Talk:Armenia/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2017

Armenia does not have a border with russia and georgia, only a border with georgia. This information is incorrect 205.209.91.171 (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  02:54, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

RFC for Western Asia vs. Eastern Europe

The following discussion 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.

---

Should the lead say that Armenia is:

• Located in Western Asia

or...

• Located in Eastern Europe

Long overdue RfC. I believe there has been a consensus in the past, but it appears that a few users believe that the WP:CONSENSUSCANCHANGE. Hence why we need an RfC. Étienne Dolet (talk) Relisted by Winged Blades ^Godric at 14:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC) .Initiated on 23:00, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Survey

• Western Asia, for consistency with Western Asia, and to follow the United Nations Statistics Division information listed on that page. Also, according to the graphics we're using – File:Western Asia (orthographic projection).svg and File:Armenia (orthographic projection).svg – it's not even close. Bradv 23:13, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
• Neither or Both, either something like we have for Georgia: "in the Caucasus region of Eurasia. Located at the crossroads of Western Asia and Eastern Europe" or better yet Cyprus without mentioning any continent: "is an island country in the Eastern Mediterranean and the third largest and third most populous island in the Mediterranean." Leaving: "is a sovereign state in the South Caucasus region of Eurasia. It is bordered by Turkey to the west, Russia and Georgia to the north and Azerbaijan to the east, and Iran and Azerbaijan's exclave of Nakhchivan to the south."-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 12:49, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Agree with Eupator here. --Երևանցի ^talk 13:17, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Agree with Eupator as well. Étienne Dolet (talk) 23:36, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
• Western Asia. Not even close indeed. Not in the slightest bit. It lays to the east of Turkey, and completely to the south of the Caucasus mountains, hence, geographically completely in Asia. Based on those verifiable facts, the supposed analogy with Georgia doesn't hold any ground, as part of Georgia lays to the north of the Greater Caucasus range, and thus in Europe, making it legit "transcontinental". Armenia is geographically in Asia, and always has been regarded as such. These recent "associations" on the world theatre with Europe are purely political/cultural (e.g. Eurovision, Council of Europe, willingness to enter the EU, UEFA, etc.). It doesn't make the country suddenly geographically in "Europe" however. FYI, even the Armenian gov considers itself to be geographically in Asia.
  

Perhaps we should make an RfC as well to see whether Israel is located in Asia or Europe. After all Israel competes in the UEFA, participates in Eurovision, a large percentage of its people are European (Ashkenazi) Jews, has strong cultural ties to Europe (much of Western European culture is based on Judaeo-Christian traditions) and is a close ally of the West. Yeah, right. -- Mazandar (talk) 13:30, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

References

Just interested. Exactly what part of Georgia lays to the north of the Greater Caucasus range? --Երևանցի ^talk 07:51, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

In a unique and strange map Mazandar alone possesses perhaps? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Here is the map hope you can find where is Georgia(the country).--Abbatai 19:17, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

• Comment--I have relisted the RFC to attract more participants.Winged Blades ^Godric 14:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

• Western Asia as per reasons stated above. Just a quick reminder though: the concept of "Europe" is a very Western idea that has led to a cultural and economic continent and is completely unrelated from any precisely defined geographic continent. The boundary between Europe and Asia has long been considered the Ural and Caucasus Mountains, but these border will remain ill-defined due to Europe's status as a cultural construct. From a geological perspective, this is all just Eurasia! --NoGhost (talk) 00:00, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I should just add that this doesn't mean the cultural continents of Europe and Asia are of any less importance, because inhabitants of both strongly identify with them. I just wanted to point out that the distinction between the two is, by nature, ill-defined. --NoGhost (talk) 00:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
• Western Asia per the reasons put forward by NoGhost. BlueSalix (talk) 03:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

After a century of newspeak applied to the geography and history of Armenia, all options are wrong. Terms that were once truthful have had their correct meaning taken away from them, making them now unusable. This is made worse by having an article that tries to cover a small and recently-formed modern country in the Southern Caucasus as well as a much larger geographical and historical Armenia whose history extends back some 2500 years. I think neither Western Asia or Eastern Europe should be in the lede. Southern Caucasus would be OK as long as it is made clear that it applies only to the territory of the modern republic. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Bad maps aside, only one side seems to be putting forth any kind of argument here. Why should the lead say neither or both? The geography seems pretty straightforward (Armenia being well to the south of the drainage divide), and the government of Armenia and the United Nations seem like pretty trustworthy authorities. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment: If you want to be all correct geographically Armenia is located in Eurasia. There is a special definition for a continent and Europe does not match it. Also, we have good explanation in wiki The criterion of a discrete landmass is completely disregarded if the continuous landmass of Eurasia is classified as two separate continents: Europe and Asia. Physiographically, Europe and South Asia are peninsulas of the Eurasian landmass. However, Europe is widely considered a continent with its comparatively large land area of 10,180,000 square kilometres (3,930,000 sq mi), while South Asia, with less than half that area, is considered a subcontinent. The alternative view—in geology and geography—that Eurasia is a single continent results in a six-continent view of the world. Some view separation of Eurasia into Europe and Asia as a residue of Eurocentrism: "In physical, cultural and historical diversity, China and India are comparable to the entire European landmass, not to a single European country.[1].--g. balaxaZe★ 18:17, 15 March 2017 (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.

code of Arms

the images on the right include the code of arms of soviet Armenia can someone please replace or include the code of the arms of the Republic of Armenia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.217.133 (talk) 05:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 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/20101220065003/http://president.am///library/constitution/eng/?pn=1 to http://www.president.am/library/constitution/eng/?pn=1
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.cnn.com/2010-06-09/world/armenia.old.shoe_1_shoe-cave-leather?_s=PM%3AWORLD
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.armembassycanada.ca/diaspora/diaspora6.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stat-nkr.am/2002_2007/0_2%20himcuc_6-10.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100109005401/http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/data_sheets/cty_ds_ARM.html to http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/data_sheets/cty_ds_ARM.html

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) 07:27, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2017

Armenia is the Middle East and this is why: Armenia is in West Asia at the bottom of the Caucasus in the Middle East. Armenia has many cultural relations with various ME countries. For example,

-Armenian food is practically identical to Arab and Turkish food (especially the Levantine Arab Countries).

-There have been multiple studies done that Armenians, Iranians, Greeks, Levantines, and Turks share many of each others DNA. I even took a DNA test think I was full Armenian and instead I got various Arab countries and Greece/Turkey.

-Persian and Armenian are in the same language group: Into-European. It is a fact that Armenian is most closely related to Greek and Persian and Arabs, Persians, and Armenian all share and borrow many words from each other.

-Traditional Armenian music is very similar to Persian traditional music

-Traditional Armenian garments are also similar to Persian and Levantine traditional garments and certain parts of Turkey

-Armenia is in West Asia (Middle East is technically a region in West Asia). Europe ends in Istanbul to the west and a very tip of the country Georgia. Only about 1/3–1/4 of Georgia if that, is in Europe.

-People may confuse Armenia for European only because of religion but by that logic part of Cyprus and Israel shouldn’t be Middle East. The 3 major Abrahamic religions came from the Middle East. If you think because of religion, well I can prove you wrong right now. The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian and Ethopian orthodox churches are all in communion with each other. All these are ORIENTAL while “European” Christianity isn’t.

-Heck at one point, Armenia was half of Turkey and the northern tip of Iran and Azerbaijan and at one point controlled all of the Levant (Levant is Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Jordan, Israel)

-Many loanwords: On average, there are more Turkish terms in spoken Armenian than Armenian in Turkish, and many many more that came from Persian into both Armenian and Turkish. At on, it was considered under the Iranian language group due to so many words and grammar being shared, but later was changed to an isolated group.

-Has Russian influence and Russian is considered second language but that doesn't make it less Middle Eastern. Lebanon was once controlled by France and French is spoken as second language, but doesn't take away ME origin. Lebanon is roughly about 50/50 Christian/Muslim and at one point was 70/30 Christian/Muslim. Christianity or religion doesn't dictate geography.

-Many maps don't always include Armenia in the ME purely for the reason it is not involved in politics like other countries are. They tend to stay away.

I would just like to edit the parts to prove its Middle Eastern :-) N31014 (talk) 03:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Izno (talk) 03:24, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Inappropriate links

There seems to be an issue with the Open Street Map link in the General Information section. It was forcing the entire page to be one big link to another site. I've commented it out for the time being, so that the rest of the page works. It's osmrelation-inline|364066 Tastyniall (talk) 09:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Human rights

"Human rights in Armenia tend to be better than those in most former Soviet republics" - that may be true, but "and have drawn closer to acceptable standards, especially economically" means nothing. Economics and human rights are entirely different matters.203.80.61.102 (talk) 22:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 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/20110515101803/http://www.mil.am/eng/index.php?page=2&p=0&id=633&y=2008&m=10&d=29 to http://www.mil.am/eng/index.php?page=2&p=0&id=633&y=2008&m=10&d=29

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) 10:17, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Multiparty

The word "Multiparty" is not hyphenated, just like all the other words that begin with "multi": multiband, multicolored, multidisciplinary, multilane, multilingual, multiman, multinational, multiprocessor, multiracial, multistate, multiverse, multiword, multiyear,...47.215.180.7 (talk) 09:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2018

Prime Minister of Armenia is Nikol Pashinyan. Wikipedia has it posted incorrectly. Please fix.

Thank you for your support in providing free information to help educate everybody in all matters.

