Talk:Armenia/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Geography of Armenia

@Archives908: I’m gonna ping you because I saw in the archives that you created the current consensus. That conversation was very messy and was full of personal opinions and original research and not an objective analysis of sources. It seems that the conversation was cut short without a real consensus to save time and omits important information. The fact is that Armenia is occasionally considered part of the middle east. The other conversation was mistaken into thinking that the terms Middle East and Europe are mutually exclusive which is not the case at all. As the CIA World Factbook aptly puts it, Armenia can be considered to be geopolitically European, Middle Eastern, or both. Many reliable sources/definitions place Armenia in the middle east, I see no valid argument to omit the fact that Armenia is occasionally considered to be part of the middle east. “Is Armenia in the Middle East?” is one of the top google questions about Armenia and this article right now is taking a position that an Encyclopedia shouldn’t be taking, Encyclopedias present all major viewpoints, it’s not our job as editors to let our own personal beliefs decide which viewpoint gets included if there is significant scholarship supporting multiple viewpoints. This doesn’t have to be a drawn out discussion, my consensus is to mention that Armenia can be considered European, Middle Eastern or Both while also leaving the part that Armenia generally aligns more with Europe.

This is my proposed consensus:

Occasionally, Armenia is considered part of the Middle East due to historical and cultural ties to the region. Geopolitically, Armenia can be considered European, Middle Eastern, or both. Since Armenia aligns itself in many respects geopolitically with Europe, the country is a member of numerous European organizations…

With this note (Note: The Middle East has no set boundaries and is defined by multiple definitions. The South Caucasus, where Armenia is located, is occasionally considered to be the northern extent or an extension of the Middle East due to its close cultural and historical ties to the region. The CIA World Factbook as well as multiple scholarly publications place the Republic of Armenia in the Middle East. Other definitions exclude Armenia or nclude it rather in the Greater Middle East due to its geopolitical alignment.}}) I believe this is more than fair, not purposefully omitting viewpoints that have significant scholarship behind them for personal political reasons. I see absolutely no reason that some mention of this classification shouldn’t be included in this article, it’s only serves to confuse readers more and takes a stance on a debated issue which is not what Wikipedia is for.TagaworShah (talk) 02:13, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Please, let's try to avoid relying on WP:POV and personally attacking the contributions of other editors from the get go- it is not constructive nor appreciated. Now to the discussion- I hope you took the time to read the entire consensus in full. If you did, you would see that the consensus was not in fact solely reached by myself, as you so erroneously claim. If that were the case, it would not be called a consensus. The ensuing and riveting discussions held on talk pages sometimes do get "messy"- that's the point. The primary topic of that discussion was centered around Armenia's geopolitical alignment towards Europe. It had nothing to do with geography. Armenia is located in the South Caucasus region of West Asia. This is undisputed. Armenia's geopolitical alignment with Europe, on the other hand, had been omitted from the article and it was agreed that 1-2 sentences would be included highlighting the country's indisputable connections with/to Europe. Again- not changing anything about Armenia's geographic location. The first area of concern- rather then addressing the talk page, you decided (unilaterally) to alter the established consensus and add a new geographical component to this section (which, typically speaking, should not include additional geographical information). The 4th paragraph in most country articles is reserved for economic/geopolitical/international relations information. The existing wording of the paragraph, follows that rule by focusing strictly on geopolitics- not geography. The second area of concern- your arguments that Armenia is generally included in the definitions of the Middle East is incorrect. The South Caucasus is in fact a distinct region of West Asia. Most scholars and academics would agree with this. Britannica, arguably one of the most reliable heavyweight sources, does not mention the Middle East at all for Armenia. It clearly states that Armenia is in the Caucasus/ Transcaucasia region. Even Transcaucasia isn't listed as part of the Middle East according to Britannica. Rather, they label the entire region as a unique region of Eurasia. The BBC, one of the most reliable international news agencies, likewise mentions nothing of the Middle East in relation to Armenia. Furthermore, Armenia is not listed as one of the countries of the Middle East proper (on the very article about the Middle East), so to include that here is slightly baffling. No mention of the Middle East at Caucasus either. Hmm I wonder why? The United Nations geoscheme for Asia correctly categorizes the region as "West Asia", not "Middle East", the UN has also placed Armenia within the Eastern European Group. While the Government of Armenia makes zero claims that they are part of the Middle East. As for the concept of "Greater Middle East", it is extremely vague, arbitrary, loosely defined, not backed up by enough scholarly work, and definitely not notable enough to categorically state "Armenia is a part of the Greater Middle East". It is for those reasons that the existing consensus should be maintained. I also must point out that your arguments presented above are eerily identical to QeeGeeBee's persistent determination to include Armenia in the "Greater Middle East". In fact, you both have identical arguments when comparing both talk page discussions. Looks like QeeGeeBee stopped editing on 21 February 2021, while your account became active a day later on 22 February 2021. Hmm, coincidence? Archives908 (talk) 04:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Archives908: Woah Woah Woah, what is with the hostility? Accusing an editor you have literally never interacted with of sock puppetry, especially when my edits, command of the english language, and interests are so vastly different from that user?? Accusing editors of bad faith or sock puppetry from the get go is neither constructive nor appreciated and it’s not considered civil under Wikipedia guidelines. Talk pages discussions while riveting and extensive should remain civil. Now I think you misunderstood what I was saying, I didn’t accuse any editor of POV editing at all, I simply stated the wikipedia guidelines in critique to an edit which I am perfectly within my right to do, that’s what the talk page is for. I know how a consensus works, I simply stated you were the one who wrote it. Also Geography includes the discipline of geopolitics, it’s in the name, I was specifically talking about geopolitics as my edits make clear, I’m well aware Armenia is geographically in Western Asia, thats not disputed and has nothing to do with this conversation. While Armenia’s physical geography isn’t disputed, Armenia’s geopolitical alignment is, and therefore each significant viewpoint should be given its due weight according to Wikipedia guidelines. I never once claimed that Armenia is “generally” considered part of the Middle east, it’s not, it’s occasionally included in the Middle East by certain definitions, that’s a fact and multiple reliable sources state that. Certain sources not mentioning Armenia as part of the Middle East is not a valid argument for not including that viewpoint when other reliable sources clearly do, again with proper due weight. The Middle East article does mention the South Caucasus as being occasionally grouped with the Middle East, it’s in the body of the article. There is simply no valid argument as to why the viewpoint that Armenia belongs to the Middle East should be omitted, it’s a significant(not dominant but still significant) viewpoint and there are milt reliable sources backing it, unless you can disprove the reliability of the sources, it should be included with its due weight. I still don’t understand why we can’t just say “Armenia can be considered geopolitically European, Middle Eastern, or both” that’s the most proper comprise that includes all the significant viewpoints in order of their weight while not changing any other part of the article. Regardless, there needs to be mention that Armenia is occasionally considered part of the Middle East, that doesn’t cancel out its geopolitical alignment with Europe, the terms are not mutually exclusive, it’s still a significant viewpoint and as an Encyclopedia, Wiki should not be omitting these viewpoints. I have yet to see a single valid argument on why this significant and well sourced viewpoint should be omitted.TagaworShah (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Let's rewind. You were the one starting off the conversation on a hostile note, and practically belittling and undermining the previously established consensus. I did not call you a sockmaster/puppet at all....I simply called a spade a spade. Your account did become active 24hrs after QeeGeeBee's became inactive. And your argument is identical to QeeGeeBee's near obsession's to include Armenia in the "Greater Middle East". Have I got anything wrong here? Illuminate me. The consensus at hand took time to establish and its focus was to highlight Armenia's predominate geopolitical connection with/to Europe. New content should not take away from that. There is an entire article to include additional information about Armenia's geopolitical "connections" with the Middle East. But to add it to the lede is ludacris. Even you admitted that Armenia is only "occasionally considered part of the Middle East". So, why would any editor add that to the lede (especially for a lede that is already cluttered). It is not notable enough to be placed in the lede, even by your own admission. Furthermore, to put that in the lede, creates the false assumption that Armenia's geopolitical alignment with Europe is equal/on par with its alignment with the Middle East. It's not. Armenia does not have any major political integration pacts/alliances/treaties with its Mid East neighbors, and does not even have full diplomatic relations with the entire region. Armenia has on the other hand, signed dozens among dozens of treaties (in various sectors from sport, culture, education, travel, airfare, health, etc...) with its European partners, is a full member of dozens of European integration organizations like the Eastern Partnership and the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, and has active political association agreements with the EU (such as the Armenia-EU Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement). Let's not forget, Armenia is a full member of the Council of Europe, which itself stipulates that a member must be "European" to accede. Not to mention that there are several Armenian political parties which advocate for closer ties with Europe/EU, not a single party advocates for "Middle Eastern" integration. The point is, Armenia does not have the same level and depth of geopolitical integration with the Middle East as it does with Europe in the 21st Century. You have neglected to justify that crucial point. You have not proved that Armenia maintains an equal level of geopolitical association/alignment with the Middle East as it currently does with Europe. Therefore, your suggestion is quite misleading to the reader and is not an improvement to the lede. You have also failed to provide any legitimate source(s) showing that Armenia itself considers it to be part of the "Middle East". I would think that would be important to back up your bold claims. In terms of the Middle East article, like I already said, the countries are not listed as countries of the Middle East. There is one sentence stating they are "sometimes associated". That just goes to show that this addition is pretty insignificant, even on the Middle East article, and is certainly not lede worthy material here. I remain unconvinced that your recommendation will drastically benefit the lede. Archives908 (talk) 14:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Archives908:That is the whole point of talk pages is to critique the edits of other editors, I never said anything about any specific editor, just the edits which is completely within my right and not hostile at all, it’s important to not take critiques to your edits personally. Since you are always looking for ways to improve as an editor, I suggest reading this conduct policy titled Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade; assigning false labels to other editors in order to prevent valid discussion and review is considered uncivil and is frankly embarrassing when you’re wrong, such as in this case (me and that editor don’t resemble each other in style whatsoever, you indirectly accused me of sock puppetry for no apparent reason other than to prevent discussion, also, I would never hastily end a discussion like that without proper consideration of my viewpoint). On to the topic at hand, again you are coming from the false pretenses that Europe and the Middle East are mutually exclusive terms and that being part of one somehow negates the other, this is very far from the truth. It is entirely possible to be seen geopolitically as both European and Middle Eastern, take Turkey for example. Saying Armenia is occasionally considered as being part of the Middle East, in no way takes away from that, I suggest familiarizing yourself with the term. Armenia being part of the middle east is significant according to Wikipedia guidelines since there is significant scholarship for that matter, saying the lede is “too cluttered” for a sentence is a very poor argument. Every significant viewpoint needs to be given it’s due weight, I provided reliable sources, unless you can prove that these sources don’t merit inclusion for some reason than they should be included. Completely omitting a significant viewpoint is a flaw of this article and clarifying Armenia’s complex geopolitical position is important. It is far too oversimplified now, even for a lede. Also Armenia doesn’t need to explicitly say “We are Middle Eastern” to act geopolitically as part of the region or to have cultural and historical ties to the region, cultural and historical ties are included in this discussion per my first source. Armenia borders and has very close ties to Iran, especially now, and is also an observer state in the Arab League. I don’t have time right now to provide a full geopolitical analysis of Armenia’s situation but the fact that many countries and definitions, notably the United States, consider Armenia to be geopolitically part of the Middle East is significant and should be included especially when it is one of the most googled questions about Armenia. Also the Wikipedia article on the Middle east needs a lot of work, that’s not a valid argument either, let’s stick to actual sources for now.TagaworShah (talk) 15:39, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

