This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
}} The article refers to the 18th century BC. Shouldn't this be 8th century? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMcPhillip ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Why was this article renamed and most of it's content removed in April 2013 without discussion? -- Steverci ( talk) 23:32, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Çavuştepe is the name that is used in all academic sources that describe the site as it exists now. However Agulani is incorrect to state that it has been Çavuştepe "for the last 1000 years", I doubt that it has been Çavuştepe for more than 50 or 60 years. Trouble is, this article is not much about Çavuştepe as a physical site, but mostly about a legend that was attached to the site and that gave the name Haykaberd to it. If considerably more were to be added to the article about the archaeological site, the Urartian temple/palace/fortress complex, then the argument for a rename to Çavuştepe would be very strong. Of course neither Çavuştepe or Haykabert is the original name of the site. Tiptoethrutheminefield ( talk) 14:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
}} The article refers to the 18th century BC. Shouldn't this be 8th century? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMcPhillip ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Why was this article renamed and most of it's content removed in April 2013 without discussion? -- Steverci ( talk) 23:32, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Çavuştepe is the name that is used in all academic sources that describe the site as it exists now. However Agulani is incorrect to state that it has been Çavuştepe "for the last 1000 years", I doubt that it has been Çavuştepe for more than 50 or 60 years. Trouble is, this article is not much about Çavuştepe as a physical site, but mostly about a legend that was attached to the site and that gave the name Haykaberd to it. If considerably more were to be added to the article about the archaeological site, the Urartian temple/palace/fortress complex, then the argument for a rename to Çavuştepe would be very strong. Of course neither Çavuştepe or Haykabert is the original name of the site. Tiptoethrutheminefield ( talk) 14:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)