Talk:Gülablı

Armeniapedia not reliable

This edit by Marshall is unacceptable. he uses Armeniapedia as a source. But Armeniapedia is a Wikipedia based Armenian source. Marshall you're an experienced user and you still cant tell when a source is reliable and when not? Neftchi (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Armeniapedia is simply displaying the census results of 2005, which were in any case collected by officials from the NKR government. It would be no different if it reproduced a New York Times article about Armenians from 1915 - it is only hosting the data on its website, not making claims to them.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Neftchi is right, gentlemen. Armeniapedia is not a reliable source. It's a Wikipedia based, owned and edited by Armenian users, participating in English Wikipedia as well. I also could not find any information on the location of the drone shoot-down in the source added [1]. Please address. For now I removed it as a violation of WP:OR. Tuscumbia (talk) 13:16, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

As long as I understand, the problem is source to prove the population. Why do you try to remove other information ? Because of Azerbaijani nationalistic sentiment ? Takabeg (talk) 13:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Takabeg, watch your statements. I explained the edit above. What exactly you claim to be NPOV when you restored the WP:OR? Tuscumbia (talk) 13:58, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Here is a neutral encyclopedia. We can permit neither Armenian nationalistic edits nor Azerbaijan nationalistic edits. Your WP:OR claim doesn't legitimate your removing information (alternative names, the administrative unit of Nagorno Karabakh Republic etc.). So I think your behavior is caused by Azerbaijani nationalism. Takabeg (talk) 14:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Why did you remove this source ? This is not Armeniapedia. If you think this source is not reliable, you can use Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Takabeg (talk) 14:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Armeniapedia is just a site that hosts the source, sheesh. The data were collected by the NKR authorities in 2005. Do you dispute the numbers or the manner in which the NKR collected the data? We should also stop pretending that the NKR is some invisible entity that only the Armenians can see and cease such antics as placing quotation marks around placenames (like Vazgenashen).--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 01:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Armeniapedia is not a reliable source. Period. The author and the owner is the user RaffiKojian. What he can't add here, he adds to his website and then re-adds as som neutral source. File for the Third Party opinion if you like. Tuscumbia (talk) 12:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

What ??? Is this website Armeniapedia ? No. Takabeg (talk) 12:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Name

• Gülablı 0
• Gyulably 4
• Gyulaply 0
• Vazgenashen 1 ?

Takabeg (talk) 04:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Google may not display all results. See the result for Gülablı here. The result for Vazgenashen can't be seen from the link you provided. Tuscumbia (talk) 13:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Geonames is useful tool. For example, according to that website, there is Armenian alternative name of Gyulably: Գյուլափլը. But Geonames is not almighty. You'd better read WP:COMMONNAME. Takabeg (talk) 13:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

In this case, it is almighty since all articles are based on the neutral unbiased source. Tuscumbia (talk) 13:58, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Plus, you might want to expand your search for Gülablı‎ which produces 18,300 results. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Normal google research is not reliable. Takabeg (talk) 14:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

According to google map, Vazgenashen. Of course, Google maps is helpful, but not almighty. Takabeg (talk) 14:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Takabeg, perhaps, you should read WP:COMMONNAME yourself. The policy implies usage of common names from reliable English language sources. Now, please go to the search results I provided above and see neutral geo-sources which all call the village Gülablı. Moreover, your Google Map result you offered above, is unreliable, for one and only reason. It was edited and the name was changed by Armenian users, including RaffiKojian who has edited this article. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

According to google scolars:

• Gülablı 2 ?, non-English sources.
• Gyulably 0
• Gyulaply 0
• Vazgenashen 1

Takabeg (talk) 14:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Armenian reporter?

Marshall, Armenian reporter? As a source which incorrectly names the village Vazgenashen? I'm sorry, but please find some other place for addition of POV. There are numerous Azerbaijani news sources which call Yerevan Iravan. Do you think we should go ahead and change those as well? I pointed out the neutral source from GeoNames as well as Google search which yields results for Gulabli from neutral sources. Edit warring will take us to an arbitration. I recommend you stop edit warring and inclusion on outright POV. Tuscumbia (talk) 12:38, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

The NKR has changed the name of the village to Vazgenashen. Whether or not you agree with that decision is irrelevant since the Armenian Reporter is reflecting the situation as it stands today. The Republic of Turkey has deliberately altered and changed the names of dozens of place names but that reality must be reflected to in the articles on Wikipedia. The analogy with "Iravan" is just silly and inappropriate and since it's vainly brought up every so often so I won't even bother wasting my time on debunking it. And, the last time I checked, it appears that it is you, Dighapet, and Neftchi who are so prone to edit warring and spinning arguments around so that they actually do not get anywhere.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

We can find Vazgenashen even in google map. This is not problem. Reporter's nationality is not problem. But I think this news is not appropriate for this article in accordance with WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Takabeg (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

The name "Vazgenashen" is illegitimate, simply because it's not given by the de-jure state which is recognized by the international community, but by an unrecognized illegitimate regime occupying a territory of a sovereign state. Iravan is an excellent example. I'm not understanding why you would shy away from considering it. Well, maybe I do.