Regards.. 2600:6C50:6C7F:FF49:DC57:BEF0:9FB4:CA03 (talk) 02:15, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The infobox lists the Prime Minister as Nikol Pashinyan. I don't see anywhere else in the article where the Prime Minister is mentioned by name. If I'm missing something, please be more specific as to the changes needed and reopen this request (change "answered=yes" to "answered=no"). ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 02:33, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Parliamentary republic

Armenia is a Parliamentary republic, starting today. Make changes in the article. 217.76.1.22 (talk) 11:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, please do this. Especially the Government and Politics section makes no sense anymore. Rotbandito 20:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Stop viewing the world through the eyes of Christianity

Its really shameful that the image of the Sun god temple text starts with "The pagan Garni Temple" . That's absurdity. High time to get rid of views like Pagans, heretics etc. These fundamentalism is so outdated that it takes away the beauty of what the Garni Temple represents. So let's call it the Sun Temple of Garni. Stop the nonsense words like Pagan etc. Besanebehumane (talk) 09:52, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Armenia's alleged "formation" in 2400 BC and equation with Urartu

I'm aware that Armenian nationalism tends to stress how "indigenous" Armenians are -- indeed, Armenians are relatively indigenous to their lands compared to their Eastern, Western and Southern neighbors, whatever nationalist bs comes out of Turkey on this issue. The current view of modern scholarship is that no Indo-European people is really "autochtonous" (culturally/linguistically at least) since the two candidate Urheimats (the Kurgan and Anatolia) both saw linguistic and cultural replacement. Although such views that simply equate Urartu with Armenia, assert the unpopular Armenian IE hypothesis, and project this indigenous Armenian history much further back even to times like 2000 or 3000 BCE may be popular in Armenia , among the diaspora, and among some certain scholars who mainly study Armenia, they really are not popular outside of these groups. We cannot have this in the infobox, it is not NPOV. Here is a sampling of the more standard global viewpoint on the issue, which posits that although many Armenians descend from people who lived in Urartian times and there are many ways they are bona fide culturally heirs to Urartu, Armenia does not equal Urartu, and furthermore, Urartians were not ethnically Armenian and spoke a language that was certainly not even Indo-European, while Armenians likely played a role in the destruction of their state. If anything, the general view on Urartian is that if it has relatives, they are in the Northeast Caucasus (Chechen, Lezgin, etc), a view held by various famous Georgian linguists, as well as Diakonov, Starostin, etc.

Here is but a small sample of the international scholarship on the issue:

Levon Abrahamian, 1998 [[2]]: This path to national identity transforms traces of distinctions between aliens and the imagined ethnic community in the deep past into a story of how such ali- ens actually formed a root of the primary reference-community. Thus, aliens present at the ethnic ìorigin timeî are symbolically transformed into ancestors. The aliens in the case of the Armenians are the Urartians, a Hurrian-speaking people who formed the state Urartu on the historical and present-day territory of Armenia in the period running roughly from 900 to 600 BC. Thus, one can say that the Armenian model of national-identity "fights" for the Armenian identity of the Urartians in order to stake a claim for the essen- tial "Armenianness" of regions once dominated by the Urartians. The symbolic construction of ancient ìUrartiansî as Armenians in contemporary Armenian national discourse can itself be explained in relation to gaps in the linguistic theories and empirical evidence used by the linguists and historians who, as I argued above, have played such a prominent role in formulating this discourse in the last decade. Though the already mentioned hypothesis of the Near Eastern motherland of the Indo- Europeans ìconfirmedî the ancient roots of the Armenians in their territory, the Hurrian speaking Urartians and their high culture formed a gap in the continuity of Armenian ìdeepî history. Thus, by identifying Urartu with Armenia, Armenian nationalists could trace the Armenian genealogical tree back to the most ancient times without any breaks in continuity. Little wonder, then, that Souren Aivazian, a champion of the idea of the Urar- tiansí Armenian origin, ìreadsî Urartian cuneiforms as written in proto-Armenian (Ai- vazian 1986: 30-31).

George Anchabadze : Urartu was an ancient state in the Caucasus... The native tongue of the ethnic kernel of this state apparently was close to the Vainakh-Daghestani linguistic group... Later, after the fall of Urartu, the ancient Armenian tribes gradually began to spread on the territory of Southern Transcaucasia, though the process of formation of the independent Armenian State protracted for the reason that the country was subject to the rule of the Persian, as well as Greek and Macedonian conquerors. It was only in 189 B.C. when the kingdom of Great Armenia came into being. The state reached the peak of its power in the first half of the 1st century B.C., when the Armenian Kingdom comprised a vast territory from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean.

Here is Diakonoff on Hurro-Urartian influences on Armenian -- note, influences. Not descent. [[3]]. Urartian forms a substratum that influenced Armenian in the sort of way that Coptic would influence Egyptian Arabic [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/602722?casa_token=kZBOhZfkyncAAAAA:jUHr3b79cPhw67xn4sPIMaAW13SWJM_w5tJNJKrqvuEIyJH7CxQpTa_h5Tk9JdodG9FiLIfKpsJibcMQM-Fol7k8xOtgiNhEgKMjG45f4ak4uHLe&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents ]]. Here for more info on Armenian's proposed "Alarodian" (i.e. related to Chechen, Lezgin, Avar etc) substratum via Urartian loans (not inherited) [[4]].

It's quite possible, and posited by many people, that Armenians were present in Urartu, ruled over by a foreign people as a minority or even a majority. However, this does not make Urartu an "Armenian state", much less a factor in the formation of the modern Republic of Armenia.--Calthinus (talk) 06:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2018

Please correct the punctuation of GDP_PPP and GDP_nominal in the infobox (decimal point instead of comma, which is thousand's separator). GDP_PPP = $28,282 billion has to be $28.282 billion, while GDP_nominal = $11,548 billion should be $11.548 billion. Axel Amsterdam (talk) 13:17, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done - FlightTime (open channel) 13:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2018

Thanks for fixing the other decimal separators. Please revert the last change to GDP_nominal_per_capita. It should be in the thousand's range, so $3,861 was correct and not $3.861. Axel Amsterdam (talk) 13:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thanx for pointing out my error :) - FlightTime (open channel) 13:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2018

Armenia's size is NOT 29.743 km2 BUT 29,743 km2 2A02:AB88:638B:5E80:4D5D:68B3:729D:9AB1 (talk) 07:33, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done. This appears to be an error made while correcting the GDP. Gulumeemee (talk) 07:59, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2018

In the History section, under the Antiquity sub-section-- tiny typo: around 2107 BC Hayk foughy against Belus should be fought Semir.amis (talk) 21:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks! RudolfRed (talk) 22:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Content and sources removed without explanation

Several deliberate attempts with edit warring have been made to remove content and sources from Establishment history infobox section. Restored the removed content Hayordi (talk) 18:36, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. Leo Freeman gets taken to ANI, stops editing (and ends up topic banned)[5] and you take over trying to add the same material. It's clearly not a coincidence. Doug Weller talk 19:45, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Was not aware of Leo Freeman's case. Reverted because it looked to me as POV based content removal, as there was not much explanation. But still, that does not cover for removal of sourced content. Hayordi (talk) 20:06, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Reverted, this was not sourced content. Also, i would suggest you to desist from accusing a user who reverted you once of "edit warring". Thanks.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:44, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Accusing for edit warring was an honest mistake, I thought that was the same user that kept removing that part of infobox earlier. Yet you don't mind when I'm accused for edit warring after my first revert. By the way, the part of infobox content you've removed contained 3 sources Hayordi (talk) 00:47, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

"Accusing for edit warring was an honest mistake" : if this comment of yours means that you're appologizing, then i would say it's ok.

"Yet you don't mind when I'm accused for edit warring after my first revert" : don't know what you're talking about.

"the part of infobox content you've removed contained 3 sources" : The sources are still here.

Regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

don't know what you're talking about - then you should check out the recent view history comments before editing here

The sources are still here. - Nope, 3 sources removed along with infobox peace Hayordi (talk) 14:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I have dealt with these fringe claims here "formation"_in_2400_BC_and_equation_with_Urartu but it was archived bc edit warriors didnt talk on the tp. Urartians spoke a language that wasn't IE and have been explicitly differentiated from Armenians, and even notable Armenian scholars regard the Urartians Armenian equation as nationalistic fringe (although Armenians certainly have partial Urartian ancestry).--Calthinus (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

Change the name of president, you’ve got wrong guy as otesident 2600:6C50:80:5B71:5D82:C58E:71AA:D0FA (talk) 23:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. What would you like it changed to? DannyS712 (talk) 23:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Armenian cuisine.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Armenia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Armenia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Armenia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:47, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

No mention of the Axis

What about the 11-30 thousand who fought in World War II against the Soviets? And why no mention of Drastamat Kanayan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B019:CEC7:110F:2427:65C5:283A (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2020

The reference to Lake Van in the Eymology section does not have a link to Lake Van's wikipedia page: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Lake_Van Bayazkus (talk) 03:35, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bayazkus:  Done! GoingBatty (talk) 03:42, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Wrong Flag

Somebody has replaced the Armenian flag as the Turkish flag. This needs to be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:EF90:9F20:6945:E4C4:79A5:D678 (talk) 20:18, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism on Armenia page

As you may know, recent hostilities have broken out between the Republic of Armenia and Republic of Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh (Azeri: Qarabag, Armenian: Artsakh). While skirmishes have been common since the cessation of hostilities in 1994, a second war seems almost certain after Armenian PM Nikol Pashayan mobilized the army and declared martial law in response to Azeri shelling of civilian buildings. This has caused a wave of vandalism, with a recent editor replacing the flag of Armenia with the flag of the Republic of Turkey, an Azeri ally (due to them both being of the Turkic race). I propose that the articles of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Turkey be subject to an extended-confirmed protection lock until hostilities cease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsobol0513 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 27 September 2020 (UTC) Dsobol0513 (talk) 20:44, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree. R. J. Dockery (talk) 16:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

(In)accurateness of description of bordering situation for Armenia

Concerning Archives908's revert of an edit in the article on Armenia concerning a more accurate description of what it borders on and where, the explanation given with it reads "rvt, not necessary and redundant, already mentioned in the lede".

While there is indeed mention of it in the lead, I imagine that people who want to read about the geography almost immediately click on the title "Geography" (that is what I did).

If there is a place in an article where the more/most detailed messages go, I prefer they go in the designated sections. The less detailed description could then go in the lead.

So I argue for a factual and accurate description there, and for a re-instatement of my previous edit (or for another edit one to the same effect).

This is, by the way, similar to e.g. the geography description in the article for Canada, where the United States of America are mentioned twice as well since it is only a matter of fact that there are two discontiguous boundary parts bordering to one and the same (federal) state, quite similar to the case of Armenia being bordered by Azerbaijan (at least) twice.

I am aware of tensions around the exact place of the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan, but I can see no reason why the factual border situation should not be accurately mentioned. I hold no stakes in the situation.Redav (talk) 02:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with you that factual information should be included. However, as stated in my edit history, it's a tad bit redundant and not utmost necessary to have the same exact information twice. Nakhchivan is very clearly mentioned in the first paragraph of this article. Other editors, correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that would be a colossal improvement to this article. If the reader whishes to learn more about Armenia's geography (which seems to be a concern of yours), they may visit Geography of Armenia. I see you have already made edits on that article to include the Nakhchivan region. Therefore, I fail to see your concern over factual information being absent. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 02:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

We seem to agree that factual information is desirable, and that with my edit (more or less) the same information was given (at least) twice in this Armenia article. But ... even without it there is already redundancy: both the introduction and the geography section give (partially) the same message regarding geography / topography.

