Talk:Second Nagorno-Karabakh War/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Map

The labels of minor places on the infobox map are too small to be readable even at full 1,280×881 px view. Since they are naturally smaller than labels for larger places, like towns and cities (and since there are more official updates on liberated villages rather than towns), I think this should be fixed somehow. Perhaps a larger resolution is warranted so that all labels would be readable. @Emreculha: maybe? Brandmeister^talk 13:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree. It's really hard to read the names of the liberated/captured villages, specially on mobile.103.147.163.6 (talk) 13:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Brandmeister, Hello, you are right that the villages on the map cannot be read without zooming. Since the area is almost a ghost town and we do not know enough which area is more important, I tried to add all the areas that are close to the conflict as much as possible. Since the subject is very sensitive, we have to write every city (if any) on the map in three languages. If we increase the font size, the texts will be very confused. However, if you are talking about some of the village names on the map deleted and important villages remain. You can present your opinion by proposing this topic and adding other users interested in the map to the discussion. Thank you :) --Emreculha (talk) 13:22, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I think the names of villages and towns could use only Azeri and Romanized Armenian spellings per our naming practice, no need to duplicate them into non-Latin spelling. Brandmeister^talk 15:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Totally agree with Brandmeister. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I applaud the inclusion of Armenian characters for Armenia and Artsakh as well as the inclusion of English translations for all the names. This is much more consistent with helping the readers to find the places mentioned in the article itself, the function of this map.

I wonder where the previous discussion of the map deletion is now. Has it been erased or is it archived?

Please, look to Stepanakert on this map. Is the Azeri name readable to anyone but someone who reads the language? No. The argument for having Armenian characters had been that no one but Armenians could read Armenian script. However, it is often the case that Azeri script is also unreadable to anyone who doesn't know the language. So, what is the objective reason for having Azeri script first & larger than Armenian script?

I believe the following suggestion can solve this current neutrality issue.

• • First, overall, could we please enlarge the map so all labels are readable when the map is clicked on?

Option A) How about having the two local scripts (Armenian & Azeri) written in equally-large, font size & having English smaller within parenthesis below? If the map is larger, we would be able to find and read the English names.

Option B) Alternative: Another option was to write the English name in large font & have Armenian & Azeri script below in the smaller font (again, this would be visible if the map is made larger). This is not the ideal option, however, considering the past British involvement in the region. Option A seems much more respectful.

I had asked this in a previous discussion (which might be archived?) as to what map-making software is being used? It would be interesting for others to have the option to learn to use the software & perhaps contribute to updates rather than troubling you to make them.

Finally, the map's name has not yet been updated to match the name of the article. For consistency sake, it should really be consistent with the URL of the article, namely "Karabakh" (and not "Qarabagh"). Usually, it would be easy to update a file name before submitting newly adjusted maps to Wiki. Thank you & regardsSacredForest (talk) 06:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)SacredForest

NPOV and the term "announced"

In several of the sub-sections in the "course of the conflict" section Aliyev's claims are phrased as "President Ilham Aliyev has announced the capture of such and such villages". I believe that the language used violates NPOV as it implies the announcements are fact, while they are simply statements from one side of the conflict which for the most part have not been confirmed by other first-hand evidence (some have been supported with video of Azeri forces at a settlement however most have not). I think they would be better phrased as "President Ilham Aliyev has claimed that Azeri forces have captured such and such villages" --LOLCaatz (talk) 07:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Warnings issued to Civilians of Ganja on 4th of October (6 days before 1st attack)

On 4th of October, before the two major attacks on Ganja of 10th and 17th of October, the president of the de facto Republic of Artsakh Arayik Harutyunyan issued two warnings (here and here) to the civilians of Azerbaijan. This was after what he claimed was the use of "Polonez and Smerch multiple launch rocket systems" against Stepanakert. His words were "From now on, military facilities permanently located in major cities of Azerbaijan became the targets of the Defense Army. I call on the people of Azerbaijan to leave these cities as soon as possible to avoid possible casualties.". In the second warning he mentions calling off an attack on Ganja last minute to avoid civilian casualties, saying that "Azerbaijan can stop before it is too late". Why is this important point, that civilians and the Azerbaijani army were warned 6 days before the 1st attack isn't mentioned anywhere in the article? There seem to be room to mention Ganja 36 times, but none to mention this crucial important point --Sataralynd (talk) 23:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd, I don't know what point you want to prove here. Two rockets were launched to Ganja on 4 October too, that's the first attack, which resulted in one person getting killed and 32 more injured (in varying degrees). One of the rockets hit an ex-Armenian quarter (Aziz Aliyev street) and hell, one of the people to get injured was a Soviet-Armenian. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 04:31, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Not trying to prove any point but mentioning a fact that I believe is not at all insignificant. Could I ask you (not only in this thread) to always provide sources for your claims - preferably secondary? A quick search yielded this from AlJazeera and DW and the number of injured (four) is lower than what you cite--Sataralynd (talk) 09:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd I am tracking this. Please copy-paste this to the Ganja Talk page; I think it is better discussed there, first. Johncdraper (talk) 05:55, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Sataralynd, you realize that the dead/injured count rises as the search and rescue teams finds more people among the rubble? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: not sure if you're asking a question there, but please add whatever you need to add to the topic. We are not discussing casualties in this thread. If you want to discuss that, make a separate thread. Thank you--Sataralynd (talk) 12:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 October 2020

