Talk:Aram Khachaturian

Nationality

I am being threatened with 'blocking' by one 'Serouj' -- who has now even *deleted* a *properly sourced* reference I provided that happens to contradict his personal ethnic-nationalist fantasies. What I am 'guilty of' is the mere attempt to construct a lede paragraph that makes it straightforwardly clear that Khatchaturian was actually born in Georgia, not Armenia, and was thus 'administratively' Georgian by birth (and later 'Soviet-Georgian'), even if he was ethnically and culturally Armenian.

I can easily see why the Armenian nationalist lobby wants to make Khatchaturian 'Soviet-Armenian'; but I insist that it is not wikipedia's job to pander to ethnic-nationalist pressure-groups in this way. I believe 'Serouj' -- an Armenian with a history of aggressively pro-Armenian edits and postings -- is treating me in an unfair way in the interests of his political agenda. Pfistermeister (talk) 01:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Umm, there is a very lengthy debate two sections up about this. Khachaturian in no way was Georgian. He was Armenian by birth and lived most of his life in Moscow. The only reason he was born in Tiflis was that Tiflis was the cultural center of Armenian culture at the time. Indeed, Tiflis was a cosmopolitan city with many different cultures (indeed, in 1897, there were more Armenians in Tiflis than Georgians. This quote is from the Tbilisi article itself - "Throughout the century, the political, economic and cultural role of Tbilisi with its ethnic, confessional and cultural diversity (Armenians, Georgians and Russians comprised 38.1, 26.3 and 24.8 percent of the population respectively in 1897[4]) was significant not only for Georgia but for the whole Caucasus.". :Again, the fact that Khachaturian was born in Tiflis neither makes him Russian nor Georgian! Lastly, Tiflis at that time was part of the Russian Empire -- no state of Georgia existed at the time. Sorry that these facts don't appease your particular view point. Serouj (talk) 01:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Your edits are rather ridiculous. I believe that it is you who is the nationalist between us, as Khachaturian isn't even CLOSE to being a Georgian! Please move on to something more productive like improving the Tbilisi article, as you have absolutely no case here. Serouj (talk) 01:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the Pfister doth protest too much. He was Armenian, Pfister. Sorry if that fact disappoints you. TA-ME (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Pfistermeister's remarks are false to say at least and they actually provoke national tensions. While the Soviet Union was still in place we all had same citizenship, yet we all were ethnically distinct. Ethnic Armenians are born anywhere: be it Lebanon, France, Russia or Georgia. That does not make us Lebanese, French, Russian or Georgian. Unfortunately, the tendency to usurp Armenian heritage and culture is a recent trend among her neighbors. Recent attempts to annex Armenian Church of Norashen in Tbilisi serve as an example of this system of stealing! And now Aram Khatchaturian! Who's going to claimed as a "Georgian" next? Needless to remind you that Armenians played key role in Tbilisi over the course of many centuries. Do not be ignorant and do not use Wikipedia for political purpose. Avetik (talk) 03:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Pity to see how 3 Armenian are mocking at the only person who is trying to be objective. Khachaturian was never a citizen of Armenia, nor of Armenian Republic within USSR (for he lived in Moscow his whole life long), so technically he is NOT Armenian. As regards etnicity, it is already very well emphasized in the opening of the article by mentioning he was born in the Armenian family, there is no way and need to emphasize it even more, that's the usual practive of English Wikipedia, which is not a soapbox. Alaudo (talk) 08:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

You can count four now. I hope you realize the nonsensical nature of the remarks you made above.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

There is absolutely 0% objectivity in Pfistermeister's outrageous edit. There is 100% nationalistic provocation. And you know it, don't you? Avetik (talk) 18:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It's so funny to see how contributors with 0 knowledge and understanding of region, history, and culture, label those who do have understanding "nationalists" and consider themself "objective". I hate wasting my time on incompetent people, so I will not go over all the perls met here, though just one example of Lezginka dance being Georgian in your opinion, and not Lezghin while Lezginka being "Lezghin's/Lezghin smth" in Russian, perfectly shows terrible incompetence of contributors, and their "objectivness".

As already mentioned Tbilisi, a city in Russian Empire, and capital of Tiflis province by that time was armenian cultural centre, with 38% (majority) of city being armenians. Even without googling I can mention about 20 armenian writers, poets, artists, millitary officers, etc, who were born, lived and created in Tbilisi. Still it's first time I come across someone who thinks that they were Georgians. At that time there simply was NO Georgia and NO Armenia. If we follow your logic, and determine nationality (or ethnicity as you call it in west) by place of birth, those who were born in Tiflis by beginning of 20th century, would first be Armenian, then Georgian or Russian (with last two having pretty same chances - 28% and 26%). BTW, Baku was another armenian center by that time. With Gumri, being only major city in Eastern Armenia and Yerevan still being smth like big village and not a city suitable for art or science. Lot of Western Armenian writers were born and lived all their live in Stambul, does it make them Turkish? :) Well, let's go for some statistics.