We seem to be dealing with two issues: 1) redundancy: how much is desirable and acceptable? 2) placement: where does the information that is to be retained, go?

To be clear: I share the general aim of conciseness - and I welcome your raising of this point in itself -, but some redundancy still seems functional to me. [Please combine this with the one but last paragraph below.]

From your actions and acquiescence, it would seem that you are happy retaining the current partially redundant messages. That raises the question: why have you drawn the line for redundancy exactly with the edit (which happened to be made by me)?

Even if that edit might not have been a "colossal" improvement, it would - in my opinion - not be a "colossal" deterioration either, or, rather, it would have been an improvement nonetheless, for it brought the most detailed information on geography to the dedicated section (which I deem most appropriate for it).

If this placement vision could be agreed upon, the matter of redundancy remains open. Now, one way to reduce redundancy (while keeping the most detailed information in "its" section) would be to cut it wholly from the introduction and paste it into the section. This might be combined with a brief forward reference in the introduction, although that might seem unnecessary, since the contents list already points to a geography section.

I have not been able to find your explicit motivation for and view about the placement issue. It would seem that (implicitly) you are bringing forward the assumption / suggestion that a general reader would be more likely to (want to) find the bordering situation in the introduction than in the geography section. I am not convinced of that, but would welcome your explicit discussion on this point. I, for one, immediately looked for the geography section.

If we do not limit attention for placement to the Armenia article, but also consider other (possible) places like the "Geography of Armenia" article, one might wonder where best to put any - or the most detailed - information on border topography: a) introduction; b) dedicated section; or c) separate article?

I propose: none or some in a), more in b), and most in c), since "dry" forward references like [in a)] "Topography information can be found in b) and from references / links therein." and [in b)]: "Topography information can be found in c)." do not strike me as reader friendly.

I would welcome your thoughts on this.Redav (talk) 22:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I think this is getting far too philosophical and beyond technical and I don't believe (in my opinion) even necessary for something pretty minuscule (again, in my opinion). I choose not to reiterate my arguments, as I have made them abundantly clear twice already- and my arguments remain the same. It is outright redundant and not necessary to include the same information twice on this article and then again on Geography of Armenia. Nor do I believe any astronomically long debates are needed over this relatively minute topic. Therefore, if other editors can please chime in, perhaps then, a consensus can be reached on what would be most logical for the betterment of this article. Cheers! Archives908 (talk) 01:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Of course, this is not only about a single edit: it is about sharing arguments and views (derived from them), which may be fruitful for further edits by anyone involved in it. But, to reduce it to the edit and the reversion, as you seem to view it: you, in your own words, reiterated arguments. Indeed, you chose not to engage in some of my, justified, other questions and arguments related to the - valuable - edit and your reversion. At the same time you appear to keep standing behind that reversion. Now I would regret to revert the reversion without consensus, or at least a discussion covering the issues entered: it was you who entered the redundancy argument and the "not a colossal improvement" assessment in the first place [which I then engaged in] as well as pointed to the same or similar information being elsewhere in the article [which I also engaged in]. Now how is consensus to be reached without entering into each other's arguments?

What I see left is to act according to the best of the things that I can gather from your input and mine: reduce redundancy (which you desire) and put the information into the dedicated section at the same time (a point you did not engage in). I have acted accordingly.Redav (talk) 01:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Based on your tone, I sense some agitation over this. I assure you that this is definitely not worth getting flustered over. At the end of the day, it is not a drastic change and is not worth getting into an endless back-and-forth debate. I actually like your recent edit and see no reason to revert it. If you had brought that suggestion to the talk page (instead of the rather lengthy essay discussing technicalities) this could have been sorted out far sooner and probably would have saved you lots of time. Also, just a side note, in the future you may want to allow some time for other editors to chime in (as I had previously suggested). As per WP:CON, other editors may have wanted to contribute to the discussion to try and reach a consensus. They may also have had different viewpoints or even better recommendations then either of ours. After all, that's what a talk page is all about. All the best, Archives908 (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

If arguments are motivatedly challenged, engagement in a discussion about arguments and challenges seems the most helpful to me, if consensus is to be reached. What I think I could mainly (though not exclusively) see was reiteration of previous arguments, more so than engagement in newly brought up challenges including motivation.

I also saw messages like: "it is not necessary", "it is outright redundant", as well as terms like colossal, astronomically long. These are not obvious facts; rather they are subjective qualifications. According to my experience, subjective qualifications tend to attract a disproportionate amount of attention and to provoke longer texts than more objective ones, and than those that show (with e.g. "In my opinion ...", which you did on some occasions) that the author is aware they are but subjective (and open to discussion).

[Just to make the point clear with an example: If I gave someone a page full of objective facts and logical reasoning, larded with only four words of with a subjective remark directed at the reader's person (e.g. "Your eyelids are green."), I would bet that almost any reader - regardless of how interesting they would find the facts and reasoning - would tend to forget about them altogether, instead get focused on their eyelids, and mainly remember that sentence rather than the rest of the text.]

So, if on the one hand someone would give subjective statements that provoke reaction, and on the other hand they would at most partially engage in the reaction (as if the provoked reaction were unforeseen or unwelcome), yes, that could give cause for annoyance.

I try to (re)act politely, and I have learned that unsolicited advice and other you-messages (like ignoring) are not usually appreciated. So I decided to address also the messages that looked subjective to me content-wise, in an effort to come closer to a discussion on more objective grounds. Subjective values, opinions, and criteria can - of course - sometimes play a role, even a helpful one, the more so (according to me) when they are stated as such, rather than as general / obvious truths.Redav (talk) 04:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for reverting your edit, Redav,but the version that you just changed is quite stable, and is the result of many discussions in the past that you can read in the archives. The problem with this article is that there are many edit-warriors which try to write that Armenia lies geographically in Europe or in a unspecified region ("the crossroads") between Europe and Asia. Unfortunately, most of the RS say that the country lies geographically in Asia. On the other side, there are many editors interested in geography like me which would like to see written in the lead the continent where the country lies, that is Asia. As a compromise, it has been decided to write "Eurasia" in the first sentence (which is not wrong, but on purpose vague), and Western Asia in the second sentence. I have no problem in moving the second sentence in the geography section, but then we should mention the continent to which Armenia geographically belongs (Asia) in the first sentence, as is the case for most of the articles about countries in wikipedia. Personally I think that is better to leave the lead as it is, since if we write "Asia" instead of "Eurasia" in the first sentence we will have plenty of edit-warriors trying to revert to "Eurasia" or "Europe", as it happened in the past. It is true that since a couple of years the article is under the jurisdiction of the arbitration committee, and since then the edit warring has faded out, but it is better not to throw petrol on the fire, especially on these days. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

My edit(s) did not involve changing or adding content in the article, just rearranging. I wonder how that would spark discussion regarding content.

Remains the placement. I have no preponderant objections against keeping the (apparently carefully balancedly formulated) description of the topographical information in the introduction. That would answer your desire to leave the lead as it is.

To minimize on text: call by "L" the current sentence in the introduction: "Located in [...] to the south.", and call by "M" the sentence in the geography section: "Armenia is bordered [...] and west by Turkey."

I still argue that at least the same amount information as in L in the introduction be also placed in the dedicated section; more precisely: an exact copy of L in the geography section would be acceptable to me. My motivation for this: accessibility / "findability", as discussed above.

I also argue that any relatively independent text unit like the first paragraph in the geography section should not reasonably leave room for misinterpretation or, worse, misinformation. The current formulation there in M leaves out that at its (south)western side Armenia is bordered by what is - at least according to UN maps - part of Azerbaijan. That could easily be interpreted as ignoring or denying that Azerbaijan has a part of its country lying there. If there would be fuel for heated debate, that could certainly be part of it, I think.

The above can then be weighed against the argument (Archives908's as much as mine) for conciseness. Were I to weigh and decide, taking into account the new (to me) argument about not needlessly fuelling heated debate, I would replace M in its entirety by L.

Or ... at the very least: delete M from the geography section as well as precisely also in that geography dedicated section (says its title) a) refer back to (L in) the introduction and/or b) forward to the article "Geography of Armenia" with a sufficient and valid description there. Now, b) is already in place.

According to my reasoning, then, the current choice would reduce to:

1. remove M, and
2. either

• a) leave it at that (reducing redundancy at the same time) or
• b) add L there in M's place (sacrificing on conciseness and gaining in findability and preciseness).

I would hate to see that clear, factual, complete, and findable descriptions of state boundaries, qualified by "according to UN maps" and a mention of the circumstance that a considerable group of people disagree with the view in the UN's maps if so desired, would lose it from (fear of) edit warring.

I had not thought or provided input about the continent issue yet, and I do not think I see cause for that just now.Redav (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Alex2006, you have referred me to the archives, and I have just found out how to access them. I have also done some searches with strings like "boundary", "border", "south", "southwest", "Azerbaijan", "Nakhchivan", but failed to find traces of a discussion on what countries Armenia borders to on its south(west). Could you please point out exactly where I can find such discussion? Thanks!Redav (talk) 15:03, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hallo Redav, and sorry for the delay in my answer. I think that there was a misunderstanding: the consensus is only about the first sentence and the first half of the second in the lead (that is leaving the lead as it is). About the boundaries there has been no discussion so far. But what is the problem? I think that this could be an useful addition. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 16:45, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 16:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

That was exactly my question! But until recently Archives908 seemed to object to having (more or less) a duplicate of L in the place of M; please refer to his messages above.Redav (talk) 23:05, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

If anyone has any questions about my previous arguments/points, including you Redav, kindly ping me and I will respond accordingly. I wouldn't want others to assume something that is not true. As for this conversation, I believe Redav's last edit (before it was reverted) seemed more than acceptable. As he previously argued (correct me if I'm wrong) he did not add any additional information, just moved things around as applicable. Frankly, Redeav's edit was 1)factually correct 2)did not omit any critical info and 3)improved the flow of information by rearranging placement. However, from what I gather, there was concern about the placement, based on a past consensus. I'm curious to know if editors would be open to starting a new discussion around this topic and potentially reach a new consensus? I do not know when this last consensus was reached but if it was years ago, surely revisiting this topic wouldn't hurt... especially if it improves the article. There is already tons of info above to sift through and I may have missed things so please forgive. One of the things I'm having trouble understanding is what exactly is the issue with Redav's last edit? Cheers! Archives908 (talk) 01:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Archives908: I will happily ping you, by all means, as soon as 1a) I know how to, and/or 1b) can keep remembering how to, or (preferably) 2) a handy menu / manual / Wikipedish dictionary for all such handy commands (like the other one you referred to by WP:CON) has become easily reachable from e.g. a side menu without me having to leave my edit and find it disappeared when I return. (Or did using the @-sign just do the trick?) (I suppose I am not the first who could drown in Wikipedia's manual.) And I may have unduely ascribed a particular objection to you which you did not make. If so, I apologize.