Can you please get an objective authot of this page, many thanks 62.134.62.230 (talk) 08:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

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

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

• InShot 20201020 202248937.webm

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Armenian-controlled_territories_surrounding_Nagorno-Karabakh#Requested_move_21_October_2020

Now there is a discussion about renaming the article. I expressed my opinion, but I would like to hear even more constructive opinions. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

This is an unrelated to this article and this thread is in itself not constructive or anything. If you would like to get other people's attention, write to them directly. You shouldn't open a new thread for every single developments on Armenian, Azerbaijani, or Nagorno-Karabakh Wikiprojects. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add a section on Russia under International Reactions section

Looking at the article, I see a need for a subsection on Russia under International Reactions. Russia is a key player in the region, a mediator in the conflict and has relationships with both parties. In fact, Sergei Lavrov who brokered the first ceasefire, spending 10 arguably difficult hours trying to make both sides agree, doesn't even get a mention! Here is a first stab. Open to your comments:

Being a co-chair of OSCE Minsk Group, Russia's main role in this conflict is that of a mediator. On 2 October, along with the other two co-chairs of the Group, France and the USA, it called for immediate cessation of hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh, and asked both sides to continue negotiations without preconditions (source). On 6 October the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Iranian counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif expressed concern about the involvement of Syrian and Libyan fighters in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, with the possible support of Turkey. (source 1 and 2 and 3). Both Russia and Armenia are part of a mutual defence pact (source). However, President of Russia Vladirmir Putin on 8 October expressed that the fighting is not happening on the territory of Armenia and therefore Russia would not intervene in the current conflict (source). He also affirmed Russia's good relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. On 9 October, Sergei Lavrov mediated a ceasefire after 10 hours of talks between Armenian and Azerbaijan Foreign Ministers in Moscow. The ceasefire was quickly broken (source). On 22 of October, Putin indicated that the root of the conflict lines in interethnic clashes between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in the 1980s, and specifically referred to the massacre of Armenians in Sumgait (source 1, 2 and 3)--Sataralynd (talk) 02:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Done, Sataralynd. Eurofan88 (talk) 06:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Turkey/Russia Analysis is Shallow

"Turkey, driven by President Erdogan's ambitions to improve his popularity and divert attention from his country's economic issues..."

Quite a bit subjective -- also overlooks historical/cultural ties between Turkey-Azerbaijan and does not afford Turkey the same rationale (military alliance, etc.) as it does to the Russia-Armenia analysis.

— MaviLight (talk) 06:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@MaviLight: Agreed. I understand from @Solavirum: that the issues involved date back a over a century and include the Moscow Treaty of 16 March 1921. Would you kindly help out with a form of words and citations? Johncdraper (talk) 07:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, Turkey and Azerbaijan are bound by strong ethnic, cultural and historic ties, and refer to their relationship as being one between "two states, one nation." In short, ethnically, they have the same origin. In 1918, during the late stages of WW1, the Azerbaijani Government was formed. The two parties formed officials relations with the Treaty of Batum. Then, when the Ottoman Turks were campaigning in the Caucasus, many local Azerbaijani irregulars and commanders joined their ranks (See: Battle of Goychay, Battle of Baku, and Mürsel Bakû, the latter leading the 5th regiment only comprised of Azerbaijanis). During the Turkish War of Independence, the newly formed Azerbaijan sent economic aids to Turkey, using its vast oil reserves. In 1920, Bolsheviks occupied Azerbaijan, with many prominent Azerbaijanis escaping to Turkey, with some rose to prominence in Turkey (see: Ahmet Ağaoğlu). In the late 80s and early 90s, Azerbaijani and Turkish relations started to reform, as Azerbaijan was trying to get its independence. Turkey was the first country to recognize Azerbaijan's independence in 1991, while in 1992, Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic within Azerbaijan recognized Turkish Cyprus' independence. About Nakhchivan, the status of Nakhchivan was determined by the Moscow Treaty of 16 March 1921. With this treaty, it was decided that Nakhchivan (under the protection of Azerbaijan) should be an autonomous region. In addition, the Soviet Union and Turkey, the countries have been the guarantors of Nakhchivan. In 1992, Azerbaijani leadership were divided between Azerbaijan proper (Abulfaz Elchibey) and Nakhchivan (Heydar Aliyev; who would later overthrow Elchibey). The Armenian forces attacked Nakhchivan, which caused a political crisis between Armenia and Turkey. At the end, with the meditation of US, a ceasefire treaty was signed between Nakhchivan and Armenia. And Armenia's alleged rocketing of Nakhchivan caused some discussions over this treaty's terms.

