This is an archive of past discussions about Shusha. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Artsvik Sargsyan, claimed mayor in exile of the city
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The template should mostly be used for stable information, while now it's very controversial. Artsvik Sargsyan is not the mayor of the city, let alone in exile. Some Armenian media outlets present him as former mayor of the city: [1][2]. The link provided only talks about his appointment, but not about his later fate. My edits to ask for an update or solidify his claim to be exile were reverted twice by two editors (maybe to avoid 3rr, who knows), which I consider unjustified — Toghrul R (t)09:21, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2022
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request to Shusha has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
As Wikipedia is a well known website and is regarded as a reliable source of information I find it odd that the name for this article instead of being Shushi, the ancient name and the name it’s always had for centuries is now being called the name given by the very people who destroyed it, I’m not even Armenian and I know this information, I’ve been to Shushi and seen it’s culture and heritage and it’s beauty. Please consider making this change because of not you’re just aiding Azerbaijan and Turkey in the ethnic cleansing of Armenians and their culture. 5.30.238.108 (talk) 07:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Rejected. Thanks for your personal opinion, but this is not how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia build on the reliable sources and Shushi is not common name. Plus, this is consensus version for a long time, and believe that ancient(if we consider 19 century “ancient”) name was Shushi is not enough reason for your edit. Abrvagl (talk) 08:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2023
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request to Shusha has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Are you sure about that? Знатный means both noble and distinguished (especially in older usage) [3], hence незнатный may mean "not distinguished" ~ "unimportant." From the context this meaning looks likelier. Alaexis¿question?06:01, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Absolutely. There is no such a meaning as "unimportant" in незнатный. The word знатный with the meaning of "distinguished" was used only in Soviet era for distinguished workers. The context also very clearly indicates that that part of Muslims was rather important since it conquested a large territory. 2A0C:5A81:E102:B200:FDEE:D90A:38EA:2C12 (talk) 07:48, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
I've checked in the dictionary of 18th century Russian (since this is when Suvorov wrote it), and both meanings were present then too [4]. For what it's worth, the meaning "well-known" is #3 while "noble" is #4, so it's not like it's not that the former is an obscure or little-used one. I think the right way to resolve this issue is to look for secondary sources which discuss Suvorov's letter. Alaexis¿question?08:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
I think it's more appropriate to check the word незнатный itself instead. In the same dictionary the "not noble" meaning of this word is No.2 while "small, unimportant" is No.3. Again, there's no way a tribe that conquered the largest khanate of the region could be deemed "unimportant". 2A0C:5A81:E102:B200:640B:5E3F:379B:2D31 (talk) 16:22, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
This is your interpretation of a primary source (Suvorov's letter). Per WP:NOR we cannot rely on your - or my - interpretation. We need secondary sources which are written by experts. Alaexis¿question?18:53, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
It's not my interpretation, it's my translation. I'm a native Russian speaker and I see very clearly that there is an incorrect translation of that phrase. There can't be any secondary sources commenting on something so obvious for any Russian speaker. By the way, I don't understand why the incorrect translation that somehow got inside the article doesn't need any secondary sources to be there but my correct version does. 2A0C:5A81:E102:B200:640B:5E3F:379B:2D31 (talk) 02:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm also a native Russian speaker and to me both translations seem possible. Translation certainly involves interpretation when the translated word has several meanings. Alaexis¿question?06:44, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the 
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. Lightoil (talk) 08:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
