![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am fairly certain the Archbishop resides in Shushi. I would feel more comfortable with the statement to the contrary being removed unless it is referenced. -- RaffiKojian 17:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
This monastery hav several properties that classifies it as udi or alban monastery rather than armenian monastery. Reynhold 02:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Edited the text. Also, Gandzasar is the official Seat of the Archbishop of Artsakh. However, the Archbishopric's main administrative offices are located in Shushi. The Archbishop lives in Shushi. Capasitor ( talk) 00:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Tagging Islamic symbols on Christian churches is insulting to Christian religion. I would welcome the Azeri-stub if the image changes. Note that I'm leaving the wp:AZ tag in the talkpage as it is not highly visible. VartanM ( talk) 21:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
"Eight years after the beginning of Armenian migration, in 1836, the czarist government dissolved the Albanian Church district and brought it under the complete control of the Armenian national church." ref here -- 144.122.135.88 ( talk) 18:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
"After the Arab domination ended, the Caucasian Albanian Church became a diocese of the Armenian Church and the name Aghvan survived only in the name of this diocese associated with the church and monastery complex at Gandzasar, which was the See of the Catholicate of the Caucasian Albanian Church" ref here Please, stop giving misinformation! -- 144.122.135.88 ( talk) 18:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
According to NPOV we should write both names and both states that pretend to possess the territory where the object is located. -- Quantum666 ( talk) 06:36, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
There was false information regarding region of this temple. The monastery is located inside internationally accepted borders of Azerbaijan Republic. It was built as Caucasian Albanian church (as written in the facade of the temple). I hope this information will be taken into consideration. Regards, -- Verman1 ( talk) 05:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)],
Late History of Albanian Church) showing this temple being built as Caucasian Albanian Church. I am trying to do my best in order to follow neutrality, but this article shows Kalbajar region of Azerbaijan as a part of another country (which is unacceptable by any means).
WP:NPOV rule is completely ignored in Mr. Ashot's reverts. I am afraid we are going to ask again for mediator in here too, for the reason that Mr. Ashot will not let any neutral source to be introduced in the article. Regards, --
Verman1 (
talk)
17:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Verman1, who has recently made edits here, was very well aware of Wikipedia guidelines (at least via another discussion at Talk:Tsitsernavank Monastery). Regardless of this, he initiated changes here without preliminary discussion. Hence, his edits are reverted. -- Ashot ( talk) 13:42, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
This just looks like a repeat of what transpired on the Tsitsernvank article. You delete third-party references and insert POV information which is backed up by partisan websites that do not even come close being neutral, let alone accurate. You're even being selective on what to quote from your more reliable sources. In De Waal's book, the author quotes historian Robert Hewsen who plain says that the people who built Gandzasar considered themselves as nothing else but Armenians, even if they were ruling over an antiquated realm known by the name of "Aghuvank", which itself was the Armenian designation for Caucasian Albania. The full quote is the following: "Finally we came to the Karabakhi prince, Hasan-Jalal. Professor Hewsen concluded that "I have found not a shred of evidence that [the meliks] ever thought of themselves as anything but Armenians, albeit members of the Albanian branch of the Armenian Church." This is hardly an innocent case of a content dispute because numerous editors have in the past couple of years tried to rechristen these Armenian churches as Caucasian Albanian, an opinion which holds no water among academia today. Furthermore, Verman's own attitude towards the editing process is getting tedious. He clearly shows that he doesn't like what has been written here and that not only is his version of this article written by him the "correct" one, but that everything else is "vandalism" and thus "unacceptable". That sort of attitude and behavior is not welcomed here with open arms. -- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 06:17, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
"(until Caucasian Albanian Church was annexed to Armenian Church by Russian authorities)" :) Vidovler ( talk) 21:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
2) Gandzasar was the residence of the catholicos of the Albanian Catholicate from about 1400 until 1816, (until Caucasian Albanian Church was annexed to Armenian Church by Russian authorities) In the entire existence years of this claimed Albanian Church it was only devided from the Armenian Church for a century under Byzantine Empire, which separated the Armenian Church. That was from after 590 to 705, and even then, there was no independent Albanian Church. Your edit is a fabrication.
3) There is inscription in the facade of the temple. Inscription contains these writings "I Hasan Jalal, build this temple for my people of Aghvank". Aghvank is ancient name of Caucasian Albania. Therefore it is ridiculous to call Hasan-Jalal an Armenian prince. Aghvank is the Armenian name for Armenian Albania, and any of those writtings on the temple were writen solely in Armenian. Why did he write in Armenian, why did he use the term for Armenian Albania? Did Hasan Jalal ever write in any other language than Armenian?
These information in the 2nd and 3rd parts are published by third-party and by neutral sources. Current form of this article is obviously one-sided and contains falsified information, which can mislead any reader. Regards, That the monastery was part of the Armenian Church, no credible source has ever writen else, from this discussion it's clear you are being evasive. Vidovler ( talk) 05:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Ashot, every point was written by Verman. Why do you delete where it says the church is in Azerbaijan? Why do you delete source Black Garden? It is neutral!