Johncdraper, hope I've been able to explain it. But this feels like a WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. Might able to find real analyses from Western sources though. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 13:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: We might need to update Moscow Treaty of 16 March 1921 with these more contemporary references. This could be taken to that page's Talk? Johncdraper (talk) 06:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

In this conflict Israel is not a neutral source. It has large defense contracts with Azerbaijan. 193.196.11.188 (talk) 07:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Please stop using subjective words like 'occupation' and 'liberation'

'Occupation' and 'Liberation' are subjective terms and should not be used.
For the Armenians living in the inhabited Karabakh villages, they do not feel 'liberated' at all when they are forced to flee because of the war and advance of the Azeri army. They view the Azeris as brutes who execute and behead PoW's and execute civilians in their homes, not as friendly 'liberators'. Furthermore the Armenians would disagree with the word 'occupation' given that 99.9% of the current population of Armenian-controlled Karabakh/Artsakh is Armenian so this word does not make any sense. Almost no Azeris live under Armenian-rule, so the entire population of Armenian-controlled territories would disagree with the usage of 'occupation'.
I can understand the usage of 'liberation' when writing about former Azeri majority ghost towns like Fuzuli, Jabrayil etc. being 'liberated' (since no Armenians live there and the 30-year old Azeri IDP's welcome the news) but it is very biased to use the word 'liberated' when discussing Hadrut for example, which is 100% Armenian-inhabited and part of the former NKAO as well. The political status of the town is disputed.
With this in mind, please refrain from using the term 'liberated' especially when it is about the capture of Armenian-inhabited towns. Proper usage would be for Azeri ghost towns, but nothing else. Instead use neutral objetive terminology like 'captured' or 'taken', but not 're-captured' or 're-taken' since this implies Armenia is the aggressor in this war (obviously not the case).
User178198273998166172 (talk) 18:28 21 October 2020 (UTC)

From what I see, those words are only used in quotations. We can't alter someone's words when quoting him directly. In other instances the words "retake" or "reclaim" instead of "liberate" would be neutral, I think. Brandmeister^talk 17:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't mind NPOV wording on occupation/liberation thing, but we've all used them in quotes, and one quote even connects occupation with the Azerbaijani forces. And, yes, quotes are subjective, that's why they are quotes, duh. Also, Rosguill, what do you think of the same attitude this user have been displaying, ya know, WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS? E.g. statements like They view the Azeris as brutes who execute and behead PoW's and execute civilians in their homes, not as friendly liberatorsş --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that it's not really an actionable offense given the context of describing the various polarized POVs, but it is pushing the boundaries of civility. I would encourage User178 to reword that statement as a gesture of good faith; stating that Armenians view the Azerbaijani forces as "invaders" would be sufficient for the point they're trying to make. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Occupation and Liberation are not subjective terms:

Internationally, all of Nagorno-Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan. There are 4 UNSC resolutions that demanded occupier Armenia withdraw from the lands she occupied in Azerbaijan. User178198273998166172 misses the fact that 30,000 Azeri Turk was killed in Nagorno-Karabakh by Armenians, and 1,000,000 Azeri Turks were expelled from Nagorno-Karabakh. What minorities think as "liberated"/"occupied" is not relevant. Also, political status of Hadrut is not disputed. UNSC demanded Armenia withdraw from Hadrut as well.Fullscaledx (talk) 19:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hol up. A million Azeris expelled from NK? The entire population of Artsakh is 150k, you're telling me it Nagorno-Karabakh (mostly a subset of Artsakh) was 6x as populated in 1991? --Golbez (talk) 20:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

"The population of Artsakh-controlled territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh was at least 201,016 and at most 421,726 people in 1989." methinks someone's using wrong numbers. --Golbez (talk) 20:10, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Golbez, not so wrong; from both Armenia and Karabakh, Al Jazeera says 1,2 million, CIA says about 800,000, while the UN says 750 thousand to 1.1 million Azerbaijanis became IDPs. There are about 250,000 Azerbaijani refugees from Armenia, and the rest are from Karabakh, which is between half a million to 950 thousand Azerbaijani refugees from all of Karabakh. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

But in any case, both User with numbers' and Fullscaledx's arguments mean nothing if we're trying to change something in the article. We ain't partisanin' here. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

The statement wasn't that there were 1 million IDPs; the statement was that "1,000,000 Azeri Turks were expelled from Nagorno-Karabakh". And I truly don't care how this goes, I put in my time 15 years ago, I'm merely a chaos agent now. --Golbez (talk) 21:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

As per multiple UN Resolution, nagorno Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan, So occupation and liberation is completely true and in context.. Nawaab Sahaab (talk) 00:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

