia rule, which for the moment let's ignore. The establishment of Armenian forces during World War One and the link of these forces to promises given by Russia is established by many historians, among them are the Armenian "Hovannisian" (look at road to independence) and Taner Akcam (look at the shameful act) even third party historians "Stanford" end even military experts (from military perspective) mention the Tsar's quote as in the "First World War" by Martin Gilbert. The people who were related to these events were also highly decorated people of DRA. Prime ministers, Interior ministers, Military commanders ... Which you have not denied. On the other side; you have not presented any citation or argumentation to disprove. I will happy to drop my position, if you bring any fact or argument that I can check from a published source. Likewise, the second Prime Minister of DRA, just short of three years before the establishment of DRA, engaged with the negotiations with Tsar. The first Interior minister of DRA was assigned and celebrated by Tsar's forces as the governor of Western Armenia. If these people do not link DRA to the events happened just three years before international recognition... I can extent the list of people. But really I do not need to. Because I'm backed by sources in this case. They are all cited by very credible sources. Obviously these facts and sources are not my Original synthesis, as all included in books regarding the period. Isn't denying these facts by you a revisionist perceptive? If you want, I have Armenian Hovannisian's "Road to independence." I'm totally fine using his book to tell the story of the DRA. Will an Armenian Historian and his book about DRA enough to resolve your objection? --Անդրանիկ (talk) 15:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

text: We? how many of you are there? VartanM (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Up to day I counted; Vacio, User:Eupator, user:MarshallBagramyan and  VartanM. I'm putting a finishing touch for the story of establishment, "Hovannisian" is a great historian. --Անդրանիկ (talk) 02:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do not - removal of promises given by Russia for an Armenian rule. 

message: The map is composed by a non-professional.  http://img21.imageshack.us/i/europemap1919.jpg/
It is edited in photoshop and does not reflect the truth. 
Artvin, Ardagan, Samtskhe and Lori provinces are erroneously included into the borders of the Democratic Republic of Armenia, as the above lands were controlled by the Democratic Republic of Georgia, which was recognized by the League of Nations as an independent state within these borders.
This map contradicts all other maps marking the borders of the Democratic Republic of Armenia. 
Please delete it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DRGMap.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TranscaucasusCampaign1921.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DRGsovietization.jpg
--იბერია (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  false map 

message: It is surprising that this article does not contain any map showing the borders of DRA. Zitterbewegung Talk  01:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: Why is the Coat of arms in the info box  different from  the coat found at Coat of arms of Armenia? The change of Tinctures (both those in the shield and those in supporters) would indicate a different set of arms in heraldry. This may reflect a time change, however while I could find references to File:Coat of arms of Armenia.svg, I was less successful with File:Coat of Arms of the DRA.svg. Reference needed? Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of Arms 

message: Hi may anyone explain why the map of Wilsonian Armenia is shown in the article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.140.194.102 (talk) 13:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if you read the article Wilsonian Armenia you'd know, that by Treaty of Sevres Wilsonian Armenia was given to the Democratic Republic of Armenia. AV--Aram-van (talk) 16:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: However the claimed territories never became part of Democratic Republic of Armenia so no need to include this map.--193.140.194.102 (talk) 17:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wilsonian armenia 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 1 August 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Armenia (po sevrskomu dogovoru).png Nominated for Deletion

message: According to the Turkish General Staff (estimation), 
General Nazarbekof - Erivan
Western Front (commander: General Osepyan) - Kars
Eastern Front (commander: General Şolkovnikof) - Erivan
*1st Infantry Regiment (Mazmanof) - Bardız (district of Şenkaya)
*2nd Infantry Regiment (Serkisyan) - Vedi
*3rd Infantry Regiment (?) - Iğdır
*4th Infantry Regiment (Mirmanof) - Kara Urgan
*5th Infantry Regiment (Bartanof) - Sarıkamış, 1st batallion - Kağızman
*6th Infantry Regiment (?) - Delican
*7th Infantry Regiment (Sepof) - Şahtahtı
*8th Infantry Regiment (?) - Çıldır, 1st batallion - Ardahan
*Kars guard (batallion) - Kars
*Gümrü guard (batallion) - Bardız
*Erivan guard (batallion) - Erivan
Each regiment consisted of 4 infantry batallion and 20 x heavy machine gun
*Cavalry Brigade
**1st Cavalry Regiment (400 cavalry) - Gümrü
**2nd Cavalry Regiment (400 cavalry) - Gümrü
*Dro = Taşnak (volunteer regiment, 1500 personnel)
*General Şahak (volunteer regiment, 1500 personnel)
*Mavzerist (volunteer regiment , 1000 personnel)
*1st Regiment (volunteer regiment, 2000 personnel)
*4 x 155 mm howitzer
*4 x 105 mm howitzer
*4 x 75 mm field artillery
*4 x 75 mm mountain artillery
*40 x fortress artillery
Takabeg (talk) 13:01, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Armenian military units in August 28, 1920