You seem to be ignoring all of my counter arguments, while repeating yours. A tactic I encountered while discussing with QeeGeeBee. That won't work with me. I will recommend you to re-read my paragraph above, carefully. Armenia is not part of the Middle East proper. As per Britannica, Armenia belongs to the Caucasus region of West Asia, a distinct region separate from the Middle East. Zero mention of Armenia's association or alignment with the Middle East. I will continue to default to Britannica, not your outdated sources from 22 years ago. Gayane Novikova does not provide sources for much of her analysis or bold claims. "Armenians consider themselves linking the Middle East with Europe", where did she get that? Where are the sources/polls/statistics used? It is not a WP:RS. Karen Culcasi's article from 11 years ago is extremely broad and vague, you need to specifically cite the exact reference/page where it says "Armenia is categorically party of the Greater Middle East". As for the work of Michael B. Bishku, I have actually read his work and if you read it carefully, he actually supports my position more then yours. He points out that the Caucasus region is in fact on the very margin of a very loosely defined "Middle East". Nothing solid to be found there. Meanwhile, Adam Garfinkle's work from 22 years ago says 1 line of the Cacausus belonging in the Greater Middle East and actually says nothing about Armenia. Have you even read your sources? They certainly do not reinforce much validity to your claims. I have done extensive research to try and find anything that systematically proves myself wrong, but I can't find any recent publication(s) that talk about Armenia's firm position within the "Greater Middle East". I have addressed your points and your sources directly, while you continue to ignore my arguments. We cannot, in WP:GF, say that Armenia is as much of Europe as it is the Middle East, geopolitically. I am fully aware that the terms need not be mutually exclusive. If Armenia had its "foot in both doors", I would say you're right- we should add it to the lede. But that isn't the case here. I have provided recent and reliable sources affirming that the Caucasus is a distinct region, that Armenia does affiliate itself more with Europe geopolitically then with the Middle East, and have highlighted those connections above. You bring up the topic of the Arab League, which interestingly enough so did QeeGeeBee. Another coincidence? You should know that Armenia is not an active member of the Arab League, they were invited to participate in 1 meeting back in 2004. Yet, you have the audacity to say that because of that, Armenia should belong to the "Greater Middle East", while ignoring 100% of the geopolitical links with Europe I cited above. As for Iran, just because a country maintains good relations with one of its neighbors, that does not justify it belonging to the Middle East. You have provided nothing substantial to change my mind and certainly nothing which would warrant altering the lede or the previously established consensus. Armenia has a plethora of geopolitical connections with Europe as of 2021, we cannot say the same about the Middle East. Therefore, your suggestion is not notable enough to be included in the lede. Feel free to change my mind- I for one appreciate a good debate! Archives908 (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

For the record, Britannica is not a reliable source.[7] - LouisAragon (talk) 20:46, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

It also states that Britannica is "useful for basic and uncontroversial facts". Armenia being located in West Asia is a basic and uncontroversial fact, if I'm not mistaken. Also, I'd prefer a wiki policy rather then someone's random talk page from 2017. Thanks though... Archives908 (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Archives908: Lets leave the indirect sock puppetry accusations behind, it doesn’t reflect good on your part and doesn’t benefit this discussion at all, it’s common sense that editors on the same side of a debate will have the same viewpoint, nevertheless, me and that editor have completely different editing styles, commands of English, and focuses. I am not ignoring your arguments, I am just saying they don’t contradict mine, the middle east has many definitions, Armenia is included in some of those definitions, that’s not controversial that’s just how it is. Brittany a can be very helpful as a source but what I have learned from an Administrator in the Flamenco talk discussion is that Britannica, as a tertiary source, is often too vague and broad to solve disputes of this matter, it not being included in Brittanica does not mean it shouldn’t be included here, secondary sources or more specialized tertiary sources are preferred. Also as I said before due to time constraints I can’t provide you a full geopolitical analysis of Armenia, I was just giving some examples there are plenty more where that came from. But you know who can? The Central Intelligence Agency of the United States, Geopolitics is one of their main focuses, the CIA clearly states that Armenia can be considered geopolitically middle eastern. I’m ignoring your points on how Armenia is geopolitically European because that’s not what i’m arguing against, nobody is saying to exclude that, just to add Middle East as a significant viewpoint which also does not contradict European since it’s entirely possible to be both. IMO the CIA is more than enough proof of significance and inclusion in the article but I will still provide some other sources for a more comprehensive debate. Also you don’t have to say Armenia is as Middle Eastern as European, that is a very poor way of approaching this debate, they are not mutually exclusive and we will give each viewpoint it’s due weight, nowhere in my edits did I suggest that it carries more weight than it being European, however, it’s still very significant and deserves inclusion. Karen Culcasi specifically mentions that certain definitions include Armenia in the Middle East, I provided a quote for you if you check the ref. 21 years is certainly not outdated for the purpose of this article, if it were medical information etc. maybe but something like this definitely still relevant. Novikova’s work is published in a peer reviewed journal from a well regarded academic press, it’s definitely reliable, she doesn’t need to cite sources because it comes directly from her own research, that’s how research works, the page probably excluded the means of which she gathered the research to make it more brief and easy to read, it’s most likely in the journal if you can access that. Bishku clearly states that the Caucasus is the northern extent of the middle east, which even I recognize is loosely defined, I don’t see how that supports your point to completely omit the occasional classification of Armenia in the middle east. In scholarly studies, Armenia is also occasionally included within the geopolitical term of “Middle East” as well[8] [9] [10] These are 3 very reliable studies that include Armenia within the Middle East, I would love to go more in depth on them but unfortunately I am on a time constraint, they all do support my point though, I don’t throw sources on the table without reading them. Also, Increased trade and people-to-people ties with the Middle East are evident.[11] Armenia is looking towards the Middle Eastern market and establishing deeper geopolitical connections with the Middle East.[12] Again i’m unable to provide a comprehensive review of Armenia’s geopolitical position but the CIA is more than able which is why we should be taking that into account and giving the position it’s due weight. Also as stated above Brittanica isn’t comprehensive enough to be used in this situation, I don’t know why we need to establish Western Asia, everyone here agrees on that, this however is controversial.TagaworShah (talk) 04:25, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

You are overlooking a Catch-22 in your main argument. Armenia is located in Western Asia, correct? The Middle East is located in Western Asia, correct? If the Middle East is itself in West Asia, and if West Asia is already very clearly mentioned in this article, then your argument becomes virtually redundant. You are suggesting that we highlight that Armenia has "close relations" with a region in West Asia, even though Armenia is already in West Asia. Furthermore, you keep claiming that this topic of discussion has nothing to do with geography, yet I find it odd that you titled this discussion "Geography of Armenia" and your own edit summary was "Clarifying Armenia’s geographical situation". Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Let's review- you claim this has nothing to do with geography and only geopolitics...yet your edit summary and pursuing talk page conversation suggests that something was inherently wrong/missing regarding Armenia's geography. Again, those were the words you used, and they all centre around geography- not geopolitics. So then, if were focusing on "Armenia's geographical situation" as you originally stated, what is your concern that needed fixing? The article very clearly states (in the first sentence of the lede) that Armenia is located in West Asia, the exact same region that the Middle East belongs too. So what exactly is the geographical situation? Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

In terms of the original consensus, I couldn't find anything in the article of substance that highlighted Armenia's growing connections/ integration with Europe. Despite Armenia's physical geographical location in West Asia, there should have been some information of Armenia's geopolitical alignment with/to Europe, especially since the ratification of CEPA which brings Armenia much closer politically to the EU. A consensus was finally established to include 1-2 sentences in the lede (strictly focusing on geopolitics). Final result- Armenia's geography in West Asia is aptly covered, and now so too is its geopolitical alignment with Europe. It's balanced and accurate. Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

You then decide to include the "Middle East" into that equation, completely overlooking why Europe had been added there in the first place and thus undermining the established consensus. The whole point of adding Europe was because Armenia already had clear apparent connections with West Asia, a region the Middle East belongs too. By adding the Middle East to that 1-2 sentences, detracts from the original goal/purpose of including Europe. Granted, I understand that Middle East/Europe need not be mutually exclusive, but Armenia's connections with Asia are already present, while its connections with Europe were limited. Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

You have provided some sources which vaguely classify Armenia as part of the "Greater Middle East", well done. But you have still failed to demonstrate notability. As per WP:NRV, no subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists. Just because a source states that Armenia may be included in the "Greater Middle East", that does not mean the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition. Armenia does not currently maintain the same level of geopolitical connections with the Middle East as it does with Europe. I agree with you that they are not mutually exclusive, but they are also not on par. So, why would we (as diligent editors) allow the same level of coverage? Surely, that is misleading to readers. You have not shown any quantifiable proof that Armenia has any significant integration pacts with the Middle East. The only evidence you provided was that Armenia is an observer state in the Arab League. Attending one meeting in 2004 is not notable enough to support your claims. Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

The truth is, Armenia and the Caucasus countries in general are left out of most geopolitical pacts involving other Middle Eastern countries. Perhaps that is why the Foreign Ministry of Armenia has confirmed that bilateral relations with the EU and the implementation of CEPA is a top priority. Perhaps that is why the current Government of Armenia makes no mention of its own inclusion within in the GME. Perhaps that is why the EU is the largest/most significant trading partner of Armenia (nearly 30% of all trade is done with the EU). Perhaps that is why Donald Tusk and countless other high ranking European officials reiterate that "Armenia is an integral part of the European family and culture." Perhaps that is why the President of Armenia Armen Sarkissian stated in 2019 that “Armenia is not only a country that signed an agreement with the European Union, but also a country that is and has always been deeply European in terms of culture. Therefore, coming closer to the EU is very natural for us. Armenia is a cradle of European values, from our religion and culture to literature and music.” Perhaps that is why public opinion polls (as of 2020) show increased support of the EU and of prospective membership by the Armenian public. This is quantifiable. I'll request a second time for any polls or statistics you have showing current support for the GME in Armenia? Where is the proof? Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

