Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:57, 27 February 2016

Khojaly Massacre recognition

Khojaly Massacre recognition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The given topic does not warrant its own article on a Encyclopedia (WP:N). It is neither disputed nor denied – not even by the Armenian side – that a massacre in Khojaly took place. Therefore there is no need for a "recognition"-article, since there is no denial of it. There is no need for an article on a Encyclopedia listing how each year 1 or 2 US States commemorate the non-denied death of 200+ people during a conflict. Non-notable topic. Markus2685 (talk) 13:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

• Comment I indeed did have a bit of trouble finding disagreers, but Armenians seems to be the most likely disagreers. I were able to find this webpage: 1, which is to serve as just an example of opposition existing. Maybe the editors who edit the subject matter happen to have a bit of a lopsided viewpoint and thus don't list the opposition views, so they aren't visible here. But they do seem to exist outside of Misplaced Pages. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

You are mixing two different topics. The first topic is this "recognition"-article about depicting a recognition of an event – a massacre – which is not denied at all. Even the president of Armenia declared in an interview with Thomas De Waal that a massacre took place. The second topic – which you are mentioning – is the labeling of Khojaly massacre as "Genocide", which Azerbaidjanis try to do, although there is not a single reliable third-party source using the term "genocide" to describe the death of 200+ people. If you look carefully you will see that the headline of the link you posted reads "The Khojaly Genocide Fabrication". Markus2685 (talk) 19:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

• Maybe the best option would be then to rename the article as Khojaly Massacre controversy or something like that and have both sides' points be presented. There does seem to be great disagreement about what exactly took place and why. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
• The disagreement is already depicted in the main article Khojaly massacre by describing the positions of both parties in detail. Therefore your suggestion would basically result in just a copy of the main article "Khojaly massacre". Markus2685 (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Some few mentions but it seems like both sides' arguments have grown up to take quite a lot of space. The article itself should be fairly matter-of-fact from the perspective of third party sources and then summarize the two sides' views. This controversy article could then explain their stances further... --Mr. Magoo (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

I also don't think we need another article on the massacre itself. There are actually no two side's views. International organizations such as HRW and Memorial which investigated the massacre concur with the Azerbaijani side with regard to the perpetrators, and so do many Armenian sources, including the current Armenian president. The conspiracy theorists are pretty marginal, and I see no point in changing the topic of this article. I think the article in question should remain, as it was split from the main article in order to save space there and keep it focused on the topic. Grandmaster 23:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

• Comment Why did you change the recognitions to "commemoration": 2? The sources talk about recognition. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:10, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

"Recognition" is misleading and just wrong. The sources that you mean are only Azerbaidjani partisan sources using the term "recognition" as part of their agenda trying to give the impression, that this is an event denied by Armenia. The original resolutions are using the term "commemoration": "A Resolution commemorating the 21st anniversary of the Khojaly Tragedy" Markus2685 (talk) 19:25, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

• Keep. "Recognition" does not mean recognising that 200+ people died. It means recognising that this massacre was committed by Armenian troops; an act which Armenia has been vehemently denying since 1992. Six sovereign UN member states and 15 US states whose parliaments have voted in favour of recognising and condemning Armenia's involvement in this act of violence is more than "1 or 2 states commemorating" the death of the people. Parishan (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

I repeat: Even the president of Armenia declared in an interview with Thomas De Waal that a massacre took place by Armenians, which can be read in the main article "Khojaly massacre". Your accusation is therefore just wrong. There is no denial, and thus no need for a "recognition"-article. Markus2685 (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

• Delete I agree that it is a non notable topic. I don't see any reason for a recognition article when there is no official denial of this massacre. Hayterak (talk) 20:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
• Keep. This article was split from Khojaly massacre in order to save space and avoid the recognition section there growing way too large. I think the topic warrants a separate article. Otherwise, all this info will reemerge in the main article, and I think the main article should be more focused on the massacre itself. Grandmaster 23:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Indiscernible or unclassifiable topic)
• AfD debates