Talk:Dashkasan (city)

Qarhat

Is there any neutral source showing armenian origin of the name Dashkesen? Regards, --Verman1 (talk) 03:28, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Any edits using phrase "medieval Dashkesen" must be reverted, because it's a mockery to historical science at all. There is a huge number of photographies of Armenian monasteries and cross stones taken by armenians who lived there before 1988. Most of those was destroyd and being destroyed today. But in some of them seen exact name of Qarhat. Many medieval historians mention name Qarhat, but calling it by Turkic name "Dashkesen" in the middle ages is totally absurd. You can accept works of Mesrop Mashtots - Armenian alphabet creator as neutral source because he lived in 5th century (long before first Turkic nomand steped from Central Asia to Persia). Near Qarhat (today Dashqesan) existed Targmanchats (meaning: Translator's) Armenian monastery, where Mesrop Mashtots for the first time translated Bible from Greek to Armenian.188.115.218.197 (talk) 20:29, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

User Alexius Horatius stop protecting azerbaijani vandalism to the articles concerning to Armenian history, in which you being out of touch. Every time this article will be unprotected, historical facts, so unpleasant to you and another anti-Armenian deletionists, will be placed again and again. Wikipedia's pages must NOT contain lie and slander, insulting the whole nation (where victimes of massacres called as GANGS). You are funny people if you think it will be another way. 178.78.176.175 (talk) 07:58, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

This is not propaganda site. Your pushing povs which include hard language is not admitted here. the territory is in Azerbaijan and has always been. Dighapet (talk) 16:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Your ignorance to historical facts has no limits... just look at your words: the territory is in Azerbaijan and has always been... Dear Dighapet. You and most of Azeri people live in your dreamworld. Untill 1920 this was a northern part of Armenian populated region Artsakh. And this edit of the article is afull of PICKLE. It's out of line with reality. For example:

1. Sadly-known azeri myth about so-called Albanian-Christian temples any Armenian abby or church in Northern Artsakh survived of your barbarities you used to call as Albanian-Christian temple.
2. Turkic name Khoshbulag canNOT exited in IIId century B.C because every child know that Turkic folks lived in Central Asia at the time, and this was a part of Urartu. Therefore:
3. Words Since that period Dashkesen... are incorrect, because Dashkesan was founded in IV century A.D. as Armenian settlement named as Qarhat.
4. Tumuli type burying monuments are the most insignificant monuments in the Dashkesan/Qarhat's territory. Dashkesan's district has Vskatel, Targmantshats, Okhte Yeghtsi, Kaghni khach, Svretsiq, Madsnaberdi vanq, Khachaxbyur and Dastapor Armenian monasteries, Armenian churches inside Hambarak, Getamidj, Tsndsahal, Dastapor, Almali, Ghapaghtapa, Hatstap, Galinghaya, Amrvar, Pib(Zaglik), Verin Qarhat, Nerkin Qarhat, Khachakap(Ghushchu), Hartshangist(Chovdar) settlements and TWO in Banants(Bayan) settlement. Also u have 23 Armenian cemeteries with 20-250 Armenian cross-stone monuments in each of them.
5. Ethimology section told nothing about district's historical name Qarhat (easy to find in any of historical archives outside azerbaijan).
6. Genocide of Armenians in 1991 in north Artsakh is represented here as erasement of those gangs. Such an impudence and disrespect to hundreds of killed innocent people is a direct consequence of impunity for Armenian massacres in Baku1990, Sumgait(1988) and Maragha. Bloody criminals of this events are buried in so-called shahid's alley in Baku as heros.
   

But Nuremberg trial for Armenian genocide in Azerbaijan is near.

188.115.224.175 (talk) 10:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism of Azerbaijani wikipedians to this article

Users Maphobbyist and NovaSkola please, stop your vandalism to the issue, you know nothing about. Event.Horizon.000 (talk) 06:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

You the same user 188.115.233.180 and sockpuppet Event.Horizon.000 / Mr.John.66 are engaging in vandalism by erasing (or adding POV material) other editions.

I will watch any destructive editions you makeand revert them on the spot. And it seems you have been engaged with other users in Turkish-Armenian edit wars logged in or logged out. No acts of vandalism you make will be tolerated and will be immediately cancelled.