It is for those, and so many other examples (I have dozens more sources) why Armenia is generally considered geopolitically European, not Middle Eastern. Now, if it is a question of geography (as I believe it was, based from your original wording), may I remind you that the article has a geography section which may be more appropriate to include a line or two about the GME, rather then the lede. I believe that would be more appropriate since all of your sources mostly refer to geography, not geopolitics. I am open to compromise, otherwise this conversation will go on for eternity. Needless to say, if we include a line or two about the GME under the geography section, it would still need to be very well sourced (not just relying on the CIA factbook), since by your own admission the definition is very loosely defined. But, as a sign of WP:GF, I'm open to your thoughts on that fair proposal. Archives908 (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Archives908: I see that you do not understand what the term geopolitics or Middle East actually mean. Geopolitics is a discipline of Geography, it is not just foreign policy but the effects of Earth's geography (human and physical) on politics and international relations. Human geography includes things such as historical and cultural ties as well as economy and foreign policy and physical geography is stuff like Armenia being in western Asia. The Middle East is a transcontinental GEOPOLITICAL term, it is not a physical geographical term such as Western Asia therefore your argument shows a misunderstanding. If Armenia is ever grouped in with the Middle East it is due to geopolitical reasons because the Middle East itself is a geopolitical term. Also, it is entirely possible to be Geopolitically European and Middle Eastern, Cyprus and Turkey are prime examples so any arguments about Armenia and Europe are irrelevant because one does not negate the other and nobody is arguing for removal of Europe from the lede. I suggest looking into what geopolitics actually means because this confusion is a rather big one and needs to be resolved before we can continue to reach consensus, I never said I wasn’t talking about Geography, I very much am, that’s why I titled this discussion that, Geopolitics is intrinsically linked with Geography and you cannot talk about one without mentioning the other since one is a discipline of the other. The reason Armenia is often grouped with the Middle East is because of its Human and Physical geography and it’s implications. Armenia has undeniable historical and cultural ties to the Middle East and its in Western Asia, whether Armenia’s current administration likes it or not, they are linked to the Middle East (literally) and have to establish geopolitical ties with their neighbors. This is why Armenia is grouped with the Middle East in many reliable sources such as GeoArabia, Middle East Review of International Affairs, Cambridge University Press[13], UCLA[14] and most importantly the Central Intelligence Agency; which is probably one of the best sources for Geopolitics since that is their specialty. As well as all the other sources I provided in my first comment. these are more than enough proof that this is a significant enough grouping to include in the lede. And Geopolitics includes all relations not only good, so while Armenia has strong geopolitical ties to Iran, it has very Negative ties with Turkey, but being it’s neighbor, they are involved in various geopolitical issues that factor into the consideration of Armenia as being apart of the Middle East.[15] But again you don’t have to take my word for it, the sources say what they say, and I strongly believe in listening to the sources especially specialized ones like the CIA who know this topic way better than we do. The argument that since Armenia is already part of West Asia, that covers its geopolitical ties with the Middle East is absurd, western Asia is a physical geographical term and is not mutually exclusive with the Middle East, and the Middle East is a geopolitical term. Also the assertion that Armenia is somehow a “cradle of European culture” is absolutely absurd and a WP:OR connection using a primary source, Armen Sarkissian, who is pushing a WP:FRINGE view, I have never seen a single peer reviewed journal from a reputable academic press push that notion, certainly Armenia has influences from places that have actually been labeled Cradles of European culture by reliable sources such as Greece, however, it also has deep cultural ties with Iran and the rest of the Middle East, that’s a well known fact and I’m not gonna argue that any further because it’s irrelevant to this conversation. Middle East is a TRANSCONTINENTAL region, it includes parts of Europe, West Asia, and North Africa. Your proposal is nowhere near fair and it is plain wrong as the Middle East is a geopolitical term, my proposal of adding a mention to the occasional inclusion of Armenia in the Middle East due to reasons stated above and in previous comments, you completely ignored the sources I provided in my other comment about Armenia strengthening geopolitical ties with the Middle East, in addition to what is already there to clear up one of the most notable questions about Armenia and improve the article.TagaworShah (talk) 19:17, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

On the contrary, it is an absolutely fair proposal. Now that you have reaffirmed that this is an issue strictly about geography, what more appropriate place to include this information, then in the geography section. Since, you have confirmed this has less to do with geopolitics (while the inclusion of Europe in the lede does), they should be kept separate. May I remind you, for the third time, that the 4th paragraph in most country profiles is reserved for geopolitics/trade/membership in organizations. If your focused on "clarifying Armenia's geographical situation", then it should be done in the appropriate section of the article. Nothing unreasonable about that. I must also point out, that you keep providing sources that make mention of the geographical connections between the Middle East and Armenia. However, time and time again I have asked for proof that the Armenian people, government, political parties see themselves as either being part of the GME or wanting to further integrate into the GME. You still have not provided any legitimate polls, statistics, or statements in regards to this. Meanwhile, I have provided actual statics and recent polls highlighting Armenia's geopolitical alignment with Europe. Which, concludes that most Armenians do not consider themselves part of the Middle East or have any desire to integrate into the Middle East. Most political parties registered in Armenia, in fact, either advocate for Russia/Eurasian integration or European/EU integration. I can't seem to find a single political party in Armenia that actively calls for Armenia's political integration with the Middle East. Which brings me to my point. While geopolitics is a subsection of geography, geopolitics and physiological geography are two different things entirely. The original consensus was 100% focused on Armenia's geopolitical connections with Europe in the 21st Century. It's evident, it's backed up, it's clear. Your recommendation, as you stated above, is to make mention of Armenia's inclusion in the GME (from a geographical point of view), which is indicated by your sources. I hear you loud and clear. But, since your sources focus on physiological geography, then we should make mention of it in the respective section. Mixing it with Armenia's geopolitical alignment with Europe is reckless and is very confusing, considering modern Armenia does not geopolitically align itself with the Middle East. Not more then it does with Europe or Russia for that matter! I have been trying to understand your perspective this entire conversation, and now that you have undeniably confirmed this is solely about geography- then any new material added about "Armenia's geography" should be included under the appropriate section. Again, nothing unreasonable with that. I will reiterate my openness to including something about the GME (geographically speaking) but oppose mixing it with Armenia's geopolitical ties with Europe. Archives908 (talk) 14:19, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

@Archives908: Again you are not understanding what geopolitics means, and it seems like you are only reading what you want to here from my comments and completely disregarding the rest. I explained thoroughly how the Middle East is a GEOPOLITICAL term, it is not a physical geographical term and does not belong in Physical geography at all. I strongly encourage you to familiarize yourself with what geopolitics actually means before continuing this conversation, here are some good sources to get started[16][17][18]. What geopolitics is not is simply International Relations and Foreign policy, it is however the power relationships that stem from the human and physical geography of a nation. Political parties, public opinion, etc. don’t decide geopolitics, geopolitics is decided by the geography of the nation and it’s effects on international relations. For example, Armenia and Turkey have a power struggle that is almost always described as a geopolitical issue of the Middle East. Stuff like building railroads and relying on Iran for Oil and Natural Gas as well as a pathway to the rest of Asia is considered Geopolitics, one of the major reasons Armenia is considered geopolitically European is its reliance on Russia due to the harsh geopolitical situation in the region. However, whether Armenia likes it or not, the country is interwoven into the regional geopolitics of the Middle East. Take a look at the sources I have provided above, I would provide more but it’s seems you’re disregarding them. Let me reiterate, when Armenia is included in definitions of the Middle East, it is for geopolitical reasons because the Middle East is a GEOPOLITICAL term, please familiarize yourself with what geopolitics and the Middle East means before continuing. The fact that Armenia is included in certain definitions of the Middle East is a matter of geopolitics and should be included in the lede, it should not be included in Physical(not physiological) geography as that is just plain wrong.TagaworShah (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

First off, if you can please stop accusing me of not reading your comments or sources, that'd be great. I have taken a great amount of time to review your posts. Not sure if I can say the same about you, since 90% of my arguments and sources thus far have been ignored/ undiscussed. Does not seem like a fair discussion if this is how its going to be. For the fifth time now, the original consensus should not be altered for various reasons. 21st Century Armenia is considered geopolitically aligned with Europe. I have reviewed your sources, however, there is still no academic consensus which outright asserts that 21st Century Armenia is geopolitically "Middle Eastern". You do realize that there are several countries in the region that don't even recognize Armenia. For the second time, Armenia is left out of most treaties, trade packs, and integration projects (both economic and political) of the Middle East. This, if anything, proves that Armenia isn't drastically aligned with the Middle East as of 2021. Armenia is a current member of the Eurasian Union, which is not a "Middle Eastern" initiative. Armenia conducts 30% of its trade with the EU, far outpacing any trade with any Middle Eastern country. Armenia is an Eastern Partnership member of the EU and has signed a very complex political association agreement with the EU in March 2021. The European Parliament itself has stated that Armenia (and the other countries of the Caucasus) could be eligible for future EU membership talks, by a 2002 resolution. What (of the same magnitude) agreements has Armenia signed with the Middle East? Name one! Good luck, because Armenia does not have a single integration agreement with the GME. If Armenia was aligned to the Middle East in the same capacity, then I would be fully on board with your suggestion to mention it in the lede. The GME is still a very vague definition and you have failed to convince me that Armenia is as aligned geopolitically to this loosely defined region, as it currently is with Europe. I have asked you to provide me with those specific sources since the onset of this discussion. But, the bulk of your sources do not back up your claims. The bulk of your sources passively mention the Caucasus as being on the peripheries of GME geopolitics, not an integral part of it. On the contrary, the EU has set up substantial integration goals for Armenia over the next decade (by 2030). Whether you like it or not, Armenia is on it's way closer to Europe. I'm assuming you haven't heard of the Trio+1 group, recently coined by the EU? This new initiative supports the six EU associated countries in letting them move more rapidly with reform implementation and deeper political and economic integration with the EU. The resolution affirms Armenia's importance to Europe and to intensify integration over the next 10 years. I ask you, what pact does Armenia have of this nature with any Middle Eastern country? Again, I can't seem to find any that are on par with what Armenia has and is establishing with Europe. Therefore, I can only concluded that Armenia's alignment with Europe far exceeds its alignment with the Middle East. So, why on earth would we equate them? How can any reasonable editor say that Armenia is just as integrated with the Middle East as it is with Europe in the 21st Century? And finally, for the third time, I must reiterate that I am open to finding a consensus. But, you need to be as willing and open to negotiate as I have been. I have suggested a reasonable alternative and you have shot that down immediately. As another sign of GF, I will suggest we include something about Armenia and the GME under the "Foreign relations" section. I have read through that part, and we could expand/create a few sentences that would, in fact, work very well. That section mentions the Arab League already, so we could build off of that seamlessly. There is also a section about relations with its neighbors (as you brought up above) Turkey/Azerbaijan, so we could tie in GME geopolitics with that and even talk about regional issues. I think it could actually tie in that sections pretty nicely. I hope you (and anyone else reading this) sees that I have not been opposed to outright exclude info about the GME and that I am trying to brainstorm decent and fair proposals that could improve this article. But alas, it takes two to tango. Archives908 (talk) 15:02, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

References

freedom index

What exactly is a "freedom index" and how can "it be claimed" that it improved after the death of Joseph Stalin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.102.105.155 (talk) 20:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Kingdom of Armenia

The Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) is missing on the info box in the establishment section 331 BC— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.51.127 (talk) 14:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Correction request