@Archives908, @Alex2006: So, it appears to me that Archives908, Alex2006 (or is it Alessandro57?) and Redav (me, that is) agree that the dedicated (geography) section can (also) at least hold L. Am I correct?Redav (talk) 01:30, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

No worries, Redav! I know it can be a lot to learn; I still am after 3 years. Personally, I thought your last edit was a great improvement to the article for the points mentioned earlier. Which leads me to ask, is there any strong opposition to reinstating Redav's last edit? If so, solid rationale is needed. If not, let's wrap this up folks. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 02:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

[[User:Redav|Redav], if you want to copy (not to move) the info in the lead in the geography section, it is ok for me. Alex2006 (talk) 15:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Alex2006, @Archives908 (hope this coding creates the pings): copy carried out.Redav (talk) 12:11, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Flag vandalism

Someone replaced it with the LGBTQ flag. Please change immediately. R. J. Dockery (talk) 16:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Why isn't Armenia also located in Europe but Azerbaijan is ?

Both Armenia and Azerbaijan are basically located in South Caucasus with Armenia more closer to the west than Azerbaijan but yet it's mentioned that Azerbaijan is between East Europe and West Asia but not for Armenia ?

Also Armenia is a member of council of Europe, participate in the Euro football cup, European games and Eurovision. Why are they mentioned only as west Asia if they are not Europe ? I was told them by most people that they are a European country too.Vamlos (talk) 23:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Vamlos I agree, a distinction should be made between Armenia's geographic location and geopolitical alignment. This article makes reference to Armenia's geographic location, but nothing is mentioned about it's geopolitical orientation with Europe. Please read my comment below. Archives908 (talk) 14:57, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Regardless of Armenia's geopolitical alignment, which I will make comment below under the geopolitical orientation thread, it geographically speaking is completely in West Asia. So the geography of it being identified as a country in Western Asia should remain.

Azerbaijan is a transcontinental country, like Turkey , Kazakhstan , and Georgia with parts of each country in Asia and Europe - so that is why they are mentioned geographically in both continents. Armenia is not a transcontinental country. It is country in West Asia not Europe.

The consensus under the Europe article, with numerous citations, is that Europe stops at the Ural mountains and Ural river in terms of its border with central Asia and the greater Caucasus in terms of its border with West Asia .

Let's not conflate geopolitics with geography. Armenia participating in Eurovision doesn't change its geography. Even Morocco has participated in Eurovision... --QeeGeeBee (talk) 12:58, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Let's talk only from a geography stand point. Please have a look at this map which shows both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

https://up.wiki.x.io/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Armenia_Azerbaijan_Locator.svg/1200px-Armenia_Azerbaijan_Locator.svg.png

What is it here that makes Azerbaijan having a part of it's country in Europe but not Armenia ? Geographically speaking Armenia is more shifted to the west and Azerbaijan is slightly more eastern shifted to Asia (central Asia), they are located next to the Capsien sea. Also Iran is certainly West Asia ( along with Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Afghanistan ect ) and Azebaijan southern parts all touches it's border with North Iran, but South Armenia only touches a small border with North Iran.

Armenia is also next to Georgia which is part of East Europe. How is that not transcontinetal country? Armenia are all sandwiched between Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan who are all considered part West Asia and part Europe but ironically Armenia who is in the middle is just considered entirelly west Asia.

Also, is incorrect to say East Europe. All of Caucasus is generally considered the East Europe and West Asia. North Azerbaijan area doesn't touch Russia Europe but North Caucasus republic countries lieke Chechen, Ossetia and many ethnic groups lile Adyghe, Tassabaran that are not even Indo-European like Armenia is, not even Christian like Armenia. They are muslims who speak indegenious Languages of the Caucasus.

The wikipedia of Caucasus says this

The Caucasus (/ˈkɔːkəsəs/), or Caucasia[3][4] (/kɔːˈkeɪʒə/), is a region between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea and mainly occupied by Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and parts of Southern Russia. It is home to the Caucasus Mountains, including the Greater Caucasus mountain range, which has historically been considered a natural barrier between Eastern Europe and Western Asia.[5]

Europe's highest mountain, Mount Elbrus, at 5,642 metres (18,510 ft) is in the west part of the Greater Caucasus mountain range.[6] On the southern side, the Lesser Caucasus includes the Javakheti Plateau and grows into the Armenian highlands, part of which is located in Turkey.[7]

When look at the Caucasus mountains it clearly also mentions Armenia by including the northern territory called Aragats that is included as part of Europe.Vamlos (talk) 18:14, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

With the map you listed you can see Azerbaijan has slightly more territory to the north, this territory is geographically speaking in Europe. Armenia again is totally in Western Asia, with its territory begining slightly more southward. According to the cited academic sourced consensus on the Europe article you can see the natural barrier from Europe to Asia stops contemporarily in Georgia and Azerbaijan. Also you can go to the Asia article and see where the continent of Asia begins, again with numerous citations and academic sources. Armenia being more westward then Azerbaijan does not make it closer to Europe then Azerbaijan - directly westward to Armenia is Turkeys territory in Asia. Kazakhstan is almost completely in central Asia, but because of the geographic cut off of the Ural's it has part of its country in Europe - so again, Azerbaijan being geographically closer to central Asia does not mean it can't have physical geographically in Europe. All of the Caucasus is not in Europe, part of the region is in Europe and part of the region is in Asia. The cut off part from Europe to Asia is situated in Georgia and Azerbaijan - this cut off is in the Greater Caucasus. Armenia being Christian does not mean it's geographically in Europe, there are many religiously diverse populations in West Asia. Armenians speaking an Indo-European language also does not mean the country of Armenia is situated in Europe. Persians speak an Indo-European language, that does not change Irans geography. Aragrats is not in Europe, it is in west Asia. Armenia is located in the continent of Asia. It is what is, cheers --QeeGeeBee (talk) 05:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay you gave your answer. If everything what you say is true than I find all these articles very contradicting and these articles have nothing to do with geopolitics but geography

Geography of Europe and it says this The " landlocked countries in Europe are: Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Belarus, Czech Republic, Hungary, Kosovo, Liechtenstein (which is doubly landlocked), Luxembourg, North Macedonia, Moldova, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Vatican City "

Map of European countries by number of neighbouring countries (Geographically).

https://up.wiki.x.io/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Neighbouring_Countries_of_Europe.png

I personally find Armenia's being in Europe and not being in Europe with many contradicting answers. I am okay if most people don't want to mention Armenia as part of Europe.Vamlos (talk) 06:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Geography of Europe also lists Cyprus under the islands section, even though it's totally located in western Asia and the Middle East. If you look at the initial map on the globe, highlighted in green - you can see Armenia and likewise Cyprus are not highlighted.

I'd argue the neighboring countries map listed on that article is in part a geopolitical take, as its listing several countries located in western Asia. I'd also surmize that Armenia being included in the landlocked country list is also for geopolitical reasons and not geographical ones - and may need to be omitted from the landlocked countries section since the consensus on the Asia article is that Armenia is geographically entirely in West Asia.

If you go to the Geography of Asia article, Armenia is listed under the West Asian region of Asia. Likewise you can see it on the maps. I do agree that some of these articles are contradictory, unfortunately I'm sure this is because some may be conflating geography with geopolitics when including countries like Cyprus and Armenia that are completely in Asia on these articles. --QeeGeeBee (talk) 10:45, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Geopolitical orientation

The recent edits regarding Armenia's geography made me question the accuracy of the wording in the lead. Knowing very well that geographically Armenia is situated in Western Asia, it made me wonder, Armenia is also geopolitically "at the crossroads" of Eastern Europe and Western Asia. Yet, why is this not included anywhere in the article? For starters, the Caucasus region as a whole- is in fact on the "crossroads" of Eastern Europe and Western Asia. Under the United Nations Regional Groups, Armenia is listed as "Eastern European". Meanwhile, Eurovoc the official thesaurus maintained by the Publications Office of the European Union classifies Armenia as belonging to Eastern Europe. Not to mention, Armenia is also included in the Europe and Eastern Europe articles as well as List of European countries by area and List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe, among dozens of other "Euro-related" articles including, Economy of Europe, Regions of Europe, Languages of Europe, Politics of Europe, Flags of Europe etc... in which Armenia is mentioned. In these articles, there are footnotes indicating that while geographically Armenia is in Western Asia, Armenia is geopolitically/culturally aligned more so with Europe. That should be reflected here, even only for consistency's sake. There should be no double standard. This can also be cemented in Armenia's membership in the Council of Europe; of which the founding treaty clearly stipulates that in order for a county to accede, they must be 'European'. Armenia would, henceforth, not have been granted full membership in the Council if it wasn't considered 'European' to a degree. In addition, Armenia has membership in other European institutions in which 'being European' is mandatory criteria (ie, European Cultural Convention, European Higher Education Area, European Olympic Committees, European Court of Human Rights, etc...). Certain reliable media outlets such as the BBC also classify Armenia as part of Eastern Europe. Politically speaking, Armenia is part of the EU's Eastern Partnership and Euronest Parliamentary Assembly and has ratified a new Armenia-EU Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement aligning Armenia ever more closely (politically and economically) to Europe and the EU. There are also several political parties and politicians in Armenia who vehemently support Armenia's European integration and/or Armenia's potential bid for EU membership (see: Potential enlargement of the European Union) and some who see Armenia's future with Europe, not Asia. In return, several prominent EU politicians (including Donald Tusk) have included Armenia as belonging to the 'European family of states' and belonging to a 'Greater Europe'. Further, in 2002, the European Parliament noted that both Armenia (and neighboring Georgia) may enter the EU in the future providing that they meet all necessary criteria. And we all know, that EU membership is only open to states considered 'European'. Even Cyprus, which like Armenia is also in Western Asia, joined because it has been deemed 'European' to a degree. My point here is that Armenia (to an extent) is 'European', and this should be reflected in the article in some capacity, whatever that may be. There is no valid reason to outright exclude Armenia from being geopolitically included as part of Europe. The current wording works well (and I'm not saying that anything should be removed, as per past consensuses). But, this article can definitely be improved to include the fact that Armenia is truly 'at crossroads'. Including this reality will better reflect Armenia's 21st Century geopolitical alignment, as seen above. It would be negligent to turn a 'blind eye' to this. Looking forward to some feedback! Regards, Archives908 (talk) 04:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that Armenia's status of a borderland or crossroads between these two areas is important. Vici Vidi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:35, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. Do you have any recommendations/suggestions of how we can make that distinction in the article? Archives908 (talk) 12:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I will explain once again the problem with this article, even though this discussion haunts the archives. :-) Nobody here has ever questioned the geopolitical and cultural location of Armenia. For reasons that in my opinion are mainly psychological, several users (most of them now not anymore active or banned) have pretended to turn this geopolitical location into a geographical location. In other words, in their opinion the geographic border between Asia and Europe should be moved in some unspecified way leaving Armenia at least partially in Europe, all this without showing reliable sources. The fact that Armenia is part of the Council of Europe, UEFA, etc. does not change its geographical location. I have already advised that the place to discuss this issue is not here, but on the talk pages of the articles about Europe, Asia and the borders of the continents, but no one has opened a discussion there. I would also like to point out that for almost all the articles dedicated to countries on wikipedia the first sentence of the lead mentions the geographical location. For Armenia an exception has already been made, using the word "Eurasia", which is deliberately vague, to point out its geopolitical dichotomy.