It is loaded language and the UN is not the factual authority of the world. From a neutral standpoint the territory is within Azeri borders but is also claimed by Artsakh, who controls or has controlled it - the best way to describe it would be a disputed territory and thus terms like "occupation" and "liberation" are not applicable. "Liberation" also implies freedom and Aliyev's government, in my opinion (just from looking at the Ilham Aliyev wikipedia page) is not considered a free government which also makes this term not applicable. Neutral, non-loaded terms such as "captured" and "controlled" I consider to be preferable in this situation --LOLCaatz (talk) 07:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Agree, not correct to use these words. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 19:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment: The "1M IDPs" consisted of both Azerbaijanis and Armenians, as per link BBC "Azeris criticised on human rights", 600k and 400k respectively. Hardly an occupation if about 15% of their own citizens were displaced, no? --MarioLemieux999 (talk) 19:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)MarioLemieux999 19:39 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Both words are contestedly accurate and are also slightly loaded. Liberation implies something good, potentially violating npov. Seeing as how I don't think said words would be needed in the text, maybe avoid them to at least avoid the issue. Bedfordres (talk) 21:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

After reading the other discussion, I'm unsure about occupation. Liberation still the same. Bedfordres (talk) 22:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, it is Azerbaijanis, not Azeris. Secondly, occupation is not a POV term. Occupation is occupation. It is absurd to discuss this term. @Rosguill:, @User178198273998166172: should watch his words, his topics aren't civil, always aggressive. His text is solely based on original research. Considering that text above is true, it is the third time he used that executioner argument. Beshogur (talk) 22:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Question Was Manchukou an occupied or a controlled territory of China? We are talking about protectorates, puppet states and satellite states of foreign powers on own territory. Do these foreign induced separatists just control or occupy? Geysirhead (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Funny News on Armenian Public Radio

People's Radio of Armenia claims that some famous Turkish artists wearing military uniforms are advancing in the front by showing photos as if they were Azerbaijani soldiers. This is clearly a funny disinformation.

(1:https://tr.armradio.am/2020/10/21/guneyde-inatci-savaslar-devam-ediyor-hovhannisyan-nedenini-acikladi/)
(2:https://tr.armradio.am/2020/10/21/on-iki-kat-daha-fazla-ama-atilim-yapamiyorlar/)

(Artists: Serdar Ortaç, Aras Bulut İynemli) --Emreculha (talk) 12:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree on adding these to the article, though with more neutral wording. Here are the archives (1, 2) and confirmation of the identities (1), 2, 3). --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

This is apparently troll. Beshogur (talk) 12:51, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

War

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.

---

Many WP:RS have called it a war: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] [6], the death toll exceeded that of a "conflict", and not every wars have an official declaration. Not suggesting any immediate name change though, just pointing out incase of future RfC, there are already WP:RS taht states its a war, but I suppoert it staying as a conflict for now. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

There is already an ongoing discussion at the top of the talk page to change the name of the article to 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War.XavierGreen (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2020 (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.

Update template

Additions should be made to the template for a more detailed map. Locations are too lacking. https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Template:Nagorno-Karabakh_conflict_detailed_map --45.135.206.211 (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

RfC about placing the war map at the top of the page

Should the map of the conflict be listed on the top of the infobox? HersiliaAramazd (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2020 (UTC) It was easy to see it there. Now we have to scroll down to get to the map. As a reader who came here to understand the latest developments, I support it.103.147.163.6 (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Heads up - Users on social media are urging people to edit the Wiki pages (Especially the last couple of days)

Because people love to say "What about the other side" I will refrain from mentioning which side it is, but any examination of various social media websites will show people are being urged to do all they can including edit the "Wikipedia pages" - in addition the image was reverted based on a 2, almost 3 day old facebook post just before I made this post. Just letting people know why you might see increased editing and reverting for a bit and trying to draw attention to that - Also, note I didn't mention a 'side' so "If it don't apply, let it fly" dawg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ETphonehomebeech (talk • contribs) 22:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

The article is already extended-confirmed protected, so new editors will not be able to edit the article directly for at least a month. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Where did you see this? Please send evidence links. Expertwikiguy (talk) 23:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Cyber warfare deserves a section of its own

Super Dromaeosaurus, thanks for your addition. But I think that "Cyber warfare" needs a section of its own and heavily expanding. There have been fake messages sent from Armenia in Azerbaijanis posing as official announcements, and I don't doubt similar things occurred in Yerevan too. What do you (and others) think about this? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 09:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with its expansion, this was my intention when adding the subsection, but if the result is the same as the section on the Azerbaijani Wikipedia, I think it would be too short to warrant its own section. However, it seems that the Azerbaijani Wikipedia has detailed the attacks on the first days of the conflict, so it is possible that it can be expanded much more. Super Ψ Dro 10:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with this and have actually gathered some sources that can be used.