Dighapet (
talk)
14:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I give consensus to Verman's edits. If you agree it is Azerbaijan's de-jure part, then look what you undid: You undid that it is de-jure located in Azerbaijan, you undid the Azeri name (if the church is de-jure in Azerbaijan, then the Azeri name has to be included); you undid the fact that Albanian church was annexed to Armenian church officially in 19 century; you deleted Russian site where it says Hasan Jalal was Albanian, you undid quotation from Thomad de Waal in Black Garden book; you undid link to Culture of Azerbaijan, etc. So stop your deletions and pov and come to consensus. Dighapet ( talk) 14:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I included both claims and restored neutral sources. Since church Albanian or Armenian is still discussed and there is no consensus both will stay in the article. So don't undo Dighapet ( talk) 14:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hahahahaha :) you now contradict your comment. How can I add "POV" if it's in line with NEUTRAL sources? I know you don't like it but please read WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Dighapet ( talk) 15:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC):Why
Please write something meaningful to discuss, not for play of words. Ashot said no consensus was achieved and I said I give consensus to Verman. Where do you take I dismiss others? Dighapet ( talk) 15:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC) haha! I rest my case lol! You're just typing. Since you did reply to my comments without addressing them, I established the other version, since you had nothing to disagree about. Vidovler ( talk) 15:38, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
The Albanian Church had already been well incorporated into the Armenian Church by the 9th century. The priests that resided at Gandzasar in the 19th century when the Russians abolished the CA Catholicate were ethnic Armenians, they had be ordained by the Armenian Church.-- Moosh88 ( talk) 01:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I've protected the article. Please discuss on the talk page in good faith. I have no clue which version is correct and will revert to a different version after a few days if the side that currently has its version up does not make a good faith attempt to resolve this. -- rgpk ( comment) 16:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
What does Thomas Dewaal confirm? He does not confirm nothing. Vidovler is not historian. Albanian church was independent before Arabs.. It was passed under Armenian diocese when Arab Khalifs came and occupied Azerbaijan and was converting population to Islam. After Arabs left, Turks and Mongols came and occupied Azerbaijan but Albanian church existed in all Azerbaijan including Karabakh and Kabala, that's why it remained. If Albanian church was not independent Russians would not abolish it and pass to Armenian diocese in XIX century. They passed to fully armenize Albanians. In general, if you are so good in compromise, why you not changing at least the map in article. You already said Karabakh is de jure Azerbaijan. Dighapet ( talk) 13:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Read what I write carefully. I said Thomas Dewaal confirms nothing in reply to your "De Waal confirms the opposite". Yes, Arabs occupying Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is a region, not just a country's name. You should research in historical books first. Dighapet ( talk) 14:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I read. What do you want to say? Thomas is just describing his view of what a historian Mamedova said. Mamedova does not say Gandzasar and Hasan Jalal was Albanian because she thinks so. It is also written by other historians that Hasan Jalal was son of Vakhtang and comes from Mihranid family. Dighapet ( talk) 15:27, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
No he does not say that but he presents his view on Mamedova's argument. All other sources say Hasan Jalal was a Mihranid, not Armenian. At last Gandzasar was subdued to Armenian church and sometimes it was under Armenian rule but it is an Albanian church. Dighapet ( talk) 16:04, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
There is not one evidence that there ever was an independent Albanian Church, any of you has to provide still one. For a century the Armenian Church was divided by the Byzantine Empire that region to become Chalcedonian, yet, even then, it was still not an independent Church. You claim De Waal does not confirm anything, but yes HE DOES, at the pages I provided you. I'll quote just one (even though he specifically write about the two monasteries) : All of this confirmed what perhaps no one should have doubted in the first place: that the man whose dagger in the Hermitage bears an Armenian inscription was not in fact a latter-day Caucasian Albanian. Yet it needed a scholar in New Jersey to prove it. Vidovler ( talk) 15:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Neftchi, the reason I undid your latest additions to this article is because they do not correspond at all to the more specialist literature on Armenia, Artsakh, and Caucasian Albania. Ronald Grigor Suny, it should be remembered, is not a specialist of this region nor even of Armenia. His area of expertise is the Soviet Union, modern Europe, and modern Georgia (just have a glance at his works, which have nothing to do with the ancient or medieval period). Much of the conclusions he reached in Looking toward Ararat are based on a quick, and somewhat simplified, treatment of Caucasian Albania. He does not seem to understand that Caucasian Albania by the time of the tenth century was nothing but a geographical designation and that the princes who built Gandzasar considered themselves as nothing but Armenians, a fact that has been pointed out by historians like Robert Hewsen.
You are trying to establish a fringe opinion that is at odds with those of other scholars, and it does not matter if the material is "sourced" if the sources are not the state of the art in academic literature. Furthermore, your use of the book Heritage of Armenian Literature does not support the contention that Gandzasar was a "historically Caucasian Albanian" and appears to be a misreading of their own text.
You have already been exporting these misconstrued views to other Karabakh-related articles, and after a quick glance I regret to say that the same problems that are found with your edits are encountered in those articles, namely tendentious interpretation and forced attempts to insert fringe opinions. -- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 23:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
"Should this article mention in the lead that this monastry was historcialy Caucasian Albanian?" [1]. Mursel ( talk) 02:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Please check the "clarify" tags I have put in. But these are just small issues. There is no proper description, really. So much on politics & war that the church is almost left out.
Any monastery walls & annexes old enough as to merit mention?
Why is the narthex treated as a separate element?
There should be a description of
I'm not getting an image of the church yet from what we have. Of the Azeri fringe (as in: BS) theory, more than I wished to know :) Arminden ( talk) 03:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I went ahead and linked to the Principality of Khachen, but is it correct? That article doesn't start as early as the 10th c. Also, there's no explanation of the name (a town? A ruler?), and WP only has a town by the name of Khacen much farther south, in Iran. Arminden ( talk) 12:45, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
This edit removed 3 §. The content was:
How bad are the referenced sources? -- Saippuakauppias ⇄ 11:58, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
What is bad about the sources? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Arran Shah (
talk •
contribs)
06:19, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi!
I suggest, since Gandzasar is common heritage and since both Azeris & Armenians consider it dear to their history and identity, we should make two separate sections one for Armenian version another for Azerbaijani.
I have tried to to add some relavent information regarding the monastery, with out adding much, just to see that pointlessly it was being taken down with no particular reason.
Lets