Takabeg, I suppose the Google Maps results have already been addressed, but for editors who seem to have ignored that, I'll reiterate. The result in Google Maps is due to Google Map Maker edits by Armenian users, including RaffiKojian who have replaced the legitimate names in Google Maps and are trying to force that in here as well. Tuscumbia (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

We don't discuss legitimacy here. Do you know situation in French Wikipedia ? For example, fr:Zardanashen, fr:Varanda, fr:Tsovategh... completely Pro-Nagorno Karabakh Republic and not neutral. In English Wikipedia, Zərdanaşen, Qaradağlı, Khojavend, Zavadykh... completely Pro-Azerbaijan and not neutral. As you know, Cyprus is also "disputed" area, but articles are more neutral. We can see in related articles (Famagusta, Kyrenia, Morphou etc.), Greek/Turkish alternative names, information about "De jure" and "De fact". Takabeg (talk) 18:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

"Vazgenashen" is not a Gülablı. Please see. --N KOzi^Talk 09:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Sağolun. In this situation, we have to create new article. What do you think about it ? Takabeg (talk) 09:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Gülablı → Gyulably – per WP:COMMONNAME

Gulably is also acceptable.

As we know, GeoNames search is helpful but almighty. For example, Missolonghi's approved name is Mesolóngion (Talk:Missolonghi), Imbros's approved name is Gökçeada by GeoNames search.

According to GeoNames search: Gülablı (Approved), Gyulably (Variant), Gyulap’ly (Variant), Гюлаблы (Variant Native Script), Գյուլափլը (Variant Native Script)

According to google books:

• Gülablı 0
• Gyulably 4
• Gyulaply 0
• Vazgenashen 1 ?
• Gulably 8, but at least 4 of them are irrelevant.

According to google scolars:

• Gülablı 2 ?, non-English sources.
• Gyulably 0
• Gyulaply 0
• Vazgenashen 1

Everything is better than 0. Takabeg (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose I don't think Takabeg is really understandind what he's proposing. WP:COMMONNAMES states In determining which of several alternative names is most frequently used, it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies and scientific journals.Tuscumbia (talk) 17:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose the wikipedia policy is at WP:Names, which states: "If there are too few English-language sources to constitute an established usage, follow the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject (German for German politicians, Portuguese for Brazilian towns, and so on)." Here, as Takabeg points out there seems to be few English-language sources, so we use Azerbaijani as the language appropriate to a village in Azerbaijan. There are redirects at all the other variants, so no one will get lost. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose Im with Carlossuarez on this one and I want to add that Takabeg's continuous request for move and deletion of Azerbaijani related articles are ungrounded. Neftchi (talk) 18:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Drone was Azerbaijani?

The Armenian media and military authorities declared this drone to be Azerbaijani even before making any investigations. But they have shown not any single proof that it was Azerbaijani (military signs and etc.) All these are presumable reports and maybe fictions. --Verman1 (talk) 19:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Few quotes from the source added to deny the drones Azerbaijani origin.

"state news agency APA came out with an explanation that, to be charitable, we can call "elaborate." Approvingly citing a Turkish tabloid report, APA suggests that the drone may have in fact been Israeli:"

"why would Armenia -- which has good relations with Iran -- allow such a thing in the first place? As this fascinating Wikileaked cable describes, it's in fact Azerbaijan that has a close relationship with Israel"

I believe the fact that Azerbaijan denies the drone was theirs should be included in the article, but it should be clearly shown that is a fringe theory. --George Spurlin (talk) 02:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

George Spurlin, first of all I kindly ask you not to make any reverts before the end of discussion. Second, you have not answered to my question quoted in above. Is there any proof that drone was Azerbaijani? I have not met any single proof so far. If you can provide such proofs, then yes, I will agree that drone was really from Azerbaijan. Without proofs, I think both Azerbaijani and Armenian versions should be shown as fringe versions. What about that? --Verman1 (talk) 06:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)