Not useful, repetitive, incoherent... —PaleoNeonate – 04:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Here is information by European Union Official Website regardless of Eastern European countries that I think it should be edited for "article of Armenia" where is mentioned as Asian country. From other side if Armenia were Asian country more % of the population must have been Asians but Armenians are not Asians. This information can be useful for edit for other countries below. Eastern Europe "EU relations with Region" Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, The Republic of Moldova and Ukraine are European countries not part of the EU Eastern Partnership The Eastern Partnership (EaP) is a joint initiative involving the EU, its Member States and six Eastern European Partner countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine - here is saying clearly ...six Eastern European countries nothing about Asia EU official website for Eastern Europe https://eeas.europa.eu/regions/eastern-europe/341/eastern-europe_en Erasmus+ EU programme for education, training, youth and sport. Lists of regions with its countries Eastern Europe Neighbourhood East (Region 2) Armenia; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Georgia; Moldova; Territory of Ukraine as recognised by international law https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/programme-guide/part-a/eligible-countries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catperson1 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 4 January 2022 (UTC)  Not done: Armenia's belonging to Western Asia is purely relative to physical geography. This derives from long standing consensus and cannot be changed without reliable sources which pertain to physical geography and attest something different. The sources you have provided are in this sense totally out of scope. Please read the archives about this issue. Alex2006 (talk) 08:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC) I don't agree with your statement rejecting denying European Union statement while it says clearly the continent and countries. It doesn't matter if that information that allegedly Armenia is Western Asia stay from long time. Not everything is truth including geography. There are things which is not accurate in this worlds. However, I investigated also information by European Council where Caucasus countries are in there as Member States. Armenia Georgia Azerbaijan...are in European Council and I think none of Asian countries can be in European Council besides its continent. It's like to say Armenia United States of America. It's not logical. Here is about European Council, section "About" History Founded in 1949, the Council of Europe is one of the oldest and the biggest European organisation, which unifies 47 member states and promotes the main principles of the Human Rights. During its 50 years' activity the organisation has deepened and spread its field of action throughout the whole CONTINENT ●Pay attention it says the organisation has deepened and spread its field of action throughout the whole CONTINENT and so logically Caucasus countries belong to Europe Continent cause we are in European Council Besides that Armenia couldn't be Asian country I mention in above that. I don't understand why you insist yours. If Armenia is Asian country there must be Asians. Armenians are not Asians. 98% of nation is Armenians. Armenians form a distinctive cluster bounded by Europeans, Near Easterners, and the Caucasus populations. More specifically, Armenians are close to (1) Spaniards, Italians, and Romanians from Europe; (2) Lebanese, Jews, Druze, and Cypriots from the Near East; and (3) Georgians and Abkhazians from the Caucasus - according to European Journal Of Human Genetics European Journal Of Human Genetics https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2015206 Every country has it's own nation. It can't be for example in Asia like Kazakhstan 50% more Swedish or French or Spanish. or contrary. Hope.it helps Catperson1 (talk) 10:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC) By your reasoning, countries like Romania and Slovakia lie on the Atlantic Ocean because they belong to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the United States is in southeast Asia because it used to belong to the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. Also by your reasoning, Haiti is in Africa because Haitians are most closely related to African peoples. Largoplazo (talk) 10:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC) I wasn't talking about the organizations. I'm talking about continents which should be fixed in Wikipedia. Romania however is in Eastern Europe Slovakia is in Central Europe. And because European Council mention ...the organisation has deepened and spread its field of action throughout the whole CONTINENT and so logically Caucasus countries belong to Europe Continent cause we are in European Council. European Council Website https://www.coe.int/en/web/yerevan/the-coe/about-coe And as I explained above Armenia can't be Asian country for that reason above as I explained. It's mistake disinformation that Armenia is Western Asia. Regardless of USA it's North America according to their official website as I am aware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catperson1 (talk • contribs) 11:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC) A large portion of your argument was based on membership in the European Council. I feel certain that that's an organization, and you talked about it at length. I wonder, therefore, when you declare "I wasn't talking about the organizations", are you even paying attention to what you, yourself, wrote? And then you just made exactly the same argument again: "so logically Caucasus countries belong to Europe Continent cause we are in European Council". So, logically, the United States belongs to Southeast Asia and, logically, Slovakia is on the North Atlantic, by exactly your reasoning. Largoplazo (talk) 11:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC) I can only renew the invitation to the initiator of this request to read the archives, where this subject has been discussed ad nauseam. Moreover, it would not be bad if he/she applied himself to understand the difference between physical geography (seas, mountains, rivers, etc.) and political geography (nations, peoples, etc.). They are two incorrelated concepts, and a nation can belong geopolitically to a continent and physically to another. In this there is no contradiction. However, I do agree with him on one thing: the main problem here is the division of the Earth in continents. At Wiki:en we have a nice article about it: Boundaries between the continents of Earth. So I suggest him/her to start a thread there, discussing the boundary between Asia and Europa. If there will be consensus to change the physical boundary definition there, we can start the discussion again. Until then, and considering the overwhelming evidence of the sources (sources which deal with physical geography, of course: not political organizations, sport associations, and the like, because these are geopolitical, not geographical sources), Armenia remains (in a pure physical Geographical sense) in Western Asia. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 12:29, 6 January 2022 (UTC) I think you don't get it what I say and what it says by European Council. There is not saying ...the organisation has deepened and spread its field of action throughout the whole CONTINENT and geopolitically continent. You don't get it what it says. I am not talking about just organization and the organization is about Europe continent. If China being in Europe Council do you think it would be called Europe? European county? It's not logic. And if Armenia or Caucasus countries are not in Europe continent why we would be in European Council then? It's not saying in EU official website about geopolitically things. It says ...has deepened and spread its field of action throughout the WHOLE CONTINENT where you read geopolitically things ? Enter and read at least. So EU and Council is nothing but you is something with your knowledge which is poor?. Not accurate. Wikipedia is not always accurate by the way. Catperson1 (talk) 14:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC) I would like to mention that even some people are saying confirming that for example from Greece. He said being tourist I Armenia that Armenia And Greece are Estern European countries by continent despite that in Wikipedia says different and one Dubai man called me Eastern European and do you think they never searched in Google about Armenia so it means we know better and certain informations Catperson1 (talk) 14:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC) And you don't think logically either. I have explained Armenia can't be Asian country cause Armenians are not Asians and how it's possible to live non Asian nation (Armenians 98%) in an Asian country? Or in other countries? Or Like French be in China 90%. It's not logically Catperson1 (talk) 14:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Here is also Wikipedia page where is says correctly but it needs to be fixed in general Armenia page Eastern Europe is formed by countries with dominant Orthodox churches, like Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Georgia, Greece, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Romania, Russia, Serbia, and Ukraine, for instance.[17][18] The Eastern Orthodox Church has played a prominent role in the history and culture of Eastern and Southeastern Europe.[19] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe Catperson1 (talk) 14:58, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Also some information by EuroVoc. EuroVoc is a multilingual thesaurus maintained by the Publications Office of the European Union. where Caucasus countries are in the list of Europe Continent. Here is not saying geopolitically The geographical sub-regions of Europe as defined by EuroVoc:[1] Central and Eastern Europe Edit Albania Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Czech Republic Croatia Georgia Hungary Moldova Montenegro North Macedonia Poland Romania Russia Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Ukraine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuroVoc Catperson1 (talk) 15:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Oh, my goodness, arbitrary people you talk to in the street are the ultimate authorities! (That was sarcasm.) You wrote "If China being in Europe Council do you think it would be called Europe?" Right. Being on the European Council wouldn't make China Europe. And, by exactly the same logic, being on the European Council doesn't make Armenia Europe. That's how logic works. What continent(s) a country is on is not determined by either the names or the pronouncements of organizations they happen to belong to. Largoplazo (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Instead of urge and insist your not accurate opinion go and read EU official website ok? I guess you are Asian. Asians are only urging about Caucasus countries. Caucasus countries are European countries. You are not aware of that. Here is EU Statement: (Eastern Europe) "EU relations with Region" Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, The Republic of Moldova and Ukraine are European countries not part of the EU Eastern Partnership The Eastern Partnership (EaP) is a joint initiative involving the EU, its Member States and six Eastern European Partner countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine - here is saying clearly ...six Eastern European countries nothing about Asia EU official website for Eastern Europe https://eeas.europa.eu/regions/eastern-europe/341/eastern-europe_en This is EuroVoc. EuroVoc is a multilingual thesaurus maintained by the Publications Office of the EUROPEAN UNION https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/concept/-/resource?uri=http://eurovoc.europa.eu/914 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catperson1 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC) These continue to be statements of political classification by political organizations, not by geologists. And that will continue to be true no matter how many times you repeat yourself and how many more pronouncements from them you can produce. Largoplazo (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC) You are based on Wikipedia which is not always true. Asians are fanatic of Wikipedia but even I posted Eatearn European page by Wikipedia. I don't care your not logical explanation. It's about education. You should have been prove by European Union first that those Caucasus countries are not in European continent ok? In European Council page isn't saying that the European organisation deepened its field to Europe and geopolitical European continent. You are just envying. Don't be it's not my fault that I am European country and you Asia Catperson1 (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Learn carefully and then say if there is saying about geopolitically countries ok!!! You don't have good logic don't urge with me https://www.coe.int/en/web/yerevan/the-coe/about-coe Catperson1 (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC) Informations also that in LDS church countries page Armenia is in Europe page and in Swedish Cosmetic company also. I don't think they would think geopolitically. They could just put Armenia in Asia list. It needs to be fixed in Wikipedia https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/facts-and-statistics https://oriflame.com/ Catperson1 (talk) 16:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC) The correction it's about also all Caucasus countries not only for Armenia Catperson1 (talk) 16:21, 6 January 2022 (UTC) As I mentioned above anyway from Wikipedia regardless EuroVoc also, where it says geographically not geopolitically like this way "The geographical sub-regions of Europe as defined by EuroVoc:[1] Central and Eastern Europe then countries included Caucasus countries... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuroVoc I share too official website of EUROPEAN UNION where is EuroVoc(EuroVoc is a multilingual thesaurus maintained by the Publications Office of the European Union) Caucasus Countries https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/concept/-/resource?uri=http://eurovoc.europa.eu/7208 Central and Eastern Europe https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/concept/-/resource?uri=http://eurovoc.europa.eu/914 There is nothing about geopolitically European countries Catperson1 (talk) 18:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC) I got paper statement It's called this ACTION FICHE FOR 2007 ENPI-EAST ANNUAL ACTION PROGRAMME (It's with PDF so I couldn't share here) you can search and read For the three Southern Caucasus countries. Here it says about Border management system with EU. Because EU is different than general "Europe" Caucasus countries located on the traditional 'Silk Road' transit route, border management has always been a key issue, with the goal of having a secure system where criminal flows are efficiently prevented whereas legitimate transit flows are facilitated. With the region now bordering the EU... Catperson1 (talk) 23:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Elenazadoyan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Image problem

We should try and follow other countries articles and not add random galleries. That is follow WP:Gallery and FA level articles with normal-sized images. Not seeing why we would need a few galleries causing WP:UNDUE in a few sections. We should also fix the text sandwich problem as per WP:SANDWICH. We should also remove the official Government website as this is not a government of article as per most other country articles. Needless to say mass revert was detrimental to the article. Was going to start adding sources....but wondering if this receent chnage is really a point of contention.Moxy- 16:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I asked to bring any concerns regarding layout to the talk, yet you continue to edit without any consensus or discussion. For an editor with 15 years worth of experience, those actions are puzzling. Having 2 images does not constitute WP:SANDWICH. Armenia is not the only country profile with the use of galleries. If you can please provide the exact Wiki policy which categorically bans the use of galleries, then I'll be happy to review. Furthermore, some of your edit summaries are a little offensive. Removing an image, because you deem them "random", does not justify the edit and is not valid rationale. For example, removing Khor Virap (a very significant 7th century monastery) without any valid reasoning or because you think its "random" is unjustifiable. Your rationale again for removing Charles Aznavour, was because the person was "random". You may not be aware of the cultural significance of Charles Aznavour on Armenian music. In terms of the government website, what does "not a government of article" even mean? Again, if you can provide the precise Wiki policy which outright bans the link, that would be great. However, I think its best to restore the last stable version of the article, until you can better justify/explain your rationale or we both come to a better resolution then just mass-deleting content. Archives908 (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@Archives908: you seem to be not aware that the chnage your reverting to is not the stable verson but a recent changed version. Can YOU explain why we now need a few random galaries ...why we are now sandwich text.? Protocals allready linked .. we should try and make the article accessible for all.-Moxy- 22:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree that there are certainly some images to remove or reorganize; aside from sandwich concerns, I feel that the image of Yerevan in the Economy section doesn't belong there, though I dispute the decision to remove the population pyramid instead of one of the less relevant images in its section. But since two sides of this dispute can't reach an agreement, it's time for an RfC to settle the matter. We can all agree that the infobox images belong in the infobox, so I'll start with the History section, which is the first major section with images and contains 15 of them. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Its odd to see recent changes called a stable version...that said ...the sandwich text now in the religion and antiquity section should be fixed not restored as per WP:SANDWICH (Very bad edit for accessibility MOS:ACCIM)...The undue images of 3 musicians that is sandwiching text should be removed....are theses 3 people as important as the Armenian President because they are the only others people here? WP:UNDUE. We need to expand some sections with prose text not jam more images in the sections with NEW WP:GALLERY....population pyramid spam to these types of articles was removed Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries#Charts. Moving on no pont in wasting time trying to make access better when reverted before coming to talk. Have fun.--Moxy- 22:30, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