• არამ ხაჩატურიანი - "Aram Khachatrian" in Georgian 232 Google Results vs. "Արամ Խաչատրյան" - "Aram Khachatrian" in Armenian 55,300 Google Results
• "Aram+Khachaturian"+"Georgian" 3,010 vs. "Aram+Khachaturian"+"Armenian" 18,100

Georgian wikipedia considers Aram Kchatryan to be Armenian composers (follow the first interwiki, after birth/death dates/places)

Let me sum it up: A. Khachaturyan considers himself Armenian, Georgians consider him Armenian, Armenians consider him Armenian. Researchers consider him Armenian. A lot of his works are based/enspired by armenian folk/culture in general, last one being most important, as when we talk about an artist being of X nationality, we first of all mean his works were tangibly influenced and/or influenced X culture. In this case, Khachaturyan, neither was influenced by Georgian culture/folk, nor influenced Georgian culture.

His house-museum is in Yerevan, Armenia, several concert halls, musical schools/college are named by A. Kchaturyan in Armenia, in lot of Armenia cities, you can find streets named by Khachaturyan, he was placed on armenian banknot. You wouldn't find anything like that in Georgia, and there's just one street and one monument in Russia, Moscow. His recognitions and honors, were being first given by Soviet Armenian Republic, and only 6-7 years later other Soviet republics would grant him same honors (check ru:wp for list, or website of house-museum), he was the author of Anthem of Soviet Armenia, etc, etc.. I mean it's just so obvious, that it's hard to explain. And only "Pfistermeister" being sure that he was Georgian, and those who disagree with his original research and personal POV are "armenian nationalists". DIXI. Regards, --Aleksey Chalabyan a.k.a. Xelgen (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It might also be helpful to direct the attention of the editors here to the rather farcical "discussion" that took place on the Tigran Petrosian talk page last year, here. Having come to the consensus that Petrosian was indeed an Armenian, albeit from the USSR, one of the editors felt it compulsory to add the superfluous and, frankly, asinine remark that "Western publications described Petrosian as an Armenian." Nationalism indeed.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I see that this discussion got out of hand, as could have been expected. I just like to refer to my opening remarks in the section "How Armenian was K.". My main point is that appropriating K. as 'Armenian' carries the suggestion that his genius is a matter of ethnicity rather than of individuality. I have seen no demonstrations of Armenian (rather than Russian or generic Caucasian) qualities in his music, here or anywhere else. I've described how K. was branded ethnic for Sovjet political reasons and that K. was well advised to play the part. It is understandable that Armenians are proud of the affiliation with Khatchaturian, which explains the google counts referred to above, but if you look into it, it still very much looks like a myth. Having said that, I'm OK with the present phrasing, noting that this is the current consensus. But I also feel that nationality is an administrative issue, and user Pfistermeister was treated unfairly when he raised the point of K's passport. Zwart (talk) 19:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

List of compositions by Aram Khachaturian

Should we make a page similar to other composers that has all of his compositions to avoid taking up space on the main Khachaturian article? --Chrismiceli (talk) 21:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. Feel free to go about it. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 22:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I have done this, I feel the section that links to the main article could use some expansion. --Chrismiceli (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

"Khachaturian and communism"

This section of the article seems to me very POV and questionable in its assumption; it's one thing to recognise that Khachaturian to a degree benefited from the Soviet Union's "championship" of ethnic minorities (within the strictures and distortions of Stalinist cultural policies), but quite another to claim he was working for the regime rather than for his colleagues (a significant distinction which helps explain why he fell from official favour in 1948). Further, the section has next to no citations to back its claims about Khachaturian's alleged loyalty to the regime. I propose merging matters of fact from this section into the "Life" section of the article, unless anyone can provide concrete evidence that Khachaturian was doing anything more than "rendering unto Caesar" in his supposed allegiance to communism. Alfietucker (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Relatively/extremely popular

The tweak made regarding the degree of popularity enjoyed by K's Masquerade Suite highlights the fact (for me, at least) that Wikipedia is an international website, and what is true of a work's popularity in one country may not be quite so true in another. I don't think Masquerade, as fine a suite as it is, can be described today as "extremely" popular in either the UK or the USA - certainly not in relation to such works as Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture, or even Holst's The Planets. For this reason I am reverting this to "relatively", and if anyone feels this does the work less than justice then I would urge them to consider specifying exactly where/amongst which audience the work is "extremely" popular. Alfietucker (talk) 13:58, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

"Bastardized" pronunciations

(edit conflict)Why should we give bastardized pronunciations that no-one actually uses? Per the MOS, we should give the pronunciation in English and the native language, in this case Armenian. — kwami (talk) 00:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: Instead of edit-warring, I suggest you get involved in this discussion.

