Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
* ... that after signing a ''']''', ] attemptedtoinvadesouthern ] again in 1920, but the attack was foiled by an Armenian rebellion in ], which led to the ]?
* ... that after signing a ''']''', ] prepared another invasion of ] which was foiled by a rebellion in ], which led to the ]?
{{smalldiv|1=
{{smalldiv|1=
* Source: Saparov, Arsène (2014). From conflict to autonomy in the Caucasus: the Soviet Union and the making of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno Karabakh. Routledge.}}
* Source: Saparov, Arsène (2014). From conflict to autonomy in the Caucasus: the Soviet Union and the making of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno Karabakh. Routledge.}}
Source: Saparov, Arsène (2014). From conflict to autonomy in the Caucasus: the Soviet Union and the making of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno Karabakh. Routledge.
Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by Olympian (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Article has achieved Good Article status. No issues of copyvio or plagiarism. All sources appear reliable. Hook is interesting and sourced. QPQ is not required. Looks ready to go. Thriley (talk) 18:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Until World War I, the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire controlled the Caucasus, and both collapsed during the war. At least some mention of this would help readers unfamiliar with the region understand the situation better. Right now, I only see this hinted at with "attaining independence from Russia".
Regarding "In 1920, the region was invaded by units of the Red Army" why is this in the background, when it discusses events events after the agreement is signed?
Regarding "In March 1920, the local Armenians revolted with the support of Armenia" the same as above, why include this in the background section?
Saparov (2014) mentions militias in Nagorno-Karabakh throughout this conflict, I don't see these mentioned in the Misplaced Pages article. So when it says "the local Armenians", is this referring a widespread uprising or an ongoing military conflict with those militia groups?
The article quotes a historian saying the agreement was "basically a declaration of intent". Can this article expand on that? What is a declaration of intent? Do historians find evidence that either side intended to build any kind of long-term diplomatic relationship from this? The "Aftermath" section seems to imply the opposite.
Does the Red Army invasion of Azerbaijan render this agreement moot? It occurs just weeks after the final line of the "Aftermath" section.
Thanks, Rjjiii, I implemented your feedback/exceptions. With regard to the Saparov source, I'm not sure of your concern as he describes the local Armenians who were involved in the rebellion as "rebels" from pages 94–95. The militias, by my understanding, largely operated in Zangezur (a neighbouring, albeit isolated, Armenian-controlled province) which was more-less a part of Armenia at the time. – Olympian 11:01, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
That resolved all of my concerns. Thanks! Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 14:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/Agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan respecting the District of Zanghezour: Difference between revisions
Add topic
Ruins of the Armenian quarter of Shusha after its destruction by the Azerbaijani army in March 1920.
Article has achieved Good Article status. No issues of copyvio or plagiarism. All sources appear reliable. Hook is interesting and sourced. QPQ is not required. Looks ready to go. Thriley (talk) 18:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
@Rjjiii, Thriley, and Olympian: this hook is far over the maximum of 200 characters. Please either trim the content considerably or provide a new hook. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)