- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment. Thanks to all for your participation. Ajpolino ( talk) 04:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment in Armenia
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment in Armenia ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is no neutral academic discourse on the subject, WP:SYNTHESIS, WP:OR, WP:NOTSCANDAL --Armatura ( talk) 23:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 23:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 23:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 23:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Find it hard to believe nothing neutral is to be found on this. Hyperbolick ( talk) 04:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Keep- If there is a WP:NPOV issue with neutrality and this article, the non-neutral sections should be tagged and it should be fixed. The topic is notable, the article needs to be fixed and improved, not just deleted. Deathlibrarian ( talk) 08:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with User:Hyperbolick that it seems likely that reliable coverage can be found on this, but I am not seeing any in the article, with much of the content seeming to be included as OR or Synth, such as the section on blocking an Azeri film festival. I also note that the sections that directly discuss such sentiment are always uncited - as such, can anyone identify any sources in the article that actually deal with the topic? BilledMammal ( talk) 12:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - No academic consensus about institutionalized anti-Azeri sentiment in Armenia, unlike anti-Armenian sentiment in Azerbaijan, which is well documented and covered by neutral sources. The sources should call the described events Anti Azerbaijanism, otherwise wikipedia editors devising such a concept is unacceptable. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 18:43, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.149.166.67 ( talk) 07:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)- banned user. Grand master 20:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)- After checking several sources, I agree with the nominator that almost all the article seems to be WP:OR and don't disagree with WP:TNT deletion. Can be redirected to anti-Azerbaijani sentiment where this topic is already covered. I don't see the need for a spinoff article unless it's well sourced. ( t · c) buidhe 08:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom and buidhe. - Kevo327 ( talk) 16:33, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It is a legitimate topic, a parallel article to Anti-Armenian sentiment in Azerbaijan. The two countries are at war not because of love for each other, there is a popular sentiment that drives the conflict in both states. There is plenty of information about persecution of Azerbaijani people in Armenia and in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, and the article could be further improved with use of additional sources. There is also scholarly literature that discuses the topic and could be used in this article. For example, Stuart J. Kaufman. Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War. Page 54. A very good source is a recent book by Laurence Broers, Armenia and Azerbaijan: Anatomy of a Rivalry. He discusses the topic in much detail, in particular, he writes: The structural context of Soviet Armenia's Azerbaijani minority and the patterns of violence against it suggest that rather than resentment or fear, it is hatred that was the predominant emotion towards this community in the Arm SSR. These and other sources could be used to improve the article. Grand master 19:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The article may benefit from some rewriting and additional sources, but the topic itself is
WP:NOTABLE, even being the
subject of a World Court ruling. Other sources trace it to the beginnig of the 20th century, if not earlier.
Brandmeister
talk 21:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- There is nothing about Anti-Azerbaijansim in the article you shared, and the issue at court was more about what Azerbajan did, which was displaying mannequins of dead Armenian soldiers in a trophy park. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 23:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Could you link those other sources, as the Reuters source does not appear sufficient to support the existence of the article? BilledMammal ( talk) 04:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Prevent, not stop. Getting the difference? --Armatura ( talk) 17:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but we need a reliable and independent source that tells us that; we cannot infer it. BilledMammal ( talk) 11:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- They did not order to stop hate speech in Armenia, it ordered to take all necessary measures to prevent the incitement and promotion of racial hatred and in addition presiding judge Joan Donoghue said Azerbaijan must protect all persons captured in relation to the 2020 conflict who remain in detention" and must "prevent and punish acts of vandalism and desecration affecting Armenian cultural heritage Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 12:16, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Prevent, not stop. Getting the difference, Grandmaster? --Armatura ( talk) 17:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- If you read the ruling,
Brandmeister, it’ll be clear that the court uses different language when addressing hatred in both countries - therapeutic for Azerbaijan (with concrete example of racial hatred like the hideous “trophy park”) and preventive for Armenia (as the court would remind any other country engaged in military action to not go down the route of developing ethnic hatred sentiment. They didn’t indicate the hatred ALREADY exists in Armenia).
--Armatura (
talk) 04:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, the court ruling did not concern the trophy park. The court did not support the demand of Armenia that the park is closed, but it took into consideration that the mannequins were removed. But there was no ruling concerning the trophy park itself.
Grand
master 11:16, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Where else were Mannequins displayed except for the trophy park?
Paradise Chronicle (
talk) 12:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Of course the court mentioned the trophy park and this many times. Specially
point number 93 is interesting. Azerbaijan themselves mentioned the Mannequins and helmets displayed in the Trophy Park and the Court takes notice of their announced removal.
Paradise Chronicle (
talk) 12:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Provisional measures make no mention of the trophy park. The court took into consideration the removal of mannequins, and that was all (point 93). No specific ruling in this regard. As for Armenia, the provisional measures say: The Republic of Armenia shall, in accordance with its obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, take all necessary measures to prevent the incitement and promotion of racial hatred, including by organizations and private persons in its territory, targeted at persons of Azerbaijani national or ethnic origin.