"A dictionary is better that a bastardized pronunciation that is neither English nor Armenian)" is a problematic line that shows your POV-pushing. Mind explaining how it is "a bastardized pronunciation"? Do you speak any Armenian? If not, then please abstain from such comments. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

What does Armenian have to do with anything? We're talking about the English pronunciation, and what you added is not it. A dictionary is the place you go for pronunciations. That's a no-brainer, isn't it? — kwami (talk) 00:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

The pronunciation given by a published book is much closer to being a WP:RS (and also much closer to the original Armenian pronunciation) than an online dictionary. Labeling a pronunciation directly taken from a university published book "bastardized" only speaks that you are not here to improve it, but push your personal POV. kwami, as an admin and a long time editor you mush know that adding personal comments, as you just did, is called POV-pushing on Wikipedia. Please refrain for making such edits. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:16, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

"Published" doesn't mean reliable. The ref in question gives faux-foreign pronunciations for people who don't know the language in question. It's like saying "Paris" is pronounced "puh-ree", which is neither French nor English. We are an encyclopedia, and have no business repeating such nonsense. Rather, we give the actual pronunciation, but the actual Armenian pronunciation, and the actual English pronunciation.

What you copied from that book is neither Armenian nor English. That's understandable for a print source, as they can't be expected to explain the phonology of every language they transcribe. However, we can: We have an article on Armenian phonology, and even Help:IPA for Armenian, a guide for transcriptions of Armenian names. That's what we should be using. — kwami (talk) 00:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

A published book is not reliable, but an online dictionary is? How come? Says the user who adds personal comment to articles. The irony! You are not to call a pronunciation taken from a book dedicated to pronunciations "faux-foreign".

What you copied from that book is neither. Once again. Are you expert in Armenian? And are you the one who should decide which one is the "actual pronunciation"? Dictionary.com is just an online dictionary which is not supervised by any academic institution. Therefore, it is not a RS. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:58, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I cannot judge the merits of the two references (the published book and Dictionary.com), but I would just like to make two points regarding the pronunciation of the composers name:

1) In English, Armenian names (ending "ian" or "yan") (and, in fact, virtually all multi-syllable names) are not usually pronounced with a single stress on the last syllable. A short name is pronounced with the emphasis on the syllable preceding "ian" or "yan", as in William Sah RO yan, not sah ro YAN, while a longer name like Khachaturian would have a primary and a secondary stress. So the pronunciation that Kwamikagami has provided is the way it is pronounced in English.

2) Also, the spelling "Aram" indicates that, in English, no "h" sound is pronounced (as in "AH ram"). (That initial stressed "AH" is extremely difficult for many English speakers to pronounce. So that is probably why Aram Khachaturian spelled his name Aram and not Ahram.) Yerevantsi, before you accuse another editor of pushing his/her private point of view, consider that the other editor might have good reasons for his/her edit (perhaps not even explained fully in the edit summary). Try to remain cool and calm and discuss things in a rational manner. Ask questions of the other editor, but in a courteous way. Read and consider any replies carefully. Then your opinions will be considered and taken seriously also. CorinneSD (talk) 01:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

@CorinneSD: Just answer to this one question. Is it OK to add a personal opinion ("bastardized" in this case) to the article? Is it not POV? --Երևանցի ^talk 01:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

That's not opinion. It is a bastardized pronunciation. I agree that the word does not belong in the article: It should be removed when we remove the bastardized pronunciation.

BTW, you keep saying you're Armenian, as if that gives you some special insight into English. It doesn't, just as being American doesn't give me any insight into how Aaron Copeland's name should be pronounced in Armenian. I mean, I wouldn't dare go to WP-hy and insist that Աարոն Կոպլենդ is "wrong", and that I know better than they do because, goddamn it, I'm an American! and that they need to change it to the correct spelling Էրըն Քըւպլընդ *right now* or I'll go to ANI and report them for vandalism.