Social media wars, fake accounts, impersonating the other nationality and posting fake content. https://dogrulugune.org/ermeni-turk-milliyetcisi-bir-asimetrik-propaganda-ornegi/

Spies bring down Azer government websites. https://www.cyberscoop.com/nagorno-karabakh-azerbaijan-armenia-espionage-talos-hackers/

Armenian hacker orders sex toys https://twitter.com/ASBMilitary/status/1315684486949097474

Twitter wars https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/snapshot-of-a-shadow-war-in-the-azerbaijan-armenia-conflict/

Negative online reviews was posted for this business https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/30/lifestyle/somerville-noor-mediterranean-grill-fends-off-anti-armenian-attacks/

Greek hackers https://www.wionews.com/world/greek-hackers-bring-down-over-150-azerbaijani-government-websites-as-sign-of-support-for-armenia-332409 Expertwikiguy (talk) 23:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Expertwikiguy, Greek hackers were already added, twitter ain't a good source (or deserves mentioning even). Negative online reviews seem minor and social media "wars" are expected thing. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 00:57, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Proposed infobox

Hello,

Just wanted to propose the infobox I made in this edit that use images in their usual place and the map where it should be. The only issue with this edit was the map requiring coordinates in the "location" part of the infobox, though there may be a way to hide the coordinates. Thanks.--WMrapids (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Strong Oppose, the images are not informative at all. To me, this edit seems to be aimed at disrupting the article, and assisting the Armenian POV by hiding the front-line changes. Keep in mind that almost all battle and campaign articles place the map on top. @Solavirum and CuriousGolden: HersiliaAramazd (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@HersiliaAramazd: I see two actions in your edit that should be evaluated in your future edits:

1. WP:GF – Please assume good faith. This edit was inspired by the WP:FA Nagorno-Karabakh War since it had similar pictures.
2. WP:CANVASS/WP:VOTESTACK – It appears that you are pinging two Azerbaijani users in an attempt to canvass support. This is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia and can lead to a ban on Wikipedia. For any users observing this discussion, keep this possible canvassing in mind for any future consensus decision-making processes on this page or any other related pages.

Also, this is not a simple battle or campaign. This article covers the entire conflict currently occurring while a battle or campaign would be a minor part of an entire conflict.--WMrapids (talk) 14:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

WMrapids, thank you for your addition; I took the liberty to compile them into one. Now, let me provide my opinion the main thing. HersiliaAramazd, firstly, with all respect, I would kindly ask you to not accuse others of pushing POV. But I agree that inclusion of a map is necessary. This is an ongoing conflict an a map on the infobox would provide better landscape for the readers. And we've got a map in the bottom per {{Infobox military conflict}}. So, I don't see anything problematic here. If you want to change this, you can always open a discussion subsection on the template's discussion page. Cheers! --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 14:17, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: Thank you. If more images are added to Commons, I can use the same multiple image strategy for the infobox and we can add it appropriately.--WMrapids (talk) 14:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

While in general I agree that images are better than maps for infobox main image, ongoing conflicts are somewhat different case, as for those map provides a fairly vital overview of current situation on ground. Also this proposed collage is frankly subpar. Three images, two of them from Ganja, with one being especially large? That is not going to fly.--Staberinde (talk) 18:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Note Armenian, NKR, and Azerbaijani MoDs don't release footage with a free license. We don't got much to work with. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, NKR Defense Army has plenty of CCA licensed footages on their official YouTube channel that can be useful for this article; interestingly one of them was nominated for deletion by you earlier, another deletion request for a file from the same source has been supported by you yesterday, even after i gave a clear explaination earlier that it's the official YouTube channel of NKR MoD and the main source for every other copied video on the internet. Eurofan88 (talk) 21:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

They ain't free to use. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Lack of free images would be obviously another good reason to stick with the map for now. When those numerous deletion discussions in commons eventually conclude, it should become clearer what image material we can work with.--Staberinde (talk) 14:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 October 2020

From Azerbaijan side, there is no any syrian terrorist groups. All of those are false-news generated by armenian diaspora to show itself to other countries as a victim of terror attack and they want to include 3rd countries such as Russia, France, etc into war.

Azerbaijan has modern, powerful military and all of the personal are highly educated and motivated to liberate historical Azerbaijani lands which is under occupation for more than 30 years.

Additionally, Azerbaijan army military personal is more than 100k and could be extended 2-3 times bigger if government will include past military personals.

Azerbaijan Army are using modern military equipment purchased from Turkey, Israel and Russia which includes high-tech, cutting-edge technology and can eliminate all enemy military points.

Azerbaijan Ministry of Defense have proved that on the armenian side, there is a lot of military personal are fighting against Azerbaijan army for money.

Armenia needs "terrorist" groups which is fighting for money but Azerbaijan does not need that.

These facts could be easily found on internet and all of these shows that Azerbaijan does not require none of those "terrorist" groups to win the battle.

Now Armenia does not have other options except disinformation.