What's odd is that you determined what is worthy or not based on you thinking the image is "random". I didn't realize that's how Wikipedia now operates. Just because a person isn't a "president", it doesn't mean they aren't noteworthy. Are we only allowed to include images of heads of state, and nothing else? If so, then provide the Wiki policy that highlights we can only include images of presidents. I hope you realize that there are artists, musicians, athletes, celebrities who can be equally (if not more) notable then a head of state. For instance, many people don't even know what "Armenian" is, but they know Kim Kardashian is "one of them". We need to try and put our own biases aside and realize that what is not well known to you, may be very well known to others (ie. your deletion of Charles Aznavour). Anyways, moving on from that...sure, the images can be refined, but there is a better way to do it then by deleting images because someone thinks they are "random". Personally speaking, I find it bizarre to delete Khor Virap, a 7th Century monastery (with huge cultural/historical significance) without providing any valid justification whatsoever. I suggest we be more diligent with which images are removed and kept. There has to be more thought process behind this then, "I think the image is random, I'm deleting it". Regards, Archives908 (talk) 03:46, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Yup was trying to restore to before gallery addition to no avail.....any reply to MOS concerns? Have you reviewed the revision history?Moxy- 04:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Nope, you removed several images with zero explanation, which I then restored. Check the edit history if you need a refresher. Honestly, your tactics are not helpful or constructive. As I stated above, there is a far better way to refine images/make improvements then simply mass deleting because you think a famous musician or ancient monastery is "random". For an editor with 15 years experience, I expect better. I trust the RfC process will handle this with more intellect then has been demonstrated thus far. Archives908 (talk) 14:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Zero help again with MOS concers raised by 3 editors ..and missleading Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling (a new vwersion). Do you have any suggestions ...you want us to leave the new galleries is your position and dont fixing sandwich problem? Is it ok with you to remove the "Portal to the Holy City " instead of "Khor Virap" to fix sandwich problem? Do we have any sources for the claims of "most popular musicians of Armenia." and how they are important to this overview article?....start step by step. Deal with other sections and goverrment wedsite after. Will start addeding sources in the meantime.Moxy- 15:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Seems a little hypocritical that every single one of my questions in this thread has gone unanswered, yet you want me to answer yours. But, alas, I will answer your questions. I don't see a problem with the galleries. While they may be "phasing out", there isn't a Wiki policy which outright bans them. Another option would be to space out the images (which you are already doing). I'm not opposed to you dispersing images in order to resolve WP:SANDWICH. And I will actually thank you for doing that. A third option would be a hybrid of the first two options. Keeping select galleries while continuing to space out other images. These 3 suggestions are reasonable options for a speedy resolution. I will also extend a thanks for adding sources where they were needed. I'm not an unreasonable editor and will give credit where credit is due. Archives908 (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I disagree that the EL to the government's website is irrelevant to the infobox. Liberia's article, for instance, has one, too.

As for Moxy's concerns, are there any specific images that you think should be removed, and do you have a proposal for correcting the issue where too many images on one side of the page can spill into sections other than the one they relate to? As seen on my desktop, for instance, the Geography section has the two climate-related figures pushed out of the subsections they relate to, with the CO₂ emissions graph overhanging into the Government and politics section. But for now, I'll focus on the Culture section, since this is the one that is most disputed. Here' my thoughts, broken down in the order they appear in the wikicode:

1. Armenian alphabet: We could replace this one with the shorter and plainer image on the relevant article's infobox. Besides, this information should be moved to the Languages section further up.

   

   Proposed replacement image for the Armenian alphabet

2. Djivan Gasparyan, Sirusho, and Charles Aznavour: No opinion on whether these images should be included, or if only one image should be used to represent contemporary music, but if the alphabet image is replaced or removed it should move closer to its position in the wikicode, which is at the very top of the Music and dance subsection.
3. Traditional Armenian dance: Well, duh. It's also immediately after the trio of musicians in the wikicode, so it will be directly beneath the pseudo-gallery on the article. The subsection is big enough to accommodate both.
4. Khachkar and Vardges Sureniants: Acceptable, the former is an archaeological monument, and the latter represents a major figure in Armenian art history.
5. Tsaghkadzor Olympic Sports Complex: Not clear enough to see that it's a sports complex; the football team image more clearly represents Armenian sport. How about the Vazgen Sargsyan Republican Stadium?

   

   Proposed replacement image for the sports complex

6. Armenia national football team: Good to represent a major sports franchise in Armenia. Although I do take issue that the photo was not taken in Armenia, this is the only image that features the team prominently in their current uniform.
7. Levon Aronian: Because he's Armenian and one of the best chess players in the world, I'd say give this a pass.
8. Armenian cuisine and Armenian wine: Of course; the former looks like it should be especially representative of a complete meal.

–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:27, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Will let you guys deal with this....my intent was a GA run in the near future. However we are so far off what is needed and not headed down the right path in regards to the norm for country articleso. Moxy- 23:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Arb. break

I just replaced the image of the sports complex with the one I listed; any other comments about the alphabet image? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

RfC on images, part 1: History

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.

---

Which images should be included in the #History section? (There are no non-free files in this article.) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Rfc should be about the new galleries and sections with text sandwich. There is no conflict over this section. --Moxy- 15:58, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

15 images, in the order they appear in the wikicode

Antiquity A1. Historical Armenia, 150 BC A2. Armenian soldier of the Achaemenid army, circa 470 BC. Xerxes I tomb relief. A3. The pagan Garni Temple, probably built in the first century, is the only "Greco-Roman colonnaded building" in the post-Soviet states Middle Ages B1. The Etchmiadzin Cathedral, Armenia's Mother Church traditionally dated 303 AD, is considered the oldest cathedral in the world. B2. The Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, 1198–1375. Early Modern era C1. In 1501–02, most of the Eastern Armenian territories including Yerevan were conquered by the emerging Safavid dynasty of Iran led by Shah Ismail I. C2. Capture of Erivan fortress by Russian troops in 1827 during the Russo-Persian War (1826–28) by Franz Roubaud. World War I and the Armenian genocide D1. Armenian genocide victims in 1915 First Republic of Armenia E1.   Territory held by Armenia and the Karabakh Council at some point   Area given to Armenia by the Treaty of Sèvres, which was never entered into force. E2. The Government house of the First Republic of Armenia (1918–1920). E3. Advance of the 11th Red Army into the city of Yerevan. Armenian SSR F1. The coat of arms of Soviet Armenia depicting Mount Ararat in the centre. F2. Armenians gather at Theater Square in central Yerevan to claim unification of Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast with the Armenian SSR. Restoration of independence G1. Armenian soldiers in 2008, during the ongoing and unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. G2. 21 September 2011 parade in Yerevan, marking the 20th anniversary of Armenia's re-independence. Modern-day Armenia No images References

• Whichever ones best add to understanding of the existing text while meeting Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images (particularly not being decorative, reasonable staggering, and no sandwiching). The RfC question as asked is a bit difficult to answer in isolation, although I note quite a few of the images seem mostly decorative in effect. CMD (talk) 23:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
• Agree should simply follow WP:SANDWICH ( MOS:ACCIM), WP:UNDUE and MOS:IMGSIZE (WP:GALLERY)...last thing anyone want is the India problem all over. Should look at edits step by step not restore contested edits...all should follow basics. Moxy- 02:27, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
• This RfC is overly broad, and it appears it doesn't even ask a relevant question. I would ask for LaundryPizza03 to withdraw this RfC, then work together with Moxy to create a new, better formulated RfC. Note that RfCs work best when they ask a single, simple, closed-ended question, and not an open-ended question. Fieari (talk) 07:35, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Fieari: What do you mean by "relevant"? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:42, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

  I'm referring to Moxy's comment above stating that "There is no conflict over this section." If there is no conflict over this section, then there is nothing relevant to discuss. Fieari (talk) 07:45, 24 January 2022 (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.

Date inconsistency

"By 1920, the state was incorporated into the Transcaucasian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic"

The article on that Republic says that it wasn't established until 1922. Which is correct? Harfarhs (talk) 22:59, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

My changes, Araxis, Araxes

Louis Aragon removed all the changes I made completely unjustifiably. [see]

Louis Aragon: "rv sock of LTA Araxes theThief"

Sorry, it's been months since the "Araxes TheThief" account was shut down and I'm still on trial for it. It's clear that I'm no longer responsible for this, I haven't made a single change to the English Wikipedia in months. Thank you. Araxishomegas (talk) 00:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)<--- CU blocked sock of User:Araxes TheThief

Your changes also include several attempts to add/alter/remove information (with zero explanations). Cease your WP:DISRUPTIVE editing. Archives908 (talk) 00:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Random facts at the end of the lead

I removed some material from the end of the last paragraph of the lead and User:Archives908 restored it with the edit summary "confused how this is not lead worthy?" The paragraph is about Armenia's economy and membership in international associations. The three sentences I removed were:

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 unique Armenian alphabet was created by Mesrop Mashtots in 405 AD.

These are three random facts that are off-topic for the paragraph, and none of them are defining facts about Armenia such as it makes sense to have in the lead. Regarding Artsakh, I would similarly not expect to find the fact that a country recognizes Taiwan or Somaliland to be mentioned in the lead of the article on that country. I also don't see the mention of the recognition of the church as lead-worthy. The fact about the alphabet is rather one step removed from being about the country, being, rather, a random fact about the national language. It's like discussing the origin of the Greek alphabet in the lead of the Greece article. Largoplazo (talk) 21:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

According to whom are these "random facts"? You? The tidbit of information regarding the national church and language is noteworthy. If there is a Wikipolicy which outright and categorically forbids this information from being included in the lead, please reference it. Otherwise, your personal opinion of what sets the standard for "random" and "not random" is not an official guideline. Archives908 (talk) 21:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

They appear pretty random as they're seemingly unrelated facts put together at the end, which don't fit within the structure of the lead. They are probably undue. CMD (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps within that paragraph, yes. However, the information is still quite relevant overall (and 2 sentences is not undue imo). Are there viable alternatives we can explore which avoids complete omission? Maybe including it in another, more suitable, paragraph? Archives908 (talk) 21:57, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure why they should be included. They are facts about the Armenian Apostolic Church and about the Armenian alphabet, not specifically about the country of Armenia. Relevant to the topic, but not due in the limited space of the lead. CMD (talk) 22:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Ideally, everything in the article is noteworthy. That doesn't mean everything in the article belongs in the lead. It's a question of relative weight with respect to a high-level summarization of Armenia. It makes sense for the Artsakh situation to be mentioned in the foreign relations section and the history section, and for the church recognition to be mentioned in the religion section. The single sentence about Mersop Mashtots in the language section is about as much as is duly mentioned in this article, with more detail preferably reserved for the main articles on the language and, of course, the writing system. None of that information, in my opinion, rises to the top in a big-picture look at the country. Largoplazo (talk) 22:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2022

I would like the protection template to be changed to an icon. 64.114.239.31 (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done. There was a typo in the original template. Aidan9382 _(talk) 09:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Europe or Asia?