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:21, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:The First Armenian Republic 1918-1920.gif Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:26, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Coat of Arms of the DRA.svg Nominated for Deletion

message: Sorry, but in several places, this text seems NPOV to me:
* armies of the Ottoman Empire, which were intent on eliminating the Armenian people living in the area Was it really the official objective of the army? This could have been the result of official policy, and also a well-founded fear of Armenians, but most likely not the "intent of armies".
* The Russian offensive during the Caucasus Campaign of World War I and subsequent occupation and the creation of a provisional administrative government gave hope for the liberation of Western Armenia from Ottoman Turkish rule. This is hardly the only possible description of Russian forces taking Turkish territory, and definitely not the most NPOV.
* Having massacred and deported the Armenians of Western Armenia during the Armenian Genocide, the Ottoman Empire now set its sights on eliminating the Armenian population of Eastern Armenia. The same. Also, dramatic presentation of history is not well-suited for an encyclopedia which should center on facts.
* The Armenians were able to stave off total defeat and delivered crushing blows to the Turkish army in the battles of Sardarapat, Karakilisa and Abaran. About Sardarapat, it can be argued, and the article about Abaran lacks numbers, but was Karakilisa really a "crushing blow" for the Turks? After all, they took the settlement and as Battle of Karakilisa says, "After a violent battle of 4 days, both sides had serious losses." If both sides had losses but one gained territory, did it really lose?
* After the Ottoman Empire took vast swaths of territory and imposed harsh conditions, the new republic was left with a mere 10,000 square kilometers. Well, Western Armenia had been under Ottomans for centuries. There can clearly be different POVs on if the fresh Armenian Republic established behind the Russian front really had a justified claim on the territory. Most likely, the same facts could be expressed more neutrally. After all, it is hard to deny that even some areas in former Russian Armenia were acceded to Turkey.
* The Turkish Revolutionaries alleged that the Turks inside DRA were being mistreated and oppressed by the Armenians. If these claims were used as a reasoning for war, they clearly deserve a more thorough presentation.--Oop (talk) 09:40, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: All spot-on observations. If I have some time, I'll try to bring some of the information more to line with Wikipedia policies and the sources themselves. A good source to start with on this article is Richard Hovannisian's 4-5 volume study on the republic, The Republic of Armenia. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Re names: "yan" at the end of a name are mostly a result of Soviet-period spelling reforms and dogma. I think that is not appropriate to use yan endings for names in a pre-Soviet Armenia context, or for people who became notable in pre-Soviet Armenia times. But Bagramyan is OK :) Meowy 02:01, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV and confusion 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Aharonian-avetis.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: This article suffers from a range of issues. Not least is the fact that many of the most important sections relating to the republic - the circumstances leading up to its creation, its social and political structure, its foreign relations, etc. - are not yet fleshed out. Instead of adding information about elections, political parties, and the creation of a modern university, we have editors adding dozens of citations about some negligible and unimportant names the republic may have been called by journalists or politicians during the time and placing them in their own section in the beginning of the article. 4 or 5 citations (and the accompanying quotes) are not needed for that as the fact that it was called by such a title is undisputed and uncontroversial. The article is in need of a lot of improvement and edits like these are not only unnecessary but a waste of time for readers wanting to more about the republic, not the other obscure names it was attributed.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you care about your own time and energy? Why don't you start working on the article? This article had a wrong title for years and how come you didn't notice it? Is whining about oversourcing the only thing you enjoy doing? I have been working on this article for some time now. I've drawn a map which more accurately depicts the situation, while I don't recall any major edit from you in the past months or so. --Երևանցի talk  14:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You can be as discourteous as you like but, for your information, I did spend a great amount of my time and energy reading, researching, reworking the introductory paragraphs and sections on foreign relations on this article (the history section is there for that purpose). But as I have other matters to attend to outside of Wikipedia, I am unable to devote more attention to articles that need re-working. You call it whining but please go ahead and ask another editor how important it is to include five references to an obscure and uncontroversial name used only in English and how much more preferable it is to neglect sections on economy, education, and politics in favor of "terminology" (which I don't believe enough deserve its own section, just a single footnote at the bottom). Poor edits are no substitute for no edits.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:53, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  don't expect a polite response to a comment and an edit summary that sound like personal attacks. If those few sources really irritate you that much, simply remove them, I don't care, it's not a big deal for me and have never been. I suggest you not make a big deal out of them either.  --Երևանցի talk  22:51, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: They're hardly personal attacks. I did remove them because I found that disproportionate space was allotted to them but your comment about not making them a big deal is strange. This isn't the first time this discussion is being spoken of so it's only natural that one raises it once a general pattern emerges in the editing.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section 