(Maphobbyist talk) 17:22, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a talk page of Qarhat/Dashkesan's article, and no need to justify your inability to prove destructiveness or vandalism of my edits to the article.
U can watch everything u need. And Turkish-Armenian edit wars rize users who saying words like destructive and vandalism to justify their own vandalism. Event.Horizon.000 (talk) 18:27, 18 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.115.236.124 (talk)

Even now your are still engaging in sockpuppetry even though you are being currently blocked, while you added your comments under the name (Event.Horizon.000) while not being logged.

I am neither Turkish nor Armenian, I previously reverted your editions as unconstructive until you started reverting without any reasoning and justification whatsover, the edits I made even about topics that are not even associated with controversial Armenian/Azerbaijani/Turkish topics (personally I do not care abot them), such as Facadism or Cultural heritage management etc... because of your anger and frustration of not properly editing.

(Maphobbyist talk) 21:24, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Church

Please do not delete the mention about Targmanchats Monastery that it is an Armenian church. I don't see any good reason for that. --vacio 18:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Would you explain for what reason it should stay? The sources regarding this monastery are split. One side insists that this is Caucasian Albanian monastery, the other side declares this as an Armenian church. As a neutral point of view, it is better not to mention its national connection, otherwise I am afraid this would be a base for further edit wars. --Verman1 (talk) 18:41, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Which sources do you mean? It is said to be founded by Mesrop Mashtots, do you think he was an Albanian? Even the name of the Church is Armenian! And please be warned that you are continuing edit warring, you reverted the same edit already 3 times. --vacio 18:45, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Before warning me about consequences, it is better for you to show a NPOV. What you are doing is leading us to the edit war over small thing. First of all, this case should be discussed not in this article, but in corresponding monastery's article. Regarding the name of the monastery,

1) are you sure it was original name of the monastery? Do you have any reliable sources that can prove your words?

2) It is not called like Targmanchats in everywhere, for example in Azerbaijan (where the monastery is situated) the monastery called as Quşçular monastırı. --Verman1 (talk) 18:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

1) I think we can be sure, as it was founded by Mesrop Mashtots and Sahak Partev. There are sources in the relevant article. Why do you think they are not reliable?

2) Quşçular monastırı is only used by Azerbaijanis and by the way it is a modern name of the monastery, so not relevant for this discussion. --vacio 19:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I guess you don't clearly understand my point about my edits. My inspiration is that we have to discuss this controversial matter not in this article, but in relevant monastery's article talkpage. Your edits are clearly leading us to the edit war. Ethnicity of the monastery is not that important for the article. Demonstration of NPOV is the most relevant in our situation. Relevance of modern name of the monastery is equal to the importance of monastery's ethnicity demonstration. I hope everything will be clear after this post. --Verman1 (talk) 10:49, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

No it's not. You just seem to move information which you don't like, surely it is important to mention that the church is Armenian. You didn't provide any grounds to claim that this information is controversial. If you have such grounds, you should start a discussion about that, and indeed in the talk page of the relevant article. As far as you didn't do that — and you even didn't answer my question why you think the sources are reliable —, you're just engaging in edit war. Please stop that, you have made so many reverts in this and a number of other articles, that you will leave no other choice than to report you if you continue. And I am just one of the users who's edits you continually revert, so it makes no sense to say that I am guilty for an edit war. --vacio 17:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Would you please focus on this discussion instead of analyzing my edit history? I think we can find consensus much more easily if we just discuss this controversial matter, instead of thinking of how I can report my counterpart. Your quotation that "surely it is important to mention that the church is Armenian" is very disputed and I am still looking for the answer for my question. Why do you think that it is so much important to mention that? This controversial info will result in edit-warring in future, I just don't want this article to be a battleground. --Verman1 (talk) 07:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I warned you that you were edit warring because you were continuously removing a sourced info without clear motivation. It is you that has to provide grounds to move an essential notion about the church because you think that it has to be moved. If you think it is not, please explain why it is not, otherwise refrain from edit warring as I warned you already. --vacio 18:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I have presented my explanation in above. Please read them carefully. --Verman1 (talk) 06:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I did, and I don't see any good reason mentioned there to move sourced information about the church. --vacio 22:13, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Destefur

In this source [1] there is't any word about "large influx of Armenian population into Daşkəsən, changing its ethnic makeup". Destefur raion was significantly smaller then Dashkesan. 109.173.47.1 (talk) 14:26, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Armenian or Azerbaijani village?!