I am just observing the current minor edit war. Armenia is without doubt geographically in Asia but is that too narrow a view? Iceland is geographically in North America but is treated as being in Europe. I don't know enough about its history to comment in any depth but Armenia obviously has a Christian heritage with the country divided in the past between Christian and non-Christian rule. With there being a fairly loose treatment of Europe=Christianity and Asia=Islam it is easy to see how Armenia could have been regarded as an outpost of Europe within Asia. As a comparison, it is not unknown, certainly pre- c.1920, for East Thrace (Turkey/Islam) to be thought of as a piece of Asia within Europe. This type of thinking is not fashionable now but it was in the past and I do wonder if that is the root of treating Armenia as being in Europe? Ultimately, what do sources say? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Roger 8 Roger, this issue has been discussed on this talk page numerous times over the past decades, if you search the talk page archives you can find many long winded discussions about this matter. From those discussions, we have reached a consensus that Armenia is wholly within Western Asia according to the sources, and only politically aligned with Europe. Geographically however, it is consensus that Armenia is in Asia. This is addressed in the article and the lede section. It is important to note that Christianity ≠ European and Armenians actually follow Oriental Orthodoxy which is found almost exclusively outside of Europe. I think it’s best to just drop the stick after the dozens of debates on the matter and stick with the established consensus that can be found in the archives. I hope this helped! TagaworShah (talk) 20:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and heads up. After I posted I realised it had likely been discussed before and I should have checked first, so sorry for not doing so. I thought it better to just leave my post in place anyway rather than self-revert. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:42, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks TagaworShah for changing back the short description. I didn't actually want to propose the compromise but people have been very persistent about the country being in both Europe and Asia, when clearly it lies in the South Caucasus/Armenian Highlands entirely in Asia. Also, religion shouldn't be a factor in determining whether a country is in Europe, Asia, or any continent for that matter. Yekshemesh (talk) 06:26, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Restoration of uncited text

Hi Archives908, I removed uncited content. I thought this would be self-explanatory, as it had a citation request. Why have you restored this? Stara Marusya (talk) 19:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

The current lead (including the section you removed) was established via consensus after much debate. You should refer to the talk page archives before you remove content without providing any explanation. That particular tag was just recently placed there, although per MOS:LEADCITE I don't believe it to be drastically controversial since Armenia's participation in European organizations/geopolitical connections is covered throughout the article. You can also, at any time, help WP:BUILD this article by adding WP:RS. Thanks. Archives908 (talk) 20:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

If you're concerned about building the article, why not find a reference for the claim you reinstated? Also, why restore the odd factoid about the Armenian alphabet? I don't see any mention of it in the body of the text. Stara Marusya (talk) 10:00, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Supposed consensus

Why does Archives908 say there's a consensus to retain unsourced text in the lead? Stara Marusya (talk) 11:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Armenia/Archive 8#Geopolitical orientation. Archives908 (talk) 14:00, 7 March 2023 (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:

• Armenia Product Exports (2019).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Armenia edit request (with reliable sources) on March 10

In the article, it says that Armenia is in West Asia, while it's at the intersection of Eastern Europe and West Asia. Its neighbors Azerbaijan and Georgia are declared partially Eastern European in Wikipedia, while all three of these countries are located at the intersection of Eastern Europe. The sources to prove that Armenia is West Asian[19] are outdated and Georgia and Azerbaijan are declared as West Asian/Middle Eastern at all of those sources as well. So according to that outdated sources, Georgia and Azerbaijan should've been in West Asia/Middle East as well. I offer to change the line "Armenia is a landlocked country in the Armenian Highlands of Western Asia." to "Armenia is a landlocked country at the intersection of Eastern Europe and Western Asia." Here are some sources I found declaring Armenia as Eastern European/at the intersection of Eastern Europe and West Asia.

World Atlas puts Armenia at the intersection of Eastern Europe and West Asia [20]. European Union(EEAS) says Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, The Republic of Moldova and Ukraine are European countries not part of the EU [21]. BBC puts Armenia in Europe [22](check the navigation bar). Wikipedia puts Armenia in Eastern Europe in article "Eastern Europe" [23] McGill says Culturally, historically, and politically, Armenia is considered to be part of Europe. However, its location in the southern Caucasus means that it can also be considered to be at the arbitrary border between Europe and Asia[24] Albert11000 (talk) 11:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your sources did not bring any new argument. Please read the archives about it, thanks. Alex2006 (talk) 12:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Alessandro57 Answered all the questions here. Take a look please. Talk:Armenia/Archive 8#Geopolitical orientation Albert11000 (talk) 12:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@M.Bitton Already answered and put resources here, looks like no one wants to answer it... Talk:Armenia/Archive 8#Why isn't Armenia also located in Europe but Azerbaijan is ? Albert11000 (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I would like to point out that you should not write in an archive, because archives are made to archive old discussions, and not to modify them. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Armenia edit request (with reliable sources) on March 10

In the article, it says that Armenia is in West Asia, while it's at the intersection of Eastern Europe and West Asia. Its neighbors Azerbaijan and Georgia are declared partially Eastern European in Wikipedia, while all three of these countries are located at the intersection of Eastern Europe. The sources to prove that Armenia is West Asian[25] are outdated and Georgia and Azerbaijan are declared as West Asian/Middle Eastern at all of those sources as well. So according to that outdated sources, Georgia and Azerbaijan should've been in West Asia/Middle East as well. I offer to change the line "Armenia is a landlocked country in the Armenian Highlands of Western Asia." to "Armenia is a landlocked country at the intersection of Eastern Europe and Western Asia." Here are some sources I found declaring Armenia as Eastern European/at the intersection of Eastern Europe and West Asia.

World Atlas puts Armenia at the intersection of Eastern Europe and West Asia [26]. European Union(EEAS) says Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, The Republic of Moldova and Ukraine are European countries not part of the EU [27]. BBC puts Armenia in Europe [28](check the navigation bar). Wikipedia puts Armenia in Eastern Europe in article "Eastern Europe" [29] McGill says Culturally, historically, and politically, Armenia is considered to be part of Europe. However, its location in the southern Caucasus means that it can also be considered to be at the arbitrary border between Europe and Asia[30] Albert11000 (talk) 11:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your sources did not bring any new argument. Please read the archives about it, thanks. Alex2006 (talk) 12:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Alessandro57 Answered all the questions here. Take a look please. Talk:Armenia/Archive 8#Geopolitical orientation Albert11000 (talk) 12:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@M.Bitton Already answered and put resources here, looks like no one wants to answer it... Talk:Armenia/Archive 8#Why isn't Armenia also located in Europe but Azerbaijan is ? Albert11000 (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I would like to point out that you should not write in an archive, because archives are made to archive old discussions, and not to modify them. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Bold edit

I marked the article In Use hoping for some time to rework the foreign relations section and trim the lede. The lede was entirely too long and needed trimmed. The info on all the foriegn bodies it belongs to can be incorporated into the appropriate section and this can be ce'd. If after I'm done (I'll removed the tag) it can be rv if necessary, hopefully though it will be seen as a positive change and any issues can be worked out from that point.  // Timothy :: talk  17:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

• Done, rm Western Asia from lede (see edit), ce'd, mv'd some content, fmting, rm duplicate info, rv if you must, consider improving on my changes.  // Timothy :: talk  17:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't believe that was totally necessary- and why remove content support by consensus without discussing here first? Archives908 (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

We can do an RFC.  // Timothy :: talk  18:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

You don't want to explain the rationale of your edits? Archives908 (talk) 18:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I did above. An RfC will help involve more editors and open up more improvement in the article.  // Timothy :: talk  18:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Transcontinental nature of the country

The country is transcontinental and spans both Europe and Asia. It is incorrect to state that the country is solely in West Asia. This needs to be amended or some clarity needs to be added. It is simply not enough to state it has been discussed already, or cite sources. There are reliable sources that state Armenia is a European country, as well as an Asian country. The Armenian people have cultural ties to both continents. This needs to be referred to a competent administrator. — Preceding signed comment added by Mir 5.61.122.218 (talk) 15:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Referring disputes to "a competent administrator" for a ruling is not how Wikipedia works. (If someone referred it to an administrator, and that administrator disagreed with you, you'd argue that the administrator was incompetent, right?) See WP:Dispute resolution. Largoplazo (talk) 17:09, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok, let's better discuss about the topic directly. I pointed above that the sources that provides information that Armenia is located in Western Asia says that Georgia and Azerbaijan are located there as well, but in Wikipedia Azerbaijan and Georgia are transcontinental countries. I also provided loads of sources saying that Armenia is in either intersection of Eastern Europe and Asia or just in Eastern Europe. And I also want to point that in the article "Armenia" in other languages in Wikipedia says that Armenia is transcontinental. So, I think there are more than enough sources and proofs of Armenia being transcontinental country. What do you think?

P.S we are not talking about cultural or political situation of the country, but the geography only.

Thanks. Albert11000 (talk) 12:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

About Georgia and Azerbaijan, please read WP:OTHERCONTENT, thanks. Alex2006 (talk) 16:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Alessandro57 Ok, what about the other facts I told? Albert11000 (talk) 15:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Armenia is not transcontinental. There are no continental borders that divide the Armenian territory into two separate continents, there isn’t a single source that says that part of Armenia is in one continent and part of it is in another. Geographically Armenia is entirely in Western Asia, the geopolitical alignment of Armenia with Europe is already stated in the lead, it’s time to drop the stick with this issue. TagaworShah (talk) 15:32, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I already provided bunch of proofs.

https://www.worldatlas.com/maps/armenia

Boundaries between the continents (check the map of caucasus, J and I includes Armenia)

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eastern-europe_en

I don't understand what is the problem? Even article Armenia in other languages in Wikipedia says that Armenia is a transcontinental country. Why don't we do so on English Wikipedia? Albert11000 (talk) 23:02, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Armenia is transcontinental

I am confused about the lead suggesting Armenia is in Western Asia, rather than in Eastern Europe and Western Asia. I don’t know when this update to this article happened. 130.88.226.20 (talk) 14:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Georgia and Azerbaijan are both arguably transcontinental, Armenia is not. Depending on your definition it is either entirely in Eastern Europe or entirely in Western Asia. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

This article is rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale for a reason, and someone ought to work out why that is. 130.88.226.20 (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Where is your source for that information? What reason is there to ignore reputable sources, offered by user Albert11000 in another discussion, which oppose that view? 130.88.226.20 (talk) 17:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

You should not be confused, since you are edit warring right now on another article, where there is a map that shows the situation. Anyway, it happened long time ago, after a long discussion. Please see the Archive about that. Alex2006 (talk) 15:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I saw the archive and there was no proves of Armenia being NOT transcontinental. But I provided reliable sources, but you still ignore them without explaining what is the problem? I am getting a feeling that you are being biased for some reason. Albert11000 (talk) 23:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

There is no such article which I am edit-warring where a map “shows the situation”.

130.88.226.20 (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

RFC

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.

---

I have copy edited the lede and the section on foriegn relations. It was wholesale rv'd. (See section above). See copy edited version  Question: IIs this the right version?here, status quo version here

• Question: Should the revision be reintroduced and the article copy edited from that point?

Support to use the copy edited version and continue article improvement from that point. Oppose if you believe the status quo should be restored.