Grand
master 10:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Could you indicate where the court calls for something like this from Armenia? The provisional measurements are based (for these reasons) on the conclusion mentioned from point 89 downwards which includes the mentions of the helmets and mannequins in the trophy park.
Paradise Chronicle (
talk) 20:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- There are 3 measures against Azerbaijan, i.e. protect prisoners and monuments and stop hate speech. Park is not among the measures. Since offending items are removed, the problem is solved (at least for the court). The measures should be the same for both countries, but Armenia does not have any more detainees (Azerbaijan has a group of detainees captured after the war), and Armenia has no control over Azerbaijani monuments anymore after 2020 war. Whatever Azerbaijani monuments were in the occupied territories have been destroyed, and it will be the subject for further proceedings by the court, but since Armenia does not control those territories anymore, the court cannot order Armenia to take protective measures. Otherwise, both countries are ordered to prevent hate speech.
Grand
master 10:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- I guess this is matter of interpretation of the verdict and you didn't answer my question which was: Could you indicate where the court calls for something like this from Armenia? But I guess this is actually for another talk page. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 18:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- There are 3 measures against Azerbaijan, i.e. protect prisoners and monuments and stop hate speech. Park is not among the measures. Since offending items are removed, the problem is solved (at least for the court). The measures should be the same for both countries, but Armenia does not have any more detainees (Azerbaijan has a group of detainees captured after the war), and Armenia has no control over Azerbaijani monuments anymore after 2020 war. Whatever Azerbaijani monuments were in the occupied territories have been destroyed, and it will be the subject for further proceedings by the court, but since Armenia does not control those territories anymore, the court cannot order Armenia to take protective measures. Otherwise, both countries are ordered to prevent hate speech.
Grand
master 10:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Could you indicate where the court calls for something like this from Armenia? The provisional measurements are based (for these reasons) on the conclusion mentioned from point 89 downwards which includes the mentions of the helmets and mannequins in the trophy park.
Paradise Chronicle (
talk) 20:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Provisional measures make no mention of the trophy park. The court took into consideration the removal of mannequins, and that was all (point 93). No specific ruling in this regard. As for Armenia, the provisional measures say: The Republic of Armenia shall, in accordance with its obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, take all necessary measures to prevent the incitement and promotion of racial hatred, including by organizations and private persons in its territory, targeted at persons of Azerbaijani national or ethnic origin.
Grand
master 10:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Of course the court mentioned the trophy park and this many times. Specially
point number 93 is interesting. Azerbaijan themselves mentioned the Mannequins and helmets displayed in the Trophy Park and the Court takes notice of their announced removal.
Paradise Chronicle (
talk) 12:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Where else were Mannequins displayed except for the trophy park?
Paradise Chronicle (
talk) 12:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, the court ruling did not concern the trophy park. The court did not support the demand of Armenia that the park is closed, but it took into consideration that the mannequins were removed. But there was no ruling concerning the trophy park itself.
Grand
master 11:16, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- If you read the ruling,
Brandmeister, it’ll be clear that the court uses different language when addressing hatred in both countries - therapeutic for Azerbaijan (with concrete example of racial hatred like the hideous “trophy park”) and preventive for Armenia (as the court would remind any other country engaged in military action to not go down the route of developing ethnic hatred sentiment. They didn’t indicate the hatred ALREADY exists in Armenia).
--Armatura (
talk) 04:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment per TNT. Nobody has been able to demonstrate that there are any relevant citations in the article, and while I believe that relevant citations probably exist, until we can find them we cannot have an article - and if we can find them, we can put them in the parent article and split the section out when appropriate. BilledMammal ( talk) 10:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 17:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep per Deathlibrarian, tag the sections with NPOV tag if you believe it has npov issue. I see several good English sources. Shadow4dark ( talk) 17:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- @ Shadow4dark: Could you link a few of those, as I have been unable to find them? BilledMammal ( talk) 22:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- Some sources that i found is books of
Svante Cornell
Shadow4dark (
talk) 22:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. "The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict" doesn't appear to include any mention of anti-Azerbaijani sentiment, and while "Azerbaijan since independence" does, it is limited to half a paragraph that doesn't support much more than the statement that "after the events at Chardakli, anti-Azerbaijani sentiment in Armenia grew" - this warrants mention in Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment, but I don't believe it is sufficient to support a stand-alone article. I also note that the current line doesn't match the source; the source says this rise in sentiment occurred prior to the first war, while our article says it happened after the first war.
- On a side note, Svante Cornell has been criticized for being pro-Azerbaijan, which weakens our ability to create an article that is heavily sourced to his works. BilledMammal ( talk) 23:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- Some sources that i found is books of
Svante Cornell
Shadow4dark (
talk) 22:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment as common for other pages on such subjects. My very best wishes ( talk) 02:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect, per User: BilledMammal. I don't think WP:TNT is needed, but I agree with the inclination that buildup should happen in the Anti-Azerbaijani sentiment article. A note: the quick scholarly source review I did uncovered primarily passing mentions; based on what I saw, I would be hard-pressed to write an article on the subject without WP:SYNTH. Suriname0 ( talk) 20:43, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.