This village has to be considered Azerbaijani village and comments about "Armenian origins" have to be removed from article. Because:

1. only one source (Первая всеобщая перепись населения Российской империи 1897 г. "Населенные места Российской империи в 500 и более жителей с указанием всего наличного в них населения и числа жителей преобладающих вероисповеданий, по данным первой всеобщей переписи населения 1897 г.", Санкт-Петербург, 1905, стр. 30) says that it is or was Armenian village;
2. That sources is not verifiable;
3. All the rest of the sources all over the world says it is originally Azerbaijani village.

Best, 188.142.246.17 (talk) 21:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

All the rest of the sources all over the world says it is originally Azerbaijani village., Can I see just one such sourсe?

These are the results of the census of 1897 in Russian Empire: Russian Empire Census. Why they aren't verifiable? Gragg (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 21 March 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. Per what I said in my RM closure at Talk:Ismayilli, Yes, accents or other diacritics are allowed per WP:DIACRITICS as long as their used in general from reliable English sources or are the common name from verified sources. And contrary to the RM initiator, the opposition has not demonstrated the use of "Daşkəsən" as the common name or presented its use in reliable sources. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 23:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

---

Daşkəsən → Dashkasan (city) – Move to "Dashkasan (city)" per WP:UE/WP:COMMONNAME/WP:ENGLISH. Proof of anglicized name being the common name:

Results from Google News: Dashkasan: 1,300 Daşkəsən: 5

Results from Google Scholar: Dashkasan: 145 Daşkəsən: 29

Individual reliable sources referring to the city as Dashkasan: RFE/RL, The Guardian, OC Media

This is the same name but an anglicized version. Unlike other small villages, this is a fairly large town, which has made a lot of appearances in English-language media, in most of which, "Dashkasan" has been used much more, establishing its WP:COMMONNAME. I'd also like to ask the closing admin to give more attention to the arguments being made rather than the vote counts, as there are people who go over each RM and repeat unrelated policies as an "Oppose" argument. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 16:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose en.wp can so en.wp does. All our small Azerbaijan geos are at Azerbaijani full font names. This is a choice by en.wp editors over a decade to have a high-MOS full Latin-alphabets script article corpus for all Latin alphabet countries' geos. This is a MOS choice. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

  Not really true. In fact, most Wikipedia articles for Azerbaijani cities use anglicized names as their article titles, including a recent wave of successful RMs as, for example, seen here and here. We're not changing the name solely because it uses non-anglicized letters. The anglicized name is the common name as shown by a wide range of WP:RS and WP:GOOGLETEST provided above and Wikipedia policies and guidelines such as WP:UE, WP:ENGLISH and WP:COMMONNAME prefer an anglicized common name rather than an non-anglicized barely mentioned name. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 18:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:DIACRITICS.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:37, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

  Note that the user above has copy-pasted same comment mentioning a completely irrelevant policy to every single Requested Moves of mine.

  The first sentence from that policy:

  The use of modified letters (such as accents or other diacritics) in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged; when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language (including other encyclopedias and reference works). The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters, if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources.

  See above to know which name English language reliable sources use. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 20:42, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per In Ictu Oculi. No such user (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support - I've voted on similar RMs before and there are always unrelated policies and M.O.S. issues repeated. This, to me, seems to be a commonname issue and I'm convinced by the sufficient sourcing provided by CuriousGolden that the anglicised name is the commonname. Gnominite (talk) 14:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support per sourcing brought up by nominator. I'll buy that this is the common name given the substantially different hit counts, including in high quality sources like Google Scholar. (Canvassing disclaimer to closer: These RMs were brought up in the Wikipedia Discord.) SnowFire (talk) 00:52, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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:

• Daşkəsən bayrağı.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)