If we want to change the beginning of the lead, maintaining however the geographic position, for which there is consensus and that abundantly sourced, we could write (omitting the native names) something like:

Armenia, officially the Republic of Armenia, is an independent landlocked state with capital Yerevan located in the South Caucasus region of Western Asia. From a cultural and historical point of view, however, the country is generally considered European. Due to that, Armenia is a member of the Council of Europe, etc.

Alex2006 (talk) 15:12, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps you misunderstood my comment, there is zero intention to turn Armenia's geopolitical location into a geographical location. On the contrary, I stated that we shouldn't go against archived consensuses. Rather, my concern was that while Armenia's physical geography was covered, its geopolitical orientation is completely omitted. If nobody here has ever questioned the geopolitical and cultural location of Armenia, as you stated, then there is no reason to keep omitting that information from this article. Alex2006, I like your suggestion. It very clearly covers Armenia's geography by stating it's physical location in Western Asia, and it also covers Armenia's geopolitical orientation with Europe. Both are acknowledged, as both are true. Do other editors have any suggestions/feedback with this proposal? Or, have other ideas? Regards, Archives908 (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, I don't mind starting a broader discussion on the talk page of Europe at some point, I just wasn't sure if that was more/less appropriate then starting a discussion here first. Especially considering that Armenia is already included in most "Euro" related articles. The reason why I started a discussion here is because Armenia's geopolitical alignment wasn't being reflected in this article. Archives908 (talk) 15:59, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Archives908 , I am glad to read that. :-) Let's wait for other comments and proposals. Alex2006 (talk) 16:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Alex2006, okay that sounds great! Archives908 (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

I also including a Europe connection with Armenia. It makes no sense that Azerbaijan is included as between East Europe and Western Asia while Armenia is only Western Asia. Geographically Armenia as a country is more slightly closer to the west of East Europe than Azerbaijan is.Vamlos (talk) 23:16, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that may be technically true but (correct me if I'm wrong), Azerbaijan has a very small portion of its north-western territory in Eastern Europe- that's why it is a transcontinental state. Armenia (again, correct me if I'm wrong) isn't a transcontinental state by most definitions (although some newer schools of geographic thought do challenge this). Vamlos, the proposal currently being discussed is to keep Armenia's geographic location the same but we will also include Armenia's geopolitical orientation (ie. Europe) to the article, as that was missing. Do you have any recommendations of your own? Or do you agree with Alex2006's suggestion above? Regards, Archives908 (talk) 23:48, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Azerbaijan does have a north-western territory in Eastern Europe. When you look at the map they are clearly slightly more closer to East Europe than Armenia, however Azerbaijan it's also closer to Central Asia compared to Armenia who are slightly more shifted to the west to Europe. I suggest we include Armenia as also territory of East Europe just like Azerbaijan. Vamlos (talk) 00:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, technically speaking, you are right again and many modern geographers/scholars would agree with you. But, your proposal is different than the one currently being discussed under this section. I would like to keep the focus of this discussion towards incorporating Armenia's geopolitical orientation to this article. I would rather our two ideas not get confused with each other. I think its best you propose this idea in a new section on this talk page yourself and see what other editors have to say, and/or maybe you can also start a discussion on the talk page of Europe, as Alex2006 had suggested earlier. Archives908 (talk) 00:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

We should focus on both geopolotical and geographical. Both Turkey and Azerbaijan page have them, both of them are geographically mentioned as having a part of Europe as within it's territory but why not for Armenia ? Only mentioning geopolotics is not good enough, because even countries like Kazakstan and Israel also have some geolpolotical connections with Europe but they are clearly not as Europe as Armenia is. Vamlos (talk) 08:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

You bring up some interesting points but, like I said, I would prefer our two different ideas not get confused. If this topic is something you are passionate about, start a new section on this talk page and clearly list your main argument followed by your rationale. Then you wait and see what other editors have to say- just like I'm doing with my suggestion now. Thanks, Archives908 (talk) 12:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems editor QeeGeeBee has responded to your topic, Vamlos. There should be no more confusion between Armenia's geographic location and geopolitical orientation. I hope that clears things up. Should you have further questions/feedback please respond under your own section because this section should strictly focus on geopolitics (as was originally intended). Thanks! Archives908 (talk) 13:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Archives908 and QeeGeeBee: we should not confuse geopolitics and physical geography here. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 15:04, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Well okay. I will not discuss geographically in this section. Please look at my answer on the other section it explains why I find strange that Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia is considered part Europe , part West Asia but Armenia not. All of Caucasus (which includes Armenia ) have always been considered geolopotical and partly geographically with East Europe. https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Caucasus Vamlos (talk) 18:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Again geographically Armenia is completely in West Asia. So to get back to the topic at hand the geopolitical orientation of Armenia, objectively speaking, is not solely European. The lead should not be changed in the ways mentioned above, as the leads of even other geopolitically ambiguous countries only mention geography.

The United Nations Regional Group does include Armenia with Eastern Europe - this is because of Armenia's post-soviet ties. They also group Israel and Turkey in western Europe's regional group. Yet both Israel and Turkey, two countries with geopolitical ties to Europe, only list geography in the lead of each respective article and do not get into the ambiguities of their geopolitical ties.

Also noteworthy is that the United Nations member states and statistics for Armenia lists it as West Asian nation, not a Eastern Europe nation.

Eurovoc does list Armenia as Central/Eastern Europe, but they also list Turkey and Cyprus as Southern Europe. As aforementioned there is not geopolitical speculation on the lead of Turkeys article page - instead it just just states its geography. Likewise Cyprus also just lists geography on its lead and not speculative geopolitical orientations.

I want to add that The World Factbook produced by the Central Intelligence Agency, which is used in academia, news, etc - lists Armenia in the Middle East and not Europe. Also in the Greater Middle East article Armenia is included and mentioned for "common socio-cultural connections". So if we indeed are going to change the lead or subsequent paragraphs in an objective way reflecting the complex geopolitics of Armenia then its fair to say you'd also need to mention Armenia's relationship geopolitically with the Middle East.

Armenia is one of 6 observer states to the Arab League. Its observation status is due to the interconnection of the Armenian diaspora living in the Arab world. Major portions of historical Armenia overlaps with the contemporary geopolitical area of the Middle East and shows the aforementioned unique relationship that Armenia has geopolitically and historically linked to the Middle East and by being again apart of the Greater Middle East. This relationship is ongoing and speaks to many geopolitical and socio-cultural situations relevant to Armenia like, United Armenia which seeks to reclaim parts of the Middle East that were once historic Armenia.

Armenia geographically shares a border with two Middle Eastern nations, Turkey and Iran. With Iran their relationship geopolitically being quite good - with many Armenians living in Iran and the Armenia-Iran border border relations being a positive one. I want to mention that Armenia is listed with Greater Iran- again this is another of the numerous Middle Eastern geopolitical and cultural connections that dates back to Sasanian Armenia and Iranian Armenia (1502-1828). Armenia historically speaking, since Urartu has had deep geopolitical ties to the Middle East. Pre Christian ancient Armenia incorporated zoroastrianism and Mesopotamian mythology with their native faith. To this day mythological creatures like the Dev are shared in stories like Shahnameh.

The Europe article does later mention Armenia - but clearly in the 1st picture does not have Armenia highlighted, or Turkey, or Cyprus, or Israel - though all have geopolitical ties to Europe. I want to mention that the Asia article does have modern Armenia highlighted and later lists Armenia.

Also for the sake of consistency - Armenia is in the List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Asia, Economy of Asia, Geography of Asia, Languages of Asia, Flags of Asia, etc… the list goes on of Asian, West Asian, and Middle eastern articles Armenia is mentioned in and has historically and culturally engaged with or overlapped. I repeat, its not exclusively European geopolitically.

The Council of Europe was mentioned, this council also includes Turkey, a country in the Middle East. Kazakhstan was also in the process of trying to join - and is currently on the path to join after improving human rights concerns. Kazakhstan is arguably a very Central Asian country - both culturally and politically. Getting into the council doesn't make you exclusively geopolitically European - it just adds to the complexity of a country's geopolitical standing.

I want to mention that in the Armenia article its mentioned in the forth paragraph in that its a member of the council of Europe. Its not as if there's a total neglect of Armenia's geopolitics. If anything I think the numerous Asian and Middle Eastern connections need more representation in the first sections subsequent paragraphs. There should be no double standard, as was stated above and we must stay neutral.

I want to add that determining how culturally European Armenia is a subjective one. As Armenia culturally has consistently shown to be complex with elements of the Middle East, West Asia, the Caucasuses, and Europe.

For example under Middle Eastern Cuisine Armenian cuisine is listed. Cuisine is one of the biggest parts of any culture. Armenian Cuisine historically is quite west asian with main stay dishes like dolma, listed under its article as its place of origin in the Middle East. Lahmacun, also known as Armenia pizza - with its origin listed as the Middle East. Börek has Ottoman origins according to its article page, its another very common Armenian dish. Armenian coffee, listed under Turkish coffee with its origins according to the article from Yemen. Manti another very important Armenian dish has its roots in Central Asia and East Asia. I could name many more examples, clearing showing that Armenian Cuisine wise is not "Culturally European" - instead its culturally multifaceted and reflects its unique history.