Just open your eyes and don't believe armenian lies. All of the disinformation made by armenian "fake" media could easily be detected. 176.96.134.186 (talk) 15:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:40, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Armatura and CuriousGelden Edits: Please provide evidence that Genocide Watch is not a reliable source

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.

---

International NGO Genocide Watch raised an Emergency yesterday about the situation in Nagorno Karabakh, indicating the thread of Genocide by Azerbaijan against the Armenian inhabitants in Nagorno-Karabakh. A summary of this has been added to the article by @Armatura: (Support from me) but then removed by @CuriousGolden: citing GW being an unreliable source. CuriousGolden please provide evidence of this as GW is not listed on WP as unreliable. Please provide links to sources that could be verified here. Thank you.--Sataralynd (talk) 15:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I thought we had finished discussing over these minor/fake/unreliable sources. Like Herbi Media. Sataralynd, try to point something constructive rather than a minor source calling soldiers dying on battlefield a genocide. The term genocide isn't something to toy around and Genocide Watch itself is minor and unreliable source. We don't have to provide evidence to something stated on Wikipedia, refrain from touching ridiculous topics. If you want to push the "Armenia is the victim" narrative, there is always the Armenian Wikipedia for that. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

For Pete's sake, there is literally a list in the link you provided and you want an "evidence" for that. Why are we even spending time on this? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Solavirum: Please refrain from ad hominems, as we are not on reddit. The list was provided to show that GW is NOT listed there. As usual you are making claims without sources. Please provide third party sources that 1) GW is "fake" and 2) that it is "unreliable" 3) that only Armenian soldiers are being killed. Thankfully, it is not up to you or me where anybody publishes anything on Wikipedia, but up to the arguments they make or the facts they assert, and the sources they use to bolster those arguments and facts--Sataralynd (talk) 15:20, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion Moved to Genocide Watch section: Sataralynd, okay, lmao. Where did I do ad hominem? Do you know what's ad hominem? Anyways, there are multiple wrongs in your statement above. Firstly, if GW is not listed, it shows how minor and unreliable they are. For a "international humanitarian organization" as your fellow calls, it sure doesn't have that much of a coverage, huh? Secondly, I didn't called GW "fake". I labelled them in a general namespace, which also includes fake sites like Hərbi Media and Toliş Media. We've confirmed that they were fake. So, no need to retouch those topics. Secondly, for arguments, and "facts", GW is not a reliable source to use especially in a such controversial topic, accusing Azerbaijan of a genocide. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Again no sources to your claims, and no engagement with my comment. I will not comment besides that I already provided evidence that GW is NOT a minor NGO (as if size were relevant), and that it is reliable, in the Genocide Watch section of this Talk page. Please address your comments there--Sataralynd (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Frankly a source that starts off by mentioning September Days and talks about the "several" ethnic cleansing ADR did but literally nothing about March Days, the ethnic cleansings of Andranik and etc already should give you a good idea of how reliable this source is. It even takes time to mention shelling of Stepanakert in the first Karabakh war, but literally nothing about forceful ethnic cleansing and massacres done on Azeris (e.g. Khojaly Massacre). The source is biased and too minor (barely any results pop up about it when you search its name; not even a Wiki article). Don't waste time arguing for the inclusion of such sources. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 15:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

You are mentioning several topics there without any sources. If you want to challenge the folks at GW, please engage directly with them. If you want to start a new talk on these topics, please do so. We are discussing the reliability of the piece and GW here. I already provided amble evidence for that in the Genocide Watch section of this page. Please address your comments to what I provided there. Thank you--Sataralynd (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Genocide Watch section of this talk: @Armatura: started a thread on the same topic before this one in the Genocide Watch section of this talk. Please go there to resume the discussion. I have added evidence on the reliability of Genocide Watch there. Please look at them and feel free to comment. Thank you.--Sataralynd (talk) 15:59, 24 October 2020 (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.

Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham

Since it's been confirmed, what do you think about adding the Nusra Front in the infobox along with Hamza and Sultan Murad.[7] Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 20:10, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

It has not been "confirmed" by third-party sources. It's just a Moscow claim. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Russia is a third party. Beaneater (talk) 23:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Beaneater, not if they're arming up Armenia. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 04:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum and Israel is arming Azerbaijan, so their sources are not third party? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 19:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Գարիկ Ավագյան we're not talking about Russian news outlets, we're talking about the Russian government here. When did we called Putin an independent reliable source? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 20:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

[8] Syrian National Army photo

picture is from Operation Peace Spring

Beshogur, If the photo is from Operation Peace Spring that doesn't mean we need to remove it. On the picture are Syrian fighters, probably, from Hamza. Instead, you could rename the caption. More like WP:IDONTLIKETHEM Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 20:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Գարիկ Ավագյան, Garik, your edits are very WP:TENDENTIOUS. Refrain from publishing such edits. We ain't going to use that image cuz it's very misleading. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum Could you clarify what you find specifically tendentious? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 09:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Agreed that the photo is misleading. It gives the impression of being a photo of Syrian fighters on the ground in this conflict, and it isn't. If such a photo does exist, that is what should be used, rather than giving the impression that this is photographic evidence of their involvement. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 21:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Dear OuroborosCobra, I don't think you will be able to find a photo of Syrian mercenaries in Azerbaijan in a public domain. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 09:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