I grew up with the name "Khachaturian", and the only variation is whether the first a is the vowel of 'spa' or of 'cat' (both listed in the dictionary), and, occasionally, the kh being pronounced [x], like the ch of Bach (but only with the 'spa' vowel). The pronunciation you gave is just not used, and would be impossible for most people to even pronounce. — kwami (talk) 01:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

(EC)

Yerevantsi, I agree that the word "bastardized" is inappropriate for the article, but Kwami was trying to convey the idea that it was a combination of English and Armenian pronunciations and therefore unhelpful, and he agrees the word should be removed. What Kwami wrote, just above, is exactly right in all points. The important thing is how the name is pronounced in English, not the way the name is pronounced in Armenian. CorinneSD (talk) 01:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

If you find it OK to defend a long-time editor who added such a word to the article intro and then claims "That's not opinion. It is a bastardized pronunciation" then I don't have anything to add. Thanks for your input. Nowhere in the book it says that it's the Armenian pronunciation. --Երևանցի ^talk 16:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

OK, just in case this comes up again, I'll try an explain in lay terms why the English pronunciation suggested in the reference isn't any good. Basically, it's because no-one says it that way. Not even radio announcers. Not even the author of the book themself.

Have a look at "ah-rahm kah-chah-toor-YAHN". The "ah" repersents the sound in "father". Remembering that, try saying "AH-rahm KAH-chah-TOOR-yahn" (/ˈɑːrɑːm ˌkɑːtʃɑːˈtʊərjɑːn/) out loud. It just sounds wrong, like a voice synthesizer, and certainly not how "Aram Khachaturian" is pronounced in English. The reason for this is that all those "ah as in father"-s in a row is just not the way that sounds in English work. Does that make sense? --Shirt58 (talk) 08:38, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

"just sounds wrong" is a personal opinion. It is directly taken from a university published book, which is dedicated to pronounciations. Whether it sounds good/bad or right/wrong has nothing to do with WP:RS, which you might want to review. --Երևանցի ^talk 17:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

"AH rahm KAH chah TOOR yahn is the way it is pronounced in English and pretty close to the way it is pronounced in Armenian. English has many words with the "a" sound as in "father". It is also a sound which is found in both English and Armenian. (And since it is a sound which is found in both English and Armenian, it makes sense to use that sound rather than the sound more comfortable for many Americans, "a" as in "cat".) Shirt58, one reason you might think the pronunciation guide yields a pronunciation that sounds like a voice synthesizer is that the Pronunciation Key pronunciation guide, with the stressed syllables shown in small caps, does not distinguish between the primary and secondary stress. In natural speech in English, there is a syllable with primary stress and one or more syllables with secondary stress. The WP article on respelling explains that no distinction between primary and secondary stress is shown because native speakers can naturally figure out which syllable takes the primary stress. In this case, "TOOR" would have the primary stress and "KAH" would have the secondary stress. Said this way, the name sounds more natural. CorinneSD (talk) 21:39, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Please respond to my question. Sorry, but I do not care what your personal opinion is. The way you think it is pronounced has nothing to do with WP:RS. --Երևանցի ^talk 22:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Երևանցի, everyone here disagrees with you, so resolve it here rather than edit warring. When you took it to ANI, they even said that "bastardized pronunciation" was an accurate description. What you're promoting is an attempt to approximate the Armenian pronunciation in English. That's why you think it's "closer". (Which is also a "personal opinion", and so by your own argument inadmissable.) But it's not how it's actually pronounced in English. Again, you're effectively arguing that Աարոն Կոպլենդ should be changed to Էրըն Քըւպլընդ because you know better. Here on WP, we give the actual English and the actual Armenian, not some bastardized approximation of the Armenian. — kwami (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

You're a user who defended a POV-editor (Jaqeli) who was ultimately topic banned and now you're lecturing me on how Wikipedia works. Ironic, isn't it? You should review WP:RS. Whether you think it is "bastardized" or not does not make any difference. If you're a linguist, good for you. Go publish some books and then come back and cite them here. Whether others agree or disagree with me has nothing to do with this. Wikipedia is not a democracy and its users are not reliable sources, unlike the book I cited. --Երևանցի ^talk 22:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Yerevantsi, do you accept that names of people and places can be pronounced in countries other than the place of origin in such a way that it sounds different from the way it is pronounced in the place of origin? There are many, many names of people and places like that. Read the article Anglicisation and English exonyms. Isn't it better to give guides both to the actual way the name or word is pronounced by millions of English speakers and to the way the name or word is pronounced by native speakers of the language from which the name/word comes? If an English speaker wants to learn the Armenian pronunciation, for example, he or she can look for the Armenian pronunciation guide and hear it and learn it. If he or she wants to learn how the name is pronounced by his/her fellow English speakers, he/she can also hear and learn that. It would not help him or her to learn something that is somewhere in between those two pronunciations. That's what Kwami was trying to convey. I think his use of "bastardized" to describe that in-between pronunciation, while perhaps accurate, may have inflamed emotions unnecessarily. By the way, I amend my comment, above, in that English speakers would generally pronounce the final part of Khachaturian's name as "i-ən", not "yahn". CorinneSD (talk) 22:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Of course they are pronounced differently in every language. It has nothing to do with our discussion. The book I cited suggests a pronunciation which you and some (or many) English-speakers may find unusual. How does that make it "less correct"? Me, you, kwami or whoever, are not reliable sources. It's not up to us to decide which one is correct. You claim the books gives the Armenian pronunciation of Khachaturian's name. It does not. It gives the English pronunciation of an Armenian name. --Երևանցի ^talk 22:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