message: I guess the name should be changed, there is no such a concept regarding first second and third republic compared with the French first second third etc. The Armenian constitution clearly says that the current republic is the continuation of the first one. Hence, It would be much more appropriate to rename the article as follows: Republic of Armenia (1918-1920).--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 05:00, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fact tagged the "First Republic of Armenia" claim. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The single cited "source" is dubious - an Armenian government website that claims "Since Armenia's independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, the most accepted term in Armenia is the First Republic of Armenia". This is not sufficient. A title should be the most commonly used title, or the most common term used in academic sources. No academic sources are cited to support this title. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Like an untreated cancer, on the basis of the title of this article this "First Republic of Armenia" term now has spread to many Wikipedia articles dealing with Armenia in the 1918-1920 period. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: "The republic was established in the Armenian-populated territories of the disintegrated Russian Empire, known as Eastern Armenia or Russian Armenia." If something is known as "this" or "that" it means it is (not "they are") the same thing. Wikipedia is not about making more articles, I believe, but -I hope- "better" articles. So please join the discussion about this excess of "Armenia" articles at the talk page of Russian Armenia and let's eliminate one of the two. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 10:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia should not be about dumbing things down, and Wikipedia does not coin names or terms - the names of things and the terms for things will exist because these names and these terms are required and are used, and so will have sources. The problem I see on Wikipedia is the often incorrect usage of names and terms, resulting in confusion. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of the place

message: Here is a very detailed and very well referenced 75 page article written by Andrew Andersen and George Partskhaladze about the war and single engagements, diplomatic intercourse and general strategy inc. original military orders of both sides involved, with respective views from both sides research.
http://www.academia.edu/10176756/Armeno-Georgian_War_of_1918_and_Armeno-Georgian_Territorial_Issue_in_the_20th_Century
TheMightyGeneral (talk) 10:33, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You cannot cite 75 pages, tell exactly where you are getting this information. Even so, Andersen got his short lived Wikipedia article removed due to not meeting the critera of a notable academic, and I couldn't even find any information on Partskhaladze. Hovannisian is much more notable than both of them. The war ended as Armenian troops were approaching Tiflis, hence why the British demanded a ceasefire. See pages 114 to 119. --Oatitonimly (talk) 17:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

text: Anyone can create their own website. A non-self published book published by a university is the best possible kind of source. Cite a book that Lang wrote, not a website by Andersen. And stop copying the source word for word, that's copyright. You cannot call Hovannisian a bad source just because he is Armenian, in fact he's actually an anti-nationalist. A reliable source is determined by if they meet WP:ACADEMIC. Hovannisian fulfills all requirements, while Andersen has none. --Oatitonimly (talk) 21:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

text: Then cite Lang and his book number and not "conflicts.rem33.com" --Oatitonimly (talk) 04:33, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Armenian-Georgian War

message: The whole Administration section is not cited and the military section as well. 
I think overall more citations are needed throughout the article.
The article is fairly neutral and all information is relevant but some incorrect grammatical errors found throughout. 
Ill try my best to work on this article, please let me know if you guys have any feedback. HP2016 (talk) 05:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Critique 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on First Republic of Armenia. 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/20130703091803/http://arfarchives.org/?p=496 to http://arfarchives.org/?p=496
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921060457/http://www.reporter.am/go/article/2009-05-28-on-armenian-independence-day-a-visit-to-sardarapat-symbol-of-armenian-pride to http://www.reporter.am/go/article/2009-05-28-on-armenian-independence-day-a-visit-to-sardarapat-symbol-of-armenian-pride
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: First Republic Of Armenia was not the official name of the country during its existence, but a term introduced later during sovietization of Armenia. The official name was and still is Republic Of Armenia, as recognised by Leage Of Nations, the predecessor of UN. The provided source in the article intro section merely proofs the use of First Republic Of Armenia as a term, nothing else. In essence, this is a major falsification. A country's name cannot be changed post-existence. It should be corrected. --Addictedtohistory (talk) 21:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Democratic Republic Of Armenian aka. First Republic Of Armenia  

message: The ongoing discussion on the RSN seems to have decided that Kazemzadeh is now an outdated source that is no longer very reliable. Kazemzadeh certainly shouldn't be used as a source on this article, given how hostile his book is to the ARF which he had a clear bias against. I will also be reviewing all the Hovannisian footnotes to make sure they accurately reflect the source. Dallavid (talk) 23:40, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As another editor on that RSN thread mentioned:  Therefore, the rationale used on the thread that Kazemzadeh's book is too old is redundant due to Wikipedia policy. Moreover, the information that references his book is also supported by a number of other sources, I just used his book as it has the most reliable consolidation of topics, and that the Featured Article Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (related to the background section of this article) cites him heavily. – Olympian loquere 02:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: "Armenia was confined to a territory of small territory around Lake Sevan". The statement a territory of small territory sounds like a typo to me. Maybe my understanding of English is wrong, what do other people think? 24.13.28.25 (talk) 03:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing it out, anon; it's been fixed. – Olympian loquere 11:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo 

message: Why is this map being removed? It's totally perfect in this article. Kenech Kermian (talk) 14:13, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[File:1922-Wilsonian-Armenia-and-the-Caucasus-Vintage~2.jpg|thumb|boundaries of Armenian state according to the Peace Treaty of Sèvres in 1920]] 

message: i made a svg file to the coat of arms Felipe Fidelis Tobias (talk) 17:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 20:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 December 2023 

message: i want to replace the png coat of arms file to a svg coat of arms file
| the png file:   
| the svg file:  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felipe Fidelis Tobias (talk • contribs) 19:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for providing the svg file! Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2023