For another example Armenians living in Armenia and abroad are overwhelming apart of the Armenian Apostolic Church - which is apart of the Oriental Orthodox Churches and theologically had much more in common with other Miaphysitism doctrine churches as opposed to European Christian doctrine. You can see on the Oriental Orthodoxy by country article the unique worldwide distribution - in West Asia, Africa, South Asia - of churches who rejected the council of chalcedon. Coptic Christians, Syriac Christians, Ethiopian Christians are all majority adherents of oriental orthodox religious doctrine. Religion is a huge part of Armenia culturally and aligns more with Armenia's west asian cultural ties as the first Christian state historically - with West Asia being the original birth place of Christianity.

I can name many more cultural connections outside Europe. Again Armenia isn't solely European culturally.

Armenia is regional Member of the Asian Development Bank, a regional bank development started in Japan - again showing Armenia's geopolitical complexity with Asia. It's also a prospective member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Economically after Russia, Armenia's main export partner is Iran under the Economy of Armenia article - any economy is a geopolitical sphere and Armenia's is again clearly diverse.

Armenia is in numerous geopolitically complex organizations including the Federation of Euro-Asian Stock Exchanges, [Euroasian Union]], Eurasian Customs Union, Eurasian Development Bank.

Someone had mentioned organizations like the European Olympic Committees - this organization also has Middle Eastern countries like Israel and Turkey. The previously mentioned European Cultural Convention has as a member Kazakhstan, Cyprus, and Turkey - again this just showcases unique geopolitical complexities. I could keep going. Eurovision has had Morocco participate, does that make Morocco culturally European? No. Again, to be neutral we need to mention every caveat.

Armenia has geopolitical complexity in terms of Europe, the Middle East, West Asia, and Central Asia. Objectively stating Armenia is geopolitically and culturally European flattens its reality - that I hopefully backed up with numerous agreed upon articles.

I disagree with changing the lead in the way suggested. I also again want to mention that in the of article of Cyprus the lead does not get into speculative geopolitics - just geography and then later paragraphs talk of its geopolitical ties. Cyprus isn't just a potential member of the EU, they are in the EU. Also again Kazakhstan has the potential to be member of the EU, that does not make the country politically and culturally European. EU ascension does not equate to a exclusive European geopolitical reality.

Armenia could use more geopolitical context in later paragraphs after the header, but these potential additions should show its complex multi continental, multi regional, and multi geopolitical spheres of influence.

Neglecting every thing I mentioned above would also be turning a blind eye and in some capacity needs to be reflected. Armenia is at a crossroads of numerous spheres, historically, culturally, geopolitically and so on and should be stated in some capacity. --QeeGeeBee (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Who said that Armenia's geopolitical orientation was solely European? I think you have misunderstood the original argument. While Armenia does have other relations (bilateral and multilateral) in various spheres -as most countries do- Armenia is generally more geopolitically aligned with Europe then with Asia. This is reflected in Armenia's full membership in the Council of Europe and lack of membership in the Asia Cooperation Dialogue; which are Eurasia's two main geopolitical organizations. It is abundantly clear which side Armenia generally falls with. Your example about Armenia's Arab League observer status is void, as Armenia does not have permanent observer status. Rather, Armenia was an invited guest to select meetings as an 'observer'. Brazil was also an invited guest, that definitely does not make Brazil geopolitically aligned with the Arab League more then Latin American organizations. Likewise, Armenia does have permanent observer status in the Pacific Alliance, that does not mean that Armenia is geopolitically more aligned with the Americas then with Europe. Also, I'm quite perplexed why you are mentioning food? In an increasingly globalized world, lets not rely on food to determine a countries geopolitical alignment. McDonalds's operates in Belarus, yet Belarus is by far geopolitically aligned with America. Rabbit meat is consumed in Italy just as much as in China, but that does not make these countries aligned together. So, let's stay focused. Armenia has recently finalized a new Armenia-EU Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement. Among countless objectives, the agreement is designed to bring Armenia closer to the EU/and by extension Europe, both economically and politically. This agreement is a far-reaching and extremely detailed document highlighting Armenia's connections with the EU, areas for growth and development, political cooperation, boosting trade/transport, and will also bring Armenian law gradually closer to the EU acquis. Armenia does not have any such agreements, of that complexity, with any other Asian/African/American/etc.. political entity. Even Armenia's membership in the Eurasian Union is primarily focused on trade and economics. You also mention the Eurasian Development Bank; you do realize that any state in Eurasia can join? Montenegro could technically join the bank, however its membership would not automatically cease Montenegro from being geopolitically aligned more so with Europe. Furthermore, even Armenia's judicial system is tied to Europe more then Asia. The highest authoritative body being the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, not Moscow, Shanghai or Jakarta. The point being, that Armenia, contrary to your statements, is in fact heavily associated with Europe. And while yes (like almost all countries) Armenia does rightfully maintain relations with other blocs; that is not a sufficient reason to say that Armenia is not geopolitically aligned with Europe. There are no valid arguments to suggest otherwise. Whether it is in the lead, or elsewhere in the article, I believe it will be beneficial to include Armenia's geopolitical alignment. As I mentioned very early on, Armenia is represented on almost every single "Euro-related" article on Wikipedia, and therefore this should be reflected here accordingly. There shouldn't be a double-standard, we should maintain consistency at the very least. Myself, Alex2006, Vici Vidi and to a degree Vamlos, agree that Armenia's geopolitical alignment with Europe should be reflected- in some capacity in this article. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 18:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, let me make this abundantly clear once again. Please refrain from bringing up culture, food, religion, etc.. This discussion is strictly focused on Armenia's geopolitical alignment. I believe everyone here in this discussion is aware of Armenia's cultural fluidity and this debate is not about whether Armenia is more culturally European or Asian. I am aware (and hope everyone else is too) that Armenia is culturally associated with the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Russia; seeing as various empires have had significant influence/cultural exchanges throughout Armenia's ~3500 year existence. So, please folks, keep the discussion focused. Thanks! Archives908 (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Someone stated an example new lead that read,

Armenia, officially the Republic of Armenia, is an independent landlocked state with capital Yerevan located in the South Caucasus region of Western Asia. From a cultural and historical point of view, however, the country is generally considered European. Due to that, Armenia is a member of the Council of Europe, etc.

So that is why I mentioned history and culture - food and religion - Because the new lead that was suggested contained a very flat perspective of the cultural and historical realities of Armenia. I didn't mean to get off topic, I just wanted to make it abundantly clear that the culture and history of Armenia and is not solely European whatsoever - and a new lead like the one that was suggested - that you said you liked - is why I mentioned history and culture. I was just responding to that new suggestion that was stated very early on in this thread that in reality is again, not objectively speaking accurate of the history and culture of a 3500 year old country. Just to clarify - saying Armenia is "historically and culturally" European is not neutral to its realities whatsoever.

Again following with other set article leads like Cyprus, who are totally in Western Asia and not just a potential member of the EU but are a member of the EU has only geography in the lead - with later paragraphs talking about geopolitics. I'm suggesting the current lead remain as is, and that later paragraphs could state the geopolitics of Armenia.

Armenia does geopolitically align greatly with Europe and this should be reflected, as I stated previously. But Armenia is also geopolitically involved with Asia and the Middle East, and this should also be reflected. Again the The World Factbook produced by the Central Intelligence Agency lists Armenia under the Middle East geopolitically. The United Nations statistics on Armenia list it under the region of West Asia. Armenia's main export partners are Russia and Iran, showcasing its unique relationship of being a post soviet country directly next to a country in the middle east with innumerable historical ties - Greater Iran. It is again apart of the greater Middle East. I want to mention that in response yes Brazil is an observer to the Arab league - that is because there are many ethnically Arab Brazilians in the Arab diaspora living in Brazil. But let's give context to why this is different than Armenia, Armenia is an observer because of the many Armenians that live in the Arab world - not because there are many Arabs living in Armenia. Also again, Brazil isn't apart of the Greater Middle East, Armenia is. Brazil doesn't share a border with two middle eastern countries, Armenia does. Brazilians didn't have historically ancient ties to the Middle East and ancient borders that overlap with the Middle East and many parts of the present Arab world, Armenia does - Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity). Brazil doesn't have entire geopolitical irredentists concepts such as United Armenia that looks to reclaim parts of the Middle East, Armenia does.

I agree Armenia is under a multitude of "Euro" related articles, but it is also under a multitude of "Asia" related articles. It is also apart of Asian related organizations. I think the Armenia article should reflect the numerous Euro related geopolitical alignments, just as I also think it should reflect the numerous geopolitical and historical ties to Asia and the Middle east. Because again, it's in many Asian and Middle eastern articles - so for consistency's sake, this should be reflected. Also just like the Cyprus article I'm suggesting the lead contain only geography, with subsequent paragraphs talking about geopolitical alignment, Cyprus is even apart of the EU and its geopolitics are mentioned in subsequent paragraphs - not the lead. I believe in every single country article I've come across the lead gets only into geography and not geopolitics, which is much more complex. If anything I think the current lead is geographically inaccurate, as Armenia is in western Asia - not "eurasia" - which is more accurate for a country like Georgia.

I apologize if I diverged off the topic of geopolitics in my initial reply, hopefully I've clarified my suggestions. It was necessary to address the suggested replacement lead that Alex2006 had created:

Armenia, officially the Republic of Armenia, is an independent landlocked state with capital Yerevan located in the South Caucasus region of Western Asia. From a cultural and historical point of view, however, the country is generally considered European. Due to that, Armenia is a member of the Council of Europe, etc.

and that Archives908 had said they "liked" as again, saying Armenia is culturally and Historically European is just not accurate and needed to be addressed. Cheers --QeeGeeBee (talk) 03:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)QeeGeeBee (talk) 11:39, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