NODE, Collins and dictionary.com all give kwami's transcription. Are none of these reliable? — lfdder 22:42, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Is not a book (A Pronunciation Guide to Classical Music) published by a university press not reliable? --Երևանցի ^talk 22:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, it should be. But it seemed to me you were opposed to kwami's transcription earlier irrespective of this one. — lfdder 23:16, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm opposed to the removal of this pronunciation, which kwami did several times. Earlier today, I made a constructive edit[1] which included both pronunciations.

There are at least two different prounciations of his name. The Collins English Dictionary gives /ˈærəm ˌkɑːtʃəˈtʊəriən/ arr-əm kah-chə-toor-i-ən,[1] while The Well-tempered Announcer: A Pronunciation Guide to Classical Music suggests ah-rahm kah-chah-toor-yahn.[2]

This was reverted by kwami, who keeps on pushing his POV claiming it is "bastardized". --Երևանցի ^talk 23:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

It is bastardized! They even agreed with that at ANI. You simply don't know what you're talking about. — kwami (talk) 23:27, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you user caps locks to make your point? Mind WP:CIVIL. Only DangerousPanda said its an "appropriate and well-used term", while Newyorkbrad removed it from the lead saying rm "bastardized"; I don't know what the correct pronunciation is, and we may need to give alternates, but we scertainly aren't using that word in an article lead" --Երևանցի ^talk 23:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, for what's worth, I've tried saying it the way they suggest and I sounded like Microsoft Sam. ;P — lfdder 23:34, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Երևանցի, no, it is not. You simply don't understand the situation. That book is intended for people who want to use the "correct" rather than customary pronunciation of a name, like saying "puh-REE" rather than "PARR-iss" for Paris. It's intended for children (specifically, radio announcers in high school) who have no training in phonetics and can't be expected to be familiar with Armenian. What it gives is not an English pronunciation; in fact, it would be difficult for most English speakers to pronounce it.

Look through the guide: It is full of foreign phrases rendered as best they can with English phonetics. That is, ah-rahm kah-chah-toor-YAHN is supposed to be the *Armenian* pronunciation, and it's an entire book of bastardized pronunciations like that. We don't do this on WP. Since we have the space to provide dedicated phonetic descriptions of every language we use, that's exactly what we do. — kwami (talk) 23:18, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Says the user who defended a nationalist POV pusher and, not surprisingly, is a POV-pusher himself. Just because you think "it would be difficult for most English speakers to pronounce it", doesn't give you the right to remove it. Keep your linguistic lectures to yourself. We go by reliable sources here. Somethng you don't seem to care much about.

The book is in English and it gives the English pronunciation of an Armenian names. If it was indeed the Armenian pronunciation then it wouldn't say "Kah", because "kh" is an actual letter and a sound in Armenian, which is usually transliterated to X. --Երևանցի ^talk 23:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Again, you show your ignorance. There is no "kh" sound in English, so they don't have that option. According to your argument, I can go to Armenian Wikipedia, add "ah-rahm kah-chah-toor-YAHN" to the Արամ Խաչատրյան article, and insist that anyone who disagrees with me doesn't know how to speak Armenian, because I found this is a "published book". I wouldn't tell native Armenian speakers that they don't know how to speak Armenian, so where do you get off telling native English speakers that they don't know how to speak English? — kwami (talk) 23:38, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

That is exactly my point. There is no "kh" sound in English, that is why it says "kah-chah-toor-yahn" (English) and not "xačatryan" (Armenian). --Երևանցի ^talk 23:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Maybe it helps to think of it like instructing Armenian speakers to pronounce [ˈvɑlibol] for վոլեյբոլ or [ˈbɛdmintʰən] for բադմինտոն. — lfdder 00:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable source which transcribes վոլեյբոլ as [ˈvɑlibol], then yes, it is an acceptable c. Football for instance, is pronounced the same way as in English. Because "Khachaturian" is not an English word, there's no one way of correctly pronouncing it. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