 // Timothy :: talk  18:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Responses

• Support using the copy edited version and making any changes and improvements from that point.  // Timothy :: talk  18:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. A significant portion of the lead was removed without much justification and directly contradicts with an established consensus- Talk:Armenia/Archive 8#Geopolitical orientation. Besides that, moving a few links and images around doesn't seem like a drastic improvement or even necessary. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 19:19, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  A small portion of the lead was moved (a list of political affiliations), not removed; most of it was alredy there. If you only object to removing Western Asia, this could have been reinserted without a complete revert (which I suggested). After making the claim that I removed "significant" content, you contradict yourself "Besides that, moving a few links and images around doesn't seem like a drastic improvement". What is it, a significant change or a just moving a few links?  // Timothy :: talk  20:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  You still haven't explained why you blanket deleted very specific text regarding Armenia's geopolitical orientation which was established via consensus? Also adding cn tags to literally every organization Armenia is a member of is a little much. The respective articles' clearly showcase Armenia's membership in those organizations. Since when is there even the slightest doubt that Armenia isn't a member of the Council of Europe or United Nations? Archives908 (talk) 20:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  Two words could have been easily added back in. The other information was already in the foriegn relations section.  // Timothy :: talk  20:19, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

• Strong oppose. Per Archives908. Furthermore, I would like to point out that the RFC location is partially off topic, as the change in the geographical location of Armenia should be discussed by History and Geography, not by Politics, government, and law. Once again, when writing "Western Asia", one is only giving a location on the globe according to the standard definition of continents, not a geopolitical position of the country. Regards, Alex2006 (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  Western Asia was a small part of the edit. It could easily be added back in. Read the entire edit please. You can add this RFC to any cat you wish. 99% of the edit was moving political affiliations out of the lede, into a section most of them already existed in, and formatting the foreign relations section.  // Timothy :: talk  19:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  It's actually very common to include a few organizations in the lead of country articles- see United Kingdom, France, Spain, etc...all of which either have similar sized leads as Armenia or even larger leads. Archives908 (talk) 20:19, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  A few, there are far more than a few.  // Timothy :: talk  20:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  It's the norm for country profiles. Spain has 10 organizations listed. Armenia has 9. Archives908 (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  Not sure how a big list of examples that leads to minimal information on the country is helpful. Should fallow FA examples.. To quote Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries#Opening paragraphs Overly detailed information or infobox data duplication such as listing random examples, numbered statistics or naming individuals should be reserved for the body of the article. See Canada with no random examples, stats or names other than in the infobox - or Japan with no random examples or names and mininual stats in lead that are not covered in infobox. Moxy- 11:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  Your response is subjective. I've provided several well written articles which include 5-10 of the most prominent organizations that the respective country is a member of. Considering some countries can be part of 100+ organizations, how is listing 5-10 considered "big"? It's completely in line with WP:NPOV guidelines. Archives908 (talk) 12:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  How does listing and linking help learn about this country? Council of Europe, the Eastern Partnership, Eurocontrol, the Assembly of European Regions, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Asian Development Bank, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the Eurasian Development Bank. Lead links should be reserved for articles about the country when posible. Moxy- 12:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  This isn't a discussion for just this article. If a B class level 3 vital article like the United Kingdom can have a whopping twelve organizations listed, then why can't Armenia have less than that? Italy has six, Portugal has eight, Russia has nine, China has ten listed, and so on. It is hypocritical to target this specific article, while the vast majority of others get a pass. It is the norm to include between 5-10 organizations in country articles'. If you have specific WP that forbids it, please share so we can begin removing organizations from ALL 200+ country profile leads. Archives908 (talk) 13:55, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  Your free to ignore our FA examples and project recommendations...but the article should try and be part of the top level articles.....not just like other C level articles, Again what infomation do these spamed links provide about this country...will they help explain anything about this country? Should do what is best for readers of this article. MOS:LEADLINK Most Featured Articles contain about 12 to 25 links in the lead, with an average of about 1.5 links per sentence, or one link for every 16 words....so drop the sea of blue and add real infomation over random links to articles unrelated to this topic. Article has some serious problems (whole section with no sources - text sandwiching etc,,,..at least the lead could link to more infomation.Moxy- 19:21, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  You continually ignore the fact that practically every single country article includes a list of select organizations they are members of. Armenia is not an outlier. Including this information serves purpose as it highlights the countries' integration into certain blocs, institutions, unions, etc... which directly impact the countries' international commitments/obligations, politics, trade, finances, and laws and regulations. It also acts as a prelude, to typically, more in depth "foreign relations" sections which discusses this topic/these memberships in greater detail. For the second time, there is no wikipolicy that categorically and outright forbids the inclusion of membership of international organizations in the lead. The lead of this article, by and large, complies with MOS:LEADLINK, which itself is a recommendation applied mostly to limit overly technical terms. A brief list of organizations is not profoundly "technical". Archives908 (talk) 19:59, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Mostly unnecessary removal, and contradicting the aforementioned consensus. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 20:10, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  You think every political affiliation of Armenia should be in both the lede and the foreign relations section? You don't think maybe there is more important material for the already far too long lede? Maybe more than a single sentence about the Armenian genocide or the Armenian struggle for independence. Perhaps a note about the cultural genocide that took place during the Soviet era?  // Timothy :: talk  20:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

• I'm a fan of some of the changes, but I don't think bundling them together and giving an RfC without much explanation will do much to move them forward. CMD (talk) 01:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

I join @Chipmunkdavis:, I am not against some of the changes and I think too that RfC is too vaguely formulated and tries to answer too many questions at once. Also, and I quote WP:RFC: "RfCs are time consuming, and editor time is valuable. Before using the RfC process to get opinions from outside editors, it's often faster and more effective to thoroughly discuss the matter with any other parties on the related talk page. Editors are expected to make a reasonable attempt at resolving their issues before starting an RfC. If you are able to come to a consensus or have your questions answered through discussion with other editors, then there is no need to start an RfC." Now I don't think this happened here so far. No serious attempt has been made to open the discussion on the talk page, so I think it would be better to do so and possibly reopen the RfC if a consensus is not reached. However, I note with satisfaction that Armenia's geographical affiliation to Western Asia is no longer being questioned. Alex2006 (talk) 08:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

• Admin comment: This is a poorly conceived RFC. I suggest you please withdraw it and prepare better for it, Tim, and then perhaps start afresh once that is done. See Alex2006's quotation from WP:RFC: Editors are expected to make a reasonable attempt at resolving their issues before starting an RfC. Please make such a reasonable attempt before jumping straight to an RFC, and try to resolve one issue at a time rather than presenting your own changes as a package. Whether Armenia is in Europe or Asia is one thing, and whether the lead is too long is another, totally different thing. The way the RfC is currently phrased makes it prohibitively difficult to respond to. Bishonen | tålk 10:36, 2 May 2023 (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.

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2023

The geographical location of Armenia is not correctly stated. The Lachin corridor citation [15] is not a credible source to suggest that the “Lachin corridor being under Russian peace keeping force” is the geographical border of Armenia. Armenia has its southern border with Iran not Nakhchivan. Nakhchivan is southwest and it being an exclave of Azerbaijan has nothing to do the geographical location of Armenia.

Please change: “It is part of the Caucasus region and is bordered by Turkey to the west, Georgia to the north, the Lachin corridor (under a Russian peacekeeping force) and Azerbaijan to the east, and Iran and the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan to the south.”

to

“It is part of the Caucasus region and is bordered by Georgia to the north, Azerbaijan to the east, Iran to the south and Nakhchivan and Turkey to the west.”

Sources: Encyclopedia Britannica https://www.britannica.com/place/Armenia Yotanasun (talk) 10:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. According to the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire agreement article, and its map, Armenia does not share an eastern border with Azerbaijan, only a northern one. Sole-sourcing your edit to Britannica seems ill-advised in this case. I think your request would be better discussed by an editor with deep experience in the region, and that appears to be @Archives908. If they don't respond, check the edit history of the page (and related articles) and reach out to other editors active in those articles. Thanks! Xan747 (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Artsakh Republic 1994-2020

Armenia is culturally European

According to multiple sources, Armenia is considered a European country in Western Asia. In the article now we have: "is a landlocked country in the Armenian Highlands of West Asia, with geopolitical ties to Europe.", but in reality it is more like "Armenia is a landlocked country in the Armenian Highlands of West Asia. It is geographically in Western Asia, but culturally and geopolitically European". Some sources proving my point is already in the article(https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/armenia, "Armenia Country Overview | World Health Organization",https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/armenia.htm),

but I found some more sources: https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/a/Armenia.htm#:~:text=Culturally%2C%20historically%2C%20and%20politically%2C,other%20words%2C%20a%20transcontinental%20nation.

https://mycountryeurope.com/culture/other-side-europe-armenia/ Albert11000 (talk) 11:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Burden re subordinate info in the lead

@Archives908 You have it backwards in your edit summary at [31]. In an earlier discussion now at /Archive 9, two people challenged the inclusion of those sentences in the lead. The burden is therefore on you to persuade others that there's sufficient rationale for inclusion.

Three sentences about completely different topics from each other shouldn't be thrown together at the end of the lead, particularly in a paragraph that is otherwise about another topic altogether, which is at best poor writing, and especially when two of them are very subsidiary topics. (Possibly, if better presented, information about the official religion would be suitable.)

Most glaringly, the identity of the person who created the alphabet used to write the language spoken by most people in Armenia is at four levels of remove from the topic of Armenia (people of > language those people speak > alphabet used to write that language > creator of that alphabet). It's like mentioning in the lead of Italy that the Italian/Latin alphabet was derived from the Greek alphabet. It doesn't remotely belong.

You need to provide rationale for inclusion that overcomes this plenty sufficient rationale for removal. Largoplazo (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Archives908: Don't know why ping didn't appear to be working. The little notification icon wasn't appearing for me but now I see that you were pinged three times. Apologies for pestering you, it was unintentional. Largoplazo (talk) 14:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

A third person[32] has demonstrated agreement regarding the sentence about the alphabet, and has moved the sentence about the religion to an appropriate place. Largoplazo (talk) 15:12, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Second paragraph of Armenia SSR section

2607:FB91:7993:DC0:AC39:9A57:4FDC:4FC3 (talk) 14:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the section titled "Armenia SSR" states: "Armenians enjoyed a period of relative stability within USSR in contrast to the turbulent final years of the Ottoman Empire."

It is not however clear as to whether it is discussing the period from 1922-36 as part of the TSFSR or their entire time as part of the Soviet Union.

It then goes on to say :

"After the death of Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, the general secretary of the Communist Party, gradually established himself as the dictator of the USSR. Stalin's reign was characterized by mass repressions, that cost millions of lives all over the USSR."

While this is certainly true, it's not clear how this is intended to relate to Armenia. Is it just a few random facts about Stalin and Lenin? If so then it should be deleted. If however it is implying that Stalin killed many Armenians then it should be stated more explicitly with sufficient referenced facts such as the number (or estimated range of numbers) of victims and who was among the Armenian population was targeted if such data is available.

Its also unclear what the entire passage is trying to say. There are multiple interpretations.

1)Armenia experienced genocide in the waning days the Ottoman Empire. From 1922-36 as a Soviet State called the TSFSR the Armenians enjoyed a period of relative stability although it was a difficult time for the Armenians church due to the communists secular policies. Then Lenin died and Stalin came to power. Stalin was responsible for mass repression costing millions of lives including x number of Armenians.

Or

2)Armenia experienced genocide in the waning days the Ottoman Empire. From 1922-to 1992,first as a Soviet State called the TSFSR and then as Armenia SSR, the Armenians enjoyed a period of relative stability although it was a difficult time for Armenians Church due to the communists secular policies. Lenin died and Stalin came to power,but that's just an inconsequential part of Stalin's back story. During Stalin's regime, he was responsible for mass repression costing millions of lives including x number of Armenians. However, even though he was responsible for widespread repression and the deaths of x Armenians, during the years under Stalin, Armenians still enjoyed relative stability compared to the pre Soviet period. (Although it's questionable whether "enjoyed" is a proper choice of words to describe people who are being murdered and repressed by a mustached dictator)

3)Armenia experienced genocide in the waning days the Ottoman Empire. From 1922-to 1992,first as a Soviet State called the TSFSR and then as Armenia SSR, the Armenians enjoyed a period of relative stability although it was a difficult time for the Armenians Church due to the communists secular policies. Lenin died but that's just an inconsequential part of Stalin's back story. Stalin is only of passing interest because of what he didn't do. During Stalin's regime, he was responsible for mass repression costing millions of lives across the Soviet Union, however, he wasn't particularly homicidal towards the Armenians. (Although it's still questionable whether "enjoyed" is a proper choice of words to describe a people under the heel of Stalin's boot)

There are many more ways this can be interpreted. It becomes a little more clear after rereading the entire section several times and then writing an analysis of it. But the reader is left confused even after several rereading. 2607:FB91:7993:DC0:AC39:9A57:4FDC:4FC3 (talk) 14:14, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