No need to apologize, in the future, if you generally dislike another editors suggestions, you should ping them directly in your response to avoid confusion of who your remarks are directed too. Furthermore, when another editor says they 'like' an idea, that does not mean that a decision has been made/finalized. A talk page is meant to toss around ideas and communicate. I see you have only been active on Wikipedia for just a few days so you may not realize this. Besides that, as per the recent conversation- nobody is confusing geography with geopolitics. It's safe to say, we should probably refrain from continually brining up geography. Next, your Arab League argument (like I said already) is completely void. Armenia does not have permanent observer status in the Arab League. They have been invited (by only Syria) to participate in a couple meetings. Armenia doesn't even have diplomatic relations with a handful of states in that area like Yemen, Saudi Arabia, etc. So, your argument about Armenia aligning with the Arab World/Asia because of their close connections with the League does not hold up. Unlike Brazil, India (also being in Asia and not having a large Arab population) is an observer member, yet I highly doubt that India considers itself more aligned with Arab states then with Southeast Asian states. Next, I think the lead is fine also, and Eurasia should remain as per past consensuses. I made it explicitly clear that this discussion would not try and breach past consensuses. Besides, Western Asia is already mentioned in the lead and it is technically a region within Eurasia. Also, lets not bring up irredentist concepts such as United Armenia. Such concepts are not official government policy of the current government of the Republic of Armenia. Unofficial fringe concepts cannot determine a countries geopolitical alignment with Asia. What can however, are tangible legal documents, like the EU-Armenia CEPA agreement (which I have referenced three times now) and is being completely overlooked. Let's be frank, Armenia does not have any complex political agreement with any other nation or bloc in Asia as compared to the Enhanced and Comprehensive Partnership Agreement which it does have with the EU. So, geopolitically, Armenia is belling pulled towards Europe more so then Asia. Several high-ranking Armenian government politicians and political party leaders have reiterated that 'Armenia considers Europe its home'. There are dozens of active political parties from Bright Armenia, European Party of Armenia, Free Democrats (Armenia), Hanrapetutyun Party, and Heritage (Armenia) which all have campaigned for greater European integration, not Asian integration. Based on these parties (and several others) manifesto's, they all confirm that geopolitically, Armenia by far looks more to Europe for its future, then to Asia. To date, there is not a single political party in Armenia which calls for Asian integration. With that being said, I hope you can see where Armenia's geopolitics generally lies. If we are both done with this back-and-forth, I would really like to start prototyping some examples of how this can be effectively and accurately incorporated into this article. Thanks! Archives908 (talk) 12:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Good to know! And yes I am quite new but excited to contribute. I wasn't attempting to claim that Armenia is somehow aligned with the Arab World. Armenia being grouped in with the Greater Middle East and its long interconnected history with West Asia is not insignificant, does have ongoing geopolitical circumstances, and should have some mention made of it - is what I was trying to get accross. The characterization of United Armenia as a fringe concept is inaccurate. If you go to the public opinion section of that article, they site a survey that showed 80% of respondents in Armenia agreed that the government of Armenia should make territorial claims. Also the Armenian Revolutionary Federation has had a long history in the political sphere of Armenia, with one of its main goals of a united Armenia. Since the Velvet Revolution they don't have any seats in the national assembly of Armenia - but what is geopolitically significant is they they do have three seats in the national Assembly of Artsakh and the Parliament of Lebanon. To be productive, my suggestion is that the fourth paragraph in the first section of the Armenia article would be a great place to expand upon Armenia's geopolitics - this section is where Armenias inclusion in the council of Europe is mentioned. My suggestion to revamp this paragraph is-

Armenia is a developing country and ranks 81st on the Human Development Index (2018).[22] Its economy is primarily based on industrial output and mineral extraction. Armenia, though being geographically in West Asia, aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe. The country is a member of numerous European or Eurasian organizations including the Council of Europe, Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, Assembly of European Regions, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Eurasian Development Bank, and the Eurasian Union. Armenia is also conversely considered apart of the Greater Middle East, as it borders the Middle East and has historical ties to the region. Armenia is also a member of regional groups in Asia, such as the Asian Development Bank. Armenia supports the de facto independent Artsakh, which was proclaimed in 1991. Armenia also recognises the Armenian Apostolic Church, the world's oldest national church, as the country's primary religious establishment.[23][4] The unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

I think this edit would showcase Armenia's unique geopolitical orientation of a country that aligns itself with Europe but is historically, and as such geopolitically, linked in part - with Asia. --QeeGeeBee (talk) 14:09, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I beg to differ. For one, Armenia is not part of the Middle East. The Middle East article very clearly states in the first sentence: "The Middle East is a transcontinental region in Afro-Eurasia which generally includes Western Asia (except for Transcaucasia)". The "Greater Middle East" area is a very vague and loosely defined term which does not accurately define Armenia's geography and therefore, should not be included. Some sources may include Armenia in that vague region to some capacity, but many also do not. Besides, as per my recollection it had already been determined in past discussions to avoid it. Armenia is however, within in the Caucasus region, which historically speaking, has been and is distinct from the Middle East proper. We should try to avoid speculative or vague information and stick to what we can confirm; including the fact that United Armenia is not a mainstream political movement. Peoples opinions/public polls do not reflect the current governments official position. The current government of Armenia does not openly support this movement. If you have academic sources which prove that Pashinyan is actively pushing for a United Armenia- please do share. Otherwise, it's irrelevant to the argument. As for the ARF, it has been on a steady decline and currently holds zero representation in the National Assembly of Armenia. In Artsakh, the ARF lost half of all seats (now down to just 3 seats) following the 2020 elections. Despite its long history, the ARF is not a mainstream political party in 2020 and thus, also irrelevant to the argument. My recommendation below fairly includes information from both your example and Alex2006's example. It reaffirms Armenia's geographic location in West Asia, while also highlighting Armenia's geopolitical pull to Europe and it's involvement in certain Eurasian organizations. I believe it is a fair assessment of Armenia's current geopolitical alignments, taking the best points from both yours and Alex2006's recommendations:

Armenia is a developing country and ranks 81st on the Human Development Index (2018). Its economy is primarily based on industrial output and mineral extraction. Armenia is geographically located in the South Caucasus region of Western Asia, however, it is generally considered geopolitically European. As it aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe, the country is a member of numerous European organizations including the Council of Europe, the Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, the Assembly of European Regions, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Armenia is also a member of certain regional groups throughout Eurasia, including the Asian Development Bank, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Union, and the Eurasian Development Bank. Armenia supports the de facto independent Artsakh, which was proclaimed in 1991. Armenia also recognises the Armenian Apostolic Church, the world's oldest national church, as the country's primary religious establishment. The republic has separation of church and state. The unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

Regards, Archives908 (talk) 16:05, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

At the moment I do not have any statement on United Armenia from Pashinyan (I will look) - but on the United Armenia article under "Current Claimants" under the Heritage Party it says -

For instance, during a 2013 speech about his future plans Hovannisian stated that "only with [the existence of a] government belonging to the people will we have awareness of our national interest—with Artsakh, Javakhk, Western Armenia—and future for our children."[105] In 2011, a leading party member, Zaruhi Postanjyan, stated in an open letter to presidents of Armenia and NKR that by organizing a repatriation of diaspora Armenians to Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, "we will [create a] base for the liberation of our entire homeland."[106]

In an April 2015 conference on the Armenian Genocide centenary Postanjyan stated that Armenia should "restore its territorial integrity" by claiming the "territory of its historic homeland." When asked about how realistic Armenian claims to its historic lands are, Heritage leader Hovannisian responded: "Today's romantic will become tomorrow's realist."[107] In an opinion piece published in The Jerusalem Post on 11 April 2015 Hovannisian wrote that Turkey occupies Western Armenia and called for "the creation of an Armenian national hearth in historic Western Armenia." He added, "negotiations between the republics of Turkey and Armenia triggering the first-ever sovereign reciprocal demarcation of the official frontier, including but not limited to provisions for an Armenian easement to the Black Sea."[108].

So, it's not completley irrelevant to bring up. Again not advocating for the paragraph to even mention United Armenia, just showcasing an Armenian geopolitical interconnection to the East. Also the Greater Middle East is vague, I'm sure purposefully so - but Armenia is included in it. I'm in total agreement that Armenia squews geopolitically European. I'm just saying Armenia is unique in that again how many geopolitically European nations are included in The World Factbook as a country in the Middle East? How many contemporary geopolitically European nations share a incredibly complex historical, cultural, and political relationship with the Middle East? And border two countries in the Middle East... even one sentence, brushing into this is a worthwhile mention.

I do think your version of the paragraph is very sound and I appreciate your edits! Though one or two sentences mentioning Armenias geopolitical/historical interwoven connections to Asia/Middle East, in some capacity would would be objectively beneficial. --QeeGeeBee (talk) 18:59, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I don't think statements from 2013/2015 count as very "current", especially considering Heritage doesn't have any political representation. But, I understand the point you are trying to make. I too, appreciate the discussion, it has given me lots to reflect on. I'm glad you like the recent suggestion; I tried to incorporate and take into account mine, yours and Alex2006's suggestions. As a result, I believe that Armenia's physical geography in West Asia is abundantly covered in the article, and now so too is it's geopolitical alignment. We have successfully highlighted a slight pull towards Europe, while affirming Armenia's connections with Eurasia. In terms of the Middle East, I believe a much wider and in-depth debate would have to be opened. As I recall, past consensuses determined to omit that information as it contradicts with the Middle East article, whereby it definitively states the Transcaucasus region is not part of the Middle East. Because the "Greater Middle East", as an idea, is very vague- there are many controversies, contradictory sources, and 'grey areas'. Plus, if we were to include that here we may also have to edit several other countries' articles- opening up a much larger debate. For now, I think its safe to say, lets to stick with what we have as I'm sure neither of us want an endless debate. Before I make the change, I will wait some time should any other editors have additional feedback. Thanks again for the interesting discussion, QeeGeeBee! Regards, Archives908 (talk) 19:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Gosh! I arrive after 48 hours and find 50k of comments, all very interesting. :-) All the information which has been brought by QeeGeeBee is true, but I would like to add that a fundamental point has been forgotten: the self-perception of the Armenians. No matter what their history and culture, they feel part of Europe. And at this aspect we should, in my opinion, give some prominence too. And now a technical :-) question: Archives908, which is the last proposal? I lost myself...thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 14:59, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Haha yes, we did get slightly carried away- but all with good intentions. Good point, many Armenians, like most Cypriots and Georgians, do consider themselves "European"- regardless of geography. Yerevan itself (culturally and even architecturally), more closely resembles Athens or Paris then it does Beijing, Mumbai, or Islamabad. Anyways, the proposal which has been agreed too is as follows:

Armenia is a developing country and ranks 81st on the Human Development Index (2018). Its economy is primarily based on industrial output and mineral extraction. Armenia is geographically located in the South Caucasus region of Western Asia, however, it is generally considered geopolitically European. As it aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe, the country is a member of numerous European organizations including the Council of Europe, the Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, the Assembly of European Regions, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Armenia is also a member of certain regional groups throughout Eurasia, including the Asian Development Bank, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Union, and the Eurasian Development Bank. Armenia supports the de facto independent Artsakh, which was proclaimed in 1991. Armenia also recognises the Armenian Apostolic Church, the world's oldest national church, as the country's primary religious establishment. The republic has separation of church and state. The unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