It'd still probably not be acceptable for inclusion for being prescriptive. Well, if it's been integrated (i.e. it's a loanword), then there is a common way of pronouncing it. Obviously 'Khachaturian' is nowhere near as common in English as վոլեյբոլ is in Armenian, but I'm sure you get what I mean. — lfdder 00:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I totally understand what you mean. But why remove the (less) common pronunciation? Does it hurt anyone? Again, yes, it might be harder for English-speakers to pronounce this version, but that's not a reason to remove it. It is a version of a pronunciation suggested by a reliable source. Whether you like it or not. Look at Vincent van Gogh. It gives several different ways of pronunciation and has only the Dutch (i.e. native) pronunciation in the intro. Despite what kwami was saying all along that the English pronunciation should be in the lead. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:16, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

All of the pronunciations listed for Van Gogh are often heard. It is very unlikely anyone will ever utter Khachaturian's name in English the way The Well-tempered Announcer suggests; whether they intend to or not, they will reduce some of the vowels. The transcription is usually found next to the title in bold (see WP:PRON#Placement). It's not for van Gogh 'cause there's more than one and they'd clutter the opening sentence. — lfdder 00:25, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

"It is very unlikely" according to you? Do you have any way to prove it? It is simply your personal belief (which may or may not be right). But let's say it is "very unlikely" to be ever used by English speakers, how does it make it less correct? At least two other sources give "kah-chah-toor-yahn": Grolier[2] and Greene's Biographical Encyclopedia of Composers[3] To ignore these sources means to give WP:UNDUEWEIGHT to the version you think is "better" or "correct". As I already stated, Khachaturian is not an English word and a pronunciation suggested by reliable sources should be included as an option. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, these two are definitely not what I'd call reliable on the pronunciation specifically. It would be WP:UNDUEWEIGHT to give them as much weight as dictionaries. — lfdder 00:40, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

How are (generic, non-related to music) dictionaries more reliable than books specifically about pronunciation (Well-tempered Announcer: A Pronunciation Guide to Classical Music) and music (Greene's Biographical Encyclopedia of Composers) and one generic dictionary (Grolier, the article is apparently written by a musician)? If you have doubts about their reliability, then I should probably take this to WP:RSN and let uninvolved and non-POV-pushing users have their say. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Maybe because these 'generic, non-related to music' descriptive dictionaries concern themselves with transcriptions? — lfdder 01:01, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Final question: Do you agree to include this pronunciation in the note alongside the other one? If not, then I will refrain from making further comments here and will continue at RSN. --Երևանցի ^talk 01:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't think there's much use for it, no -- having read kwami's assessment of the book, I think it's correct. — lfdder 01:12, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Uninvolved opinion

An uninvolved admin suggested to include both pronunciations in the article. Unless there is objection, I will go ahead and add it to the article in the upcoming days. --Երևանցի ^talk 23:30, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

'Unless there is objection'? What's made you think we've changed opinion? — lfdder 00:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't to seem to have asked your opinion. My question was for users who have not been part of this discussion. You were actively involved in the dispute. There are 4 sources that suggest an alternative pronunciation. And an uninvolved admin agreed that it needs to be included in the article. What is your rationale? That it's "bastardized", "wrong", "not sounding right"? --Երևանցի ^talk 00:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

You are joking. You're excluding me and everybody else who's commented here earlier from consensus-building on what grounds, exactly? The fact that he's an admin has fuck-all bearing here. There's three people (besides myself) who've told you it practically can't be pronounced that way, one of them a linguist -- who's also explained what's wrong with your source. — lfdder 00:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Am I? Please read your comment over. It's as POV-worded as possible. Who the hell cares if he's a linguist or a historian? Where in the Wikipedia guidelines does it say that a supposed linguist user has more to say than others? Has he published a book on how to pronunciation Khachaturian's name? If yes, then he is welcome to cite his sources (if they are reliable).

Your only rational in this entire discussion has been that it "can't be pronounced that way". I've given four sources that cite the alleged "bastardized" pronunciation as the correct pronunciation. And an uninvolved admin has supported that these sources are enough for it to be included in the article. All you're saying is that it is "wrong", "impossible" etc and what is the basis behind this? Your personal opinion. This is what Wikipedia defines as POV. You cannot dismiss four sources because you think it "can't be pronounced that way". --Երևանցի ^talk 01:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