If we are going to rename, what place does it have here? Let's add pictures of everything then. Beshogur (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Beshogur The picture is for section Turkey and Syrian National Army, in the photograph there are fighters of the Syrian National Army who take part in the 2020 hostilities. I don't understand, is the problem in the title or in the photo? If in the photo, then you will not be able to find new photos of the Syrian mercenaries. If in the title, then you can easily change it. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 09:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Please, don't add any misleading illustrations into a page about a topic, which did not only kill thousands but also has thrown back millions economically.--Geysirhead (talk) 21:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Concur with the removal, there is no reason to include this unless it's directly related to the war, and it's definitely not. --Golbez (talk) 22:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Dear Golbez, are the photos of a bus stop in Jabrayil [9] and a wall in Fizuli [10] directly related to the war? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 09:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes they are. If you find recent picture of Syrian volunteers, feel free to add. Beshogur (talk) 10:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Probably not, no. Would concur with removing any photo from before the war that isn't used to illustrate something specific noted in text. --Golbez (talk) 22:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

US Congressmen's calls for recognition of Artsakh

A growing number of US Congressmen, including Adam Schiff and Brad Sherman, have either voiced or stated that they are prepared to put forward legislation calling for the recognition of Artsakh. Would anyone oppose including mention of this in the international reaction section for the US? Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 15:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Agree on adding it with NPOV wording. Also, MarshallBagramyan, may you provide some reliable sources below? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:18, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Here's one on Congressman Sherman's and other statements, including calls for sanctions against Azerbaijan, a Tweet from his official account calling for recognition, and here is Congressman Schiff's official call for formal recognition of Artsakh. Plenty others to be had as well. Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 15:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Disagree it rather belongs into Political status of Nagorno-Karabakh--Geysirhead (talk) 16:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Agree It would be appropriate to add a section like Recognition of the Republic of Artsakh, in which one can add statements made by world politicians, as well as the names of some cities and U.S. states, which officially recognised the independence of Artsakh as a result of this war. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Agree to add.Expertwikiguy (talk) 00:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is "arms suppliers" section a thing?

Nowadays armies buy arms from many different countries. So why is there such a section specifying just 1 country for each? Azerbaijan arguably has bought more arms from Turkey than Israel. Since every drone strike is done with Bayraktar, there must be several hundreds of MAM-C MAM-L missiles bought. Armenia probably has bought arms from many other countries apart from Russia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.176.163 (talk) 21:25, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Because Turkey's support is regarded more than just arms supplier. And here, the arms suppliers are considered the countries who sent/sold additional arms to the parties during the conflict. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 22:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

In support to keep. Important info to have. Expertwikiguy (talk) 00:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

R-17 Elbrus

We've got confirmary footage on the usage of R-17 Elbrus missiles and some of their annihilation. End publishing disruptive editing. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 15:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Was this directed at me? I take issue with the accusation of disruptive editing, as I was involved in talk page discussion for days before making any edit, and the edit I made was in line with the talk page discussion up to that point. In fact, I didn't even go as far as other editors had suggested, which was to remove the claims of ballistic missiles outright. I wanted to leave them as claimed by one side, and asked for verification. Please stop with your personal attacks and accusations of disruptive editing when I have been participating, in good faith, on this talk page. Also, putting this in a separate section, I was never going to see this had I not been skimming for other content. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

OuroborosCobra I was talking about the confirmation of R-17 Elbrus launchers. They aren't alleged at this point. But adding alleged to Tockhas might be fitting (unless, there are visual confirmation). But you added alleged to both of those. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 21:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

At the point that I did that, the alleged statement was accurate as to the evidence presented on this talk page. All that had been presented was Azerbaijan claiming one thing, and Armenia denying it. That was just as true for SCUDs as for Tockhas. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 00:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Armenia has released maps showing sections of NK that are not under NK control

Sources: https://hy.armradio.am/2020/10/24/%d5%a1%d6%80%d5%ae%d6%80%d5%b8%d6%82%d5%b6-%d5%b0%d5%b8%d5%be%d5%b0%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%b6%d5%ab%d5%bd%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%a8-%d6%84%d5%a1%d6%80%d5%bf%d5%a5%d5%a6%d5%ab-%d5%b4%d5%ab%d5%bb%d5%b8%d6%81/

https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1032670.html

Seems to contradict the current claims of Azerbaijan. Given that country's lack of transparency, I think we should give some credibility to what Artsakh/Armenia have released, and adjust the map on the main article, accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeymike20 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Not done Given that country's lack of transparency is not an argument and this is not a place to push the Armenian POV. We use third-party sources on the map. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

How third parties can confirm the borders? They are based on Azerbaijani statements. Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 19:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

We've got a beautiful thing called geolocating. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

These are confirmed, there are videos from the locations. I guess you are not familiar with Syrian Civil War. If we are going to wait for reuters or something else, it would take an eternity. Beshogur (talk) 19:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

There have been countless reports of Azeri troops entering towns, taking photos, and leaving. This is not proof of occupation. Mikeymike20 (talk) 03:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Stop changing the name

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.