It also just occured to me that a little care should be taken if that passage is intended to mean that "while Stalin oppressed the Armenians ,it wasn't of the the same level as as it was during the genocide under the Ottomans." It would be easy to write something that can be easily misconstrued as minimizing atrocities committed by one dictator, because he didn't kill as many as the last one. The "whose worse Hitler or Stalin" (and yea, we ARE talking about Stalin) conversation. If the intent was to compare one event to the other, it would be better to stay away from the value judgement of which was worse, and simply state facts about the number of people killed, who was targeted etc. Even if there are legitimate references out there that support such comparisons. If there were positive things such as an outgrowth of solidarity and national identity and building of Armenian societal institutions, the things that are often destroyed by war and genocide before during or after Stalin's reign, discuss those things. 2607:FB91:7993:DC0:AC39:9A57:4FDC:4FC3 (talk) 14:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Claim that Armenia supports Artsakh

“Armenia supports the de facto independent Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), which was proclaimed in 1991 on territory internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan.” This statement from the lede appears out-of-date & misleading. That’s in view of ongoing reintegration of the region into Azerbaijan; unopposed by Armenia. Frenchmalawi (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

You’re correct, it is outdated, i’ll update it to supported. TagaworShah (talk) 18:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Redundant info in main sentence

@Renatones The addition of “with geopolitical ties to Europe” is redundant and not an improvement, the lead already states that Armenia is generally considered geopolitically European in the 4th paragraph where that information belongs and where the consensus is that information goes. Armenia is a country fully in West Asia, as you can see even it’s MFA states it is in West Asia and not in Europe, Armenia being part of Council of Europe doesn’t change that, it’s also a member of the Asian Development Bank and a regional member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Regardless, Armenia is not a European country and the geopolitical ties do not belong in the first sentence as a qualifier to its geographic location, per MOS:LEAD that information is usually presented in the 4th paragraph of the lead as it already was and without spamming 4 citations that affect the readability of the article. TagaworShah (talk) 12:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you. To me, it reads, in a way, like an article describing its subject in the first sentence as, not just "an African American surgeon" but "an African American surgeon with light skin", as though "African American" were understood as a somewhat negative quality and "with light skin" were intended as mitigation. It isn't a perfect analogy because the exact tone of a person's skin doesn't belong in an article at all, but, still, the geopolitical ties of a country aren't generally raised in the opening sentence ("Tunisia is an African country with political ties to France"), so its presence here seems explicable only as a way of insisting that while Armenia is in Asia, it can pass as European. This suggests that being in Asia is inferior to being in Europe, which is offensive. Largoplazo (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes the geopolitical ties of Armenia should not be used as a qualifier to negate its position as a West Asian country or a West Asian civilization. The claims that because Armenia is Christian and has democratic systems that means it upholds European values and cultures is antiquated and rooted in Eurocentrism. There is an entire paragraph about Armenia’s geopolitical situation, we don’t need an extra qualifier repeating the same thing making it seem like geopolitical ties somehow makes Armenia European. TagaworShah (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Armenia in Eastern Europe Partnership

Armenia is in Europe because Armenia is in EU-Eastern Partnership. It's not from simple person bloger. You don't have right to discriminate me. It's their criterias that the country should be in Europe for be in Eastern European partnership

EURACTIV MEDIA NETWORK (Belgium) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.34.242.62 (talk) 23:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC) https://i.postimg.cc/PqntVmQW/Screenshot-20231210-171454-Samsung-Internet.jpg

Edinburgh Geografical Institute (U.K) https://i.postimg.cc/DzSMGDX5/32-world-war-2-europe-map-1718412629.jpg

212.34.242.62 (talk) 22:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Believe it or not, Europe existed, and was defined, centuries before there was an EU. They aren't the definers of it for the entire world. Also, note that when Turkey joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, it didn't suddenly find itself with a North Atlantic coast. Largoplazo (talk) 00:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

who then that should define Europe? UN? But UN is not geografical Institution and before UN Armenia was existed and was part of Europe too in some recorses and UN is not who should define the world regions. It's just political organization just including all nations for cooperation. Turkey has not to with all of these and it doesn't matter who when joining to partnership or organizations. It's not good example by you. In EU they say about because of geografical misunderstanding they created EU-EASTERN partnership. You don't want to accept that EU has CRITERIAS that countries has to be in European continent for be qualified for Eastern European partnership then in your opinion they are stupid? They don't know Eurupe regions? It's funny. You're wrong if you think like that. Sorry fanatically believing in UN it's not right. UN is not better not the only true and not geographical institutions in this world. Even in Belgium schools they teach South Caucasus in Europe region so every one is stupid in Europe but USA not? It's funny while even US government website uncertainty define South Caucasus in Middle East not matching with the reality. I know in USA they are not good in geography. The majority of recourses in Europe are defining and teaching South Caucasus in Europe it depends on students if they learn or remembering and even Edinburgh Geografical Institute but you insist in your uncertain information. Why then USA Canada Japan Israel received observer status in Council of Europe while South Caucasus which you say allegedly is in Asia received membership? It's logically they don't have nothing to do with European regions because I guess you don't know that they have criterias too that the country should be wholly or partly in Europe for be member. Those could receive membership because they have connection with EU. How they are making criterias so if they are not who should define Europe or if they don't know Europe regions? European Political Community is also for European continent. They say that, not me. But you think you're the only truth and they are not important. Also we are member state of PostEurop which is for Europe region who is in Europe wholly or partly. And in Belgium schools they don't teach I am partially. Why USA is not in European Political Community PostEurop etc then? Because It's for Europe region issues. Your claim that Armenia is country in Asia is not matching with reality and cause of you I am having conflict with people defining me Middle Eastern Asian or something like that. There are of course people who don't care this uncertain information but the majority of people believe in this disinformations

This is from Belgium schools which one Armenian woman shared from there. They teach also Armenia in Europe

https://i.postimg.cc/VLsxZS8S/FB-IMG-1700135924735.jpg

This is about European political Community which says it's for European continent(Armenia is member)

https://i.postimg.cc/859bR0NB/Screenshot-20231013-123246-Edge.jpg

UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE) is a UK-wide network of academics and researchers coordinated from King’s College London. Here is saying all countries in Europe is in European Political Community then Armenia is in Europe cause it's member

https://i.postimg.cc/mrNYzg54/Screenshot-20231008-011158-Edge.jpg

Euronews.Travel says about welcoming countries in Europe mentioned Armenia too. How is others are Europe but not me!!!

https://i.postimg.cc/dQyZf1J9/Screenshot-20231016-131153-Edge.jpg

Schengen Visa Info

https://i.postimg.cc/SRJ2QS9m/Screenshot-20231031-025300-Edge.jpg

IDEA Institution showing results democracy in Europe mentioned Armenia Moldova having progress. How in this case excluding Armenia not in Europe?

https://i.postimg.cc/wBwhWW8P/Screenshot-20231103-020310-Edge.jpg

p.s there is news on Euronews from them that they were mentioning the phrase "European continent" talking about democracy in European continent so how then they are wrong not who should define Europe but you right and you are who should define Europe? That's not right to think. 212.34.242.62 (talk) 09:19, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Spanish University is also showing South Caucasia in Europe

https://i.postimg.cc/CxPHhFm5/Spain-University.jpg

University of Netherlands

https://i.postimg.cc/PrqCt1cb/Screenshot-20230814-182058-Edge.jpg

University of Netherlands

https://i.postimg.cc/R0xCntPD/Screenshot-20240120-214319-Chrome.jpg

World Atlas Europe map

https://i.postimg.cc/tRsgw9VD/europe-map.gif

World Atlas Asia map

https://i.postimg.cc/XYj6Mgz3/am-02.jpg

P.s so according to you they all are stupid or not who should define Europe?. That's not right 212.34.242.62 (talk) 10:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

I got also Cambridge University Europe map where is showing South Caucasia in Europe

https://i.postimg.cc/zB2sfMXC/HD-wallpaper-map-of-europe-in-1910-history-europe-twentieth-century-map.jpg

Hammond's Enlarged Europe map

https://i.postimg.cc/85bhBQrv/81-XKytl0-KVL-AC-SL1500.jpg 212.34.242.62 (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

By the way, the description is also not accurate. The official Republic of Armenia is not in Armenian Highlands, it's on South Caucasus because Armenian Highlands it's a historical name of Armenian land inside of Eastern part of the current Turkey which later they did distort named into Eastern Anatolia 212.34.242.62 (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2024

I would like to make a correction about Armenia being culturally European. It is both geographically and culturally West Asian but geopolitically European. Almost every part of our Hayastani culture is similar if not the same as our West Asian Neighbors, Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan. All differences of religion being put aside. TigranG81 (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

• No WP:RS. Archives908 (talk) 20:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Prehistory

Revision as of 15:29, 26 March 2024 I don’t understand how the participant’s actions are justified Archives908. Trying to add to the Pregistory part, every time my edits are deleted by the participant Archives908. Yes, perhaps they are not very well written mentally, but this does not add the right to remove all the edits. Armen888 (talk) 15:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

here it is absolutely unclear why the edit was removed, I agree there are errors in the formulation of thoughts, but otherwise there are no errors 46.71.61.249 (talk) 16:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

"Not very well written mentally"....that is precisely why your edits are being reverted. You are copy and pasting information from the Armenia article on Armenian Wikipedia. It does not translate well. There are plenty of grammatical, phrasing, sentence structure, and punctuation concerns that fully warranted a reversal of your edits. Surely, it isn't my responsibility to fix everything. I've already recommended that you 1) slow down, 2) try editing on your sandbox, 3) put forth your suggestions here for review/feedback from more experienced editors, and 4) above all, proofread before publishing! 16:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC) Archives908 (talk) 16:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

A further idea is to consider expanding Prehistoric Armenia instead. The section and detail in that part of this article already seems too long, while Prehistoric Armenia is not far past its stub stage. Efforts that try and expand Prehistory at this very high level page are misdirected. CMD (talk) 16:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

yes you are right but 1) I don’t know who to contact for help about this article 2) I want to extend the information in the Prehistoric section and if you don’t mind I’ll add at least a few sentences to this part and 3) I’m not just copying and pasting, in my first edit was errors with links which I successfully corrected Armen888 (talk) 17:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

for example, it is written that people entered the territory of Armenia 1 million years ago, although studies say that the people arrived 2 million years ago Armen888 (talk) 17:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

and the photos that I change simply give a better overview of the area Armen888 (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

my edits have already been made in the draft, all that remains is to add them to the page, but I can shorten these sentences, because in articles from other countries in this section sometimes more is written in my edit Armen888 (talk) 17:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I made an edit that is significantly smaller than my draft, I hope it turned out okay this time Armen888 (talk) 17:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Your additions are not gramatically correct.

"Kura–Araxes culture major site is a Shengavit Settlement" - does not make sense.

"The Iron Age in Armenia begins in the 2nd millennium BC. Armenian Highlands rich in iron reserves(Syunik, Mush, Hınıs, etc.) became the main supplier of raw materials and took a dominant position in Middle Asia." - odd tense used, spacing issues.

"The first sub-phase of the Old Stone Age of the primitive society"- this isn't very clear.

This is the third time I have asked you to please put forth your suggestions on this talk page under a new subheading for feedback BEFORE you continue adding material. This way, it can be peer reviewed before publishing. Do you understand? Archives908 (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I understand what you are saying, I'm just trying to fill it in at least so that the image of Shengavit is separate from the shoe from the areni cave!, and humans get in to territory of Armenia 2 million years ago not 1 million Armen888 (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2024

Remove that Armenia is a developing country. It is a real country and has been thousands of years. It is the oldest country. 67.150.0.75 (talk) 07:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: "Developing" does not mean the country doesn't exist. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 07:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

"Developing" describes the state of a country's economy and industry. See Developing country. Largoplazo (talk) 09:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Article linked to name "Palestine"

Surely, in Josephus' quote (at the very end of the "Etymology" chapter), even if the name "Palestine" is really used in the original, it should be linked to the article about the historical/geographical region, not to the one about the current political entity? 151.237.126.24 (talk) 10:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that link was quite an anachronism. I've replaced its target with Palestine (region). Largoplazo (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)