You said: 'Unless there is objection, I will go ahead and add it to the article in the upcoming days.' How is this not excluding us from consensus-building? Of course it matters that he's an expert -- how are you supposed to judge if a seemingly-reliable source is -- indeed -- reliable if you've not got the faintest clue about the topic? And how is the 'uninvolved admin's' judgment not his personal opinion? Is WP:RSN an exercise in POV-pushing then? — lfdder 01:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Two points: 1) User:Kwamikagami should not be regarded as the sole keeper of all wisdom in matters of pronunciation. I found some of his transcriptions for German terms way too detailed and/or not in line with standard transcriptions in works like Langenscheidt to be of any help. 2) I have heard radio announcers here in Australia pronounce Khachaturian's name as /ˈɑːrʌm ˌkʌtʃəˈtʊriən/ (AH-rum kah-chah-TOOR-yahn) and I expect British speakers would do similarly. I don't think the currently provided pronunciation, /ˈærəm ˌkɑːtʃəˈtʊəriən/, is universally used in English speaking countries. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, of course. Especially if you can document them. I'm not saying my way is the only way, just that it's the most common pronunciation I can find in RS's, and that AFAICT the other proposed pronunciation is not actually used, indeed isn't actually English. — kwami (talk) 08:05, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

@Michael Bednarek: kwami's arrogance is nothing new. Don't expect anything else from a long-time editor and an admin who's OK with inserting his personal opinion into article lead ("bastardized") because he think he's right. He also seems to be OK with personal attacks (e.g. calling me "ignorant"). According to him (and lfdder), his supposed degree in linguistics makes him superior and also gives him the right to dismiss reliable sources on irrational grounds. His comment reveals that he does support POV-pushing. Note that he says afaict, directly admitting that it's his opinion, not a fact. --Երևանցի ^talk 20:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

No, "IMO" means opinion, "AFAICT" means fact. — kwami (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

"as far as I can tell". --Երևանցի ^talk 01:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

You don't seem to be clear on what an "opinion" is. If I measure a desk to be 104 cm, the result is not an "opinion" even though I measured it. — kwami (talk) 01:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

But it was still measured by you. What you don't understand is that you as a Wikipedia user are not a WP:RS and what you, me and other users think has nothing to do with what should be included in the article --Երևանցի ^talk 20:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

And what you don't understand is that we need to evaluate our sources, not accept them blindly. If I found some university-published source that "Kachaturian" is pronounced TOL-stoy, you'd be right to point out that it appears to be a copy error. Should I say, "that's just your opinion, you're not a RS, so we need to say it's pronounced TOL-stoy, stop pushing your POV on the rest of us"? I can source a pronunciation of hāqiàtúliáng. Should we add that? And when you object that that is Mandarin, I should deny it, and say, again, that's just your opinion? We need to use a bit of common sense. If you're not familiar enough with English conventions to be able to distinguish between actual English, and Armenian approximated in English, how many hours should the rest of us spend trying to educate you? — kwami (talk) 00:55, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

That's not what I said. — lfdder 20:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't arguing the exclusion of every other transcription (only the one Yerevantsi insists on adding) and nowhere did I claim anything like he's 'the sole keeper of all wisdom in matters of pronunciation'. Is hyperbole hour over? — lfdder 09:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Chiming in as another uninvolved admin: please give both pronunciations, following the respective spellings in English and Armenian. If that ends up being the two pronunciations cited above from multiple sources, then that's simple. Otherwise, if there is a third pronunciation that is frequently heard in English-language broadcasts and has multiple citations from reliable sources, then IMHO it would be helpful to add that too, after the better English pronunciation and the word "or". – Fayenatic London 20:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

God save us from uninvolved admins. Do you understand that both transcriptions are for English? — lfdder 21:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Could you please clarify your position? --Երևանցի ^talk 20:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Please give both the cited English pronunciations. The word "or" will suffice without further labelling such as "bastardized". (I thought from the discussion above that one of the pronunciations was for the Armenian; I gather that it's different, so let's have that as well.) – Fayenatic London 22:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it is for Armenian, but not proper Armenian. Երևանցի doesn't understand that. — kwami (talk) 02:15, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

You're not addressing my concerns. — lfdder 00:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely not. If we're going to give an English pronunciation, it needs to be an English pronunciation. We're not going to give "United States" a second pronunciation of "es-TAH-dohz oo-NEE-dohz" even if we find a ref for it. — kwami (talk) 01:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I think providing a native, Armenian pronunciation would be helpful to many readers, similar to what can be found at Johann Sebastian Bach, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Auguste Rodin. Note that often only a native pronunciation is provided (Jean-Baptiste Lully, FA Olivier Messiaen). Why no native pronunciation here? What would it look like? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:13, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

there is one. — lfdder 08:16, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Russian name transliteration