---

Let the conflict first continue, and once it reaches the scale where sources start calling it “a war” which it is, we could change this to “second nagarno karabakh war” as of now most of the fighting is in the south and over 1000 died, which nowhere near the 15-30k+ that died in the first war. No need to rush Ehoah88880 (talk) 09:06, 25 October 2020 (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.

1 Armenian civilian was taken hostage

Solavirum, could you help to choose appropriate name for this? [11] Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 09:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Գարիկ Ավագյան, I have mentioned it above. But maybe the tagging didn't work. Anyways, I also presented an Azerbaijani link above. While the Armenian media calls this case "capturing" or "taking hostage", the Azerbaijani government and Aznif herself calls this "recovering from the conflict zone". A hostage situation violates second-party's consent, and in her interview, she voiced her consent. Even going as far as saying that she and her grandmother had lived in Baku. Seems like a problematic case, but surely it isn't a hostage situation. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 09:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

US intel on potential terrorist attacks in Baku

The American embassy in Baku has issued a security alert to its citizens and foreing nationals living in Baku. Here the link. The statement reads:

The U.S. Embassy in Baku has received credible reports of potential terrorist attacks and kidnappings against U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in Baku, including against hotels such as the J.W. Marriott Absheron, as well as potentially other locations in Baku. U.S. citizens are advised to exercise heightened caution in locations where Americans or foreigners may gather.

Seems like an important development, but dunno where to add. Beshogur, and others, what do you think? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:52, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Note that JW Marriott Absheron Baku Hotel was specifically mentioned. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment How it is related to the ongoing war? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:20, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Գարիկ Ավագյան, how is it not? The embassy never gave such alerts and have been only giving alerts recently because of the ongoing conflict. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum I do hope that everything will be fine. Though, still no connection to the war. Also, look here, please. [12] Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Գարիկ Ավագյան, that makes it more related to the conflict in the framework of ASALA's terrorist acts and assassinations carried out against Turkey and Azerbaijan. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thats because of the Jihadists Turkey brought to help the Azerbaijani Army. Is also a way of saying "get rid of them(Syrian Mercenaries) or I will not trust your Government(Baku)".Mr.User200 (talk) 18:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, that's your interpretation. How come they not refer to the Armenian terrorists? You know, there were several incidents of Armenian or Armenian-funded incidents back in the early 90s. Like 1994 Baku Metro bombings and 1990 Tbilisi–Agdam bus bombing. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

None of those terrorist attacks targeted US interests. US have this way to warn his citizens from Jihadist attacks globally. Also Beshougur stop with that lame canvassing I never said I was going to add that to the article.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC

@Rosguill: another non argument by Mr.User200. Beshogur (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr.User200, if Jihadis are even in Azerbaijan, they are hundreds of miles away from Baku. And the Armenians are pissed of about US not recognizing Artsakh. Yet again, we're not here to discuss some user's interpretation on events, neither yours, or mine. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 18:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Exactly, I was just answering Գարիկ Ավագյան.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

SOHR revealed more than 2,000 terrorists participating in the war, while Azerbaijan still denies the presence of the mercenaries, which means that it does not control them. Just an opinion. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 11:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

• Regarding the original point of discussion, I think that unless secondary sources make a big deal about it it doesn't have much of a place in the article. US Embassy warnings often err on the side of caution: I remember getting alerts while living in Germany because of incidents of "war in Europe" between Russia and Ukraine. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

.Yup, and in Libya on 2011 and some African states that suffered from terrorist attcks too. Caution for US nationals.Mr.User200 (talk) 19:01, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill, the embassy says they have credible reports on the issue. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 19:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Solavirum, they're still just a primary source's warnings. It's certainly concerning for US nationals currently in those locations, but as far as the conflict as a whole is concerned, it's both minor and preemptive at this time. If and when secondary sources report it as a serious issue we can devote coverage to it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

COVID19 Spreading in Stepanakert

Under the section Casualties, equipment losses and infrastructure damage, please add the following in the intro: Several outlets reported increased cases of COVID19 in Nagorno-Karabakh, particularly the city of Stepanakert, where the population is forced to live in overcrowded bunkers, due to Azerbaijan artillery and drone strikes, and difficulty in testing and contact tracing (sources 1 and 2)--Sataralynd (talk) 04:16, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

• Done COVID-19 is an important issue. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 14:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Second Nagorno-Karabakh War

Ilham Aliyev just called this conflict the Second Karabakh War, if no one opposes it, I'm adding it to the lead. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)