Any thoughts, Alex2006? Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I got lost in this "mare magnum". :-) The proposal is fine, but where do we want to put it? If it will be placed at the top of the introduction, I would put as first sentence the geographical position, because of consistency with almost all the articles dedicated to countries. And then everything else. If we put it at the end of the current introduction, I would remove the geographical part, which is already at the beginning. Finally, a third possibility would be to put the geographical part at the beginning of the introduction, and the rest at the bottom. Or do you want to replace the introduction as is now with this one? This is also a possibility, but the should add also whole historical part that is present now. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 16:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

haha "mare magnum" is very accurate ;) I'm glad you like the proposal also. User QeeGeeBee had suggested placing this in the fourth paragraph in the first section of the article, and it makes sense since we probably wouldn't want to overwhelm the introductory paragraph (unless you think otherwise)? Personally, I am indifferent to the placement, so I will defer to your best judgment. Ah yes, you bring up a good point (which I overlooked). It is redundant to include the entire geography bit again since it is already mentioned in the lead. So, I have tweaked it:

Armenia is a developing country and ranks 81st on the Human Development Index (2018). Its economy is primarily based on industrial output and mineral extraction. While Armenia is geographically located in the South Caucasus, it is generally considered geopolitically European. Since Armenia aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe, the country is a member of numerous European organizations including the Council of Europe, the Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, the Assembly of European Regions, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Armenia is also a member of certain regional groups throughout Eurasia, including the Asian Development Bank, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Union, and the Eurasian Development Bank. Armenia supports the de facto independent Artsakh, which was proclaimed in 1991. Armenia also recognises the Armenian Apostolic Church, the world's oldest national church, as the country's primary religious establishment. The republic has separation of church and state. The unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

What do you think? I hope we wrap this up soon! Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 17:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't exclaim that all Armenians feel "European" that feels, more like an opinion. Do you mean the average citizen living in Armenia? I'd argue Armenians living in Armenia feel more like People of the Caucasus - which is distinct. Also it might not be fair to presuppose how all Armenians living in Armenia feel - especially considering how I mentioned a poll about how 80% of Armenians feel empirically about land in the modern middle east (western Armenia) - but no one wanted to delve more into Armenias cultural and historic ties to Asia and how that effects its unique geopolitical position...

Putting these new edits in the fourth paragraph of the first section is the best fit. Similar countries like Cyprus in the first sections first paragraph get into "Geography" - then in the 2nd/3rd paragraph "History" - than in the remaining paragraphs modern "Geopolitics". I actually believe every single country article follows this same formula. So for the sake of consistency, the fourth paragraph where the council of Europe and other geopolitics related items are mentioned already is the best place for these additions and not the lead paragraph.

Under the idea that these new additions would be under the fourth paragraph is why I reaffirmed Armenias geography, as we're in a way saying though Armenia is located in west Asia it geopolitically leans European. This distinction just gives more context to a reader. My recommendation is-

Armenia is a developing country and ranks 81st on the Human Development Index (2018). Its economy is primarily based on industrial output and mineral extraction. While Armenia is geographically located in the West Asia, it is generally considered geopolitically European. Since Armenia aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe, the country is a member of numerous European organizations including the Council of Europe, the Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, the Assembly of European Regions, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Armenia is also a member of certain regional groups throughout Eurasia, including the Asian Development Bank, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Union, and the Eurasian Development Bank. Armenia supports the de facto independent Artsakh, which was proclaimed in 1991. Armenia also recognises the Armenian Apostolic Church, the world's oldest national church, as the country's primary religious establishment. The republic has separation of church and state. The unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

I think reaffirming Armenia is in west Asia rather than the south caucasus makes more sense, as other south caucasus nations also lean more geopolitically European. It's important to make the distinction that Armenia leans geopolitically European but is located in West Asia. Again for the sake of consistency, as with every other country article, these geopolitical additions should not be in the lead and should go to the later paragraphs. Of which the fourth is the perfect fit and is where geopolitics on the Armenia article page currentlty is! I'm still advocating for one sentence showing Armenia's unique geopolitical realties of a country bordering two middle eastern nations and a deeply intertwined history connected to west Asia. But yeah I'd like to wrap this up too, sorry for any mare magnum haha. Its all with good intentions <3 --QeeGeeBee (talk) 06:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

QeeGeeBee, we were simply having a harmless discussion; not everything is intended to be a critical debate. West Asia is mentioned in the second sentence of this article. Therefore, as Alex2006 pointed out, it is redundant to include the exact same information so soon afterwards. Being as precise as possible, the "South Caucasus" more accurately pinpoints Armenia's location. Besides (as you said), this section is not intended to be about geography. Next, I'm afraid I don't have the will power to repeat myself a fourth time why "Greater Middle East" should not be included. That is why I will kindly refer you to the rationale listed above; please re-read.

Armenia is a developing country and ranks 81st on the Human Development Index (2018). Its economy is primarily based on industrial output and mineral extraction. While Armenia is geographically located in the South Caucasus, it is generally considered geopolitically European. Since Armenia aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe, the country is a member of numerous European organizations including the Council of Europe, the Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, the Assembly of European Regions, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Armenia is also a member of certain regional groups throughout Eurasia, including the Asian Development Bank, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Union, and the Eurasian Development Bank. Armenia supports the de facto independent Artsakh, which was proclaimed in 1991. Armenia also recognises the Armenian Apostolic Church, the world's oldest national church, as the country's primary religious establishment. The republic has separation of church and state. The unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

This was the consensus agreed too (minus the removal of one geographic tidbit, due to legitimate redundancy). I will be WP:BB and make the edit in order close this matter. Otherwise, I fear this discussion will continue to go back-and-forth, and that would not be productive. I thank all editors for this lively discussion! :) Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 14:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Archives908, QeeGeeBee, the fourth paragraph is also ok for me. Alex2006 (talk) 17:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Definitely not trying to debate! I didn't even mention the Greater Middle East in my last message... All I said is one sentence concerning Asia/Middle east in a geopolitical context with Armenia would be beneficial for the paragraph. One sentence in a 8 sentence paragraph. Thats it.

In the context I don't think it's redundant for the first paragraph and fourth paragraph to mention West Asia, because its literally saying even though its in this geographic "region" it geopolitically leans to this geographic "region" - but we can agree to disagree, which is fine.

But I'm glad everyone was good with the fourth paragraph and found it to be an okay fit! I know this has been a long discussion but I'm new to being an editor and I'm just trying to stay objective and improve the article as best I can. Thats all I've been trying to do. In that breathe I still think the afformentioned one sentence addition I'm advocating for wouldn't hurt! --QeeGeeBee (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Why isn't the conflict mentioned?

Came here to find out about the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war but this doesn't appear to be linked despite recent events. Any reason for this? Sephiroth storm (talk) 23:31, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Map: Ethnic groups

The map under "Ethnic groups" should be edited, as it's outdated. RobinVictor (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Statement in lede that Armenia borders the ‘de facto’ ‘Republic of Artsakh’ is no longer correct.

The only part of the ‘disputed lands’ (so to speak) that border Armenia and which are still not administered by Azerbaijan is the Lachin corridor. This area is not under the control of the ‘de facto’ ‘Republic of Artzakh’. Rather, the Lachin corridor is under the control of a Russian peacekeeping force. This is provided for in art. 6 of the Nov 2020 Trilateral Agreement between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia.

Accordingly, Armenia no longer borders the ‘Republic of Artsakh’. None of the land of Armenia borders areas under the control of the ‘Republic of Artsakh’. I have updated the description of the countries that border Armenia in the lede to take this into account. Frenchmalawi (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Technically correct, but they are still linked via this short corridor. Vici Vidi (talk) 09:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Worrying denialism

Steverci, can you avoid POV-pushing and engage in denialism? This is not exclusively about Caucasus Edition, which the article is authored by an Armenian journalist. If you have a problem with Caucasus Edition, head over to the noticeboard. I've also shown New York Times and RFE/RL as sources. Even if you had a problem with some kind of Armenian-protests, you could've moved the information to a different sentence, instead of completely removing it. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

The quote is: Peaceful protests in Armenia supporting the Karabakh Armenians were met with anti-Armenian pogroms in Azerbaijan, such as the one in Sumgait, which was followed by anti-Azerbaijani violence in Armenia. While here, you say claiming widespread "anti-Azerbaijani violence" is WP:OR, as is claiming any connection to protests in Armenia. The text doesn't include the word "widespread" and relates it to Sumgait, not the protests. Just to be sure, have you actually read the paragraph, or all of this is just a misunderstanding? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:59, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Not only is Caucasus Edition basically a blog, but NY Times is a primary source that doesn't claim what it's cited to. I propose deleting all but the Radio Free Europe source to avoid MOS:OVERLINK. --Steverci (talk) 03:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

NYT article reports on anti-Azerbaijani violence in Gugark, which the text links to. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:52, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

The NYT article just has a brief mention of "ethnic fights", nothing else. --Steverci (talk) 03:51, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit request

Please move the presidents surname to Sarksyan in the info box. The letter գ is usually pronounced as [kʰ] -- if it is not the initial letter -- in Eastern Armenian, too. Rather an exception is f.e. Գագիկ ([gɯ'gik]) where it is in fact prounounces as [g] in both cases. By the way, it is the same with դ (pay attention to the pronunciations of օդ, կարդալ) and բ (երբ, շաբաթ). 2. Սարգսյան ([sɯɹkʰəs'jan]) derives from Սարգիս, therefore it is the best to write it in English with i. Compare f.e. մսի (the genitive case of միս). The ի falls out but [ə] jumps in instead of it -- note that is not reflected by the Armenian diction. Armen Sarksyan has already changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.95.54 (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

As the above is a very specific WP:Edit request asking that "Armen Sarkissian" be replaced with "Armen Sarksyan" in the leader_name1 parameter of the infobox to match the title of our article on the subject, I've changed the template used from {{help}} to {{edit semi-protected}}. 78.28.55.108 (talk) 21:24, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done, to standardize spelling to Armen Sarksyan. Page move performed in November 2020 and seems to be stable, and a quick Google search shows this spelling in multiple RS. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 03:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2021

Soviet union general (talk) 16:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

can I edit this article please

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2021

CAN I EDIT THIS PLEASE, I WILL NOT DO ANYTHING BAD I SWEAR JUST PLEASE I WILL NOT MESS IT UP PEASEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Soviet union general (talk) 01:44, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2021 (2)

CAN I EDIT?????????? Soviet union general (talk) 01:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2021 (3)

Soviet union general (talk) 01:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Help

Please add the Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) in the establishment section. İt was the empire of tigranes the great. And also fix the presidents name back to sarkissian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.108.138.146 (talk) 14:10, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

The Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) is included, it’s just separated between it’s different dynasty, for example, Tigranes the Great would be Artaxiad dyansty.TagaworShah (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per TagaworShah ✨ Ed talk! ✨ 02:06, 19 September 2021 (UTC)