This is more to do with spelling that pronounciation, but I have added a dubious tag against the claim that his name "was transformed into Khachaturian in Russian". It is well known that the "yan" ending that is seen at the end of most Armenian surnames in modern Armenia arose as a result of Russian influence - the difficulty of transcribing "ian" into Cyrillic letters. The "ian" ending is the traditional way that the ending on Armenian names have been rendered in Western European languages. I realise that what may be intended is an explanation of how Khachatrian/Khachatryan became "Khachaturian" - but if so the explanation is missleading because it inplies that "yan" is correct and Armenian - and that "ian" is not, whereas thereverse is true: it is actually "ian" which is historically more correct with "yan" a recent arival due to Russian influences.Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:13, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Would this be OK? Change "It was transformed into Khachaturian in Russian" to "It was transformed into Khachaturyan in Russian" and then put "(and thereafter adopted by English-language sources and rendered as Khachaturian)". Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

What languages did he speak fluently? What was his first language?

No mention of this at all... I'm guessing he would have spoken Russian, Armenian and Georgian? 86.148.66.208 (talk) 19:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

He spoke Russian and Armenian fluently, probably knew (some) Georgian, though I'm not sure he spoke it fluently since many Georgian Armenians simply don't learn that language, especially back then when Georgia was part of Russia and Russian was lingua franca. --Երևանցի ^talk 05:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Norman Lebrecht

I have just removed a quote by Norman Lebrecht since he is not an authority on Khachaturian, and his quote about Khachaturian's "only crime" was totally wrong/beside the point. Please note that Lebrecht is a journalist (not a musicologist of any description), who sometimes (very occasionally if dealing with a Western European artist, rather less often otherwise) gets his facts right. What he writes, though, is scarcely if ever based on primary research of any kind, so he is - at best - a dodgy tertiary source which is quite inappropriate for this article. Please could anything sourced to his writing be double-checked and more factually reliable sources found to support them. Alfietucker (talk) 08:46, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment. It's best to refrain from citing not very authoritative authors. --Երևանցի ^talk 04:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The i word

Is there any consensus to add an info-box? Is this over-ruled or prohibited by the GA status of the article? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't matter either way in terms of the GA status. If there is a consensus for an infobox, then it should be added.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I would have no objection to one being added. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:13, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Composers#Biographical_infoboxes. "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article." ... "We think it is normally best, therefore, to avoid infoboxes altogether for classical musicians, and we prefer to add an infobox to an article only following consensus for that inclusion on the article's talk page." --Երևանցի ^talk 16:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

By the way, neither Prokofiev's nor Shostakovich's article has one. --Երևանցի ^talk 16:17, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I saw your advice in your edit summary, thanks. That's why I opened this discussion thread. Are you one of the "we"? This isn't Prokofiev's nor Shostakovich's article, is it? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't really mind. Just pointing out what Wikipedia guidelines say and what other (comparable) articles follow. --Երևանցի ^talk 16:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough. The problem with the "consistency argument" is that it undermines a decision being made purely for this article on this Talk Page. As long as most composers have no info-box, "consistency" dictates that no more should have one. One has to tread carefully in this area. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I added an infobox and am considering on deleting it after reading Wikipedia:WikiProject_Composers#Biographical_infoboxes. Shoud I remove it? ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 11:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Aram Khachaturian. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.krugosvet.ru/enc/kultura_i_obrazovanie/muzyka/HACHATURYAN_ARAM_ILICH.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/17623/Steyn_Khachaturyan(2009).pdf
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://russiasperiphery.blogs.wm.edu/transcaucasia/armenia/general/aram-khachaturian/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Aram Khachaturian. 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/20141006074554/http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/aram_khachaturian to http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/aram_khachaturian%20
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006074554/http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/aram_khachaturian to http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/aram_khachaturian%20

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:02, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Aram Khachaturian. 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/20140413123511/http://georgia.yellowpg.com/listings/ge6852-a-khachaturiani-musical-school-10 to http://georgia.yellowpg.com/listings/ge6852-a-khachaturiani-musical-school-10
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141230205629/http://www.hamazkayin-usa.org/akhsm/about-us/ to http://www.hamazkayin-usa.org/akhsm/about-us/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413160039/http://www.akhic.am/en/aboutus to http://www.akhic.am/en/aboutus
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_music/8125/%D0%A5%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80%D1%8F%D0%BD

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:11, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Glière

The claim he was taught composition by Glière does not appear to be borne out by either of the biographies of Khachaturian by Shneerson or by Victor Yuzefovich. In the absence of any citation for this claim, I have deleted it. Alfietucker (talk) 13:04, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Aram Khachaturian.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Aram Khachaturian Moscow7.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Aram Khachaturian mural in Yerevan.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 20 March 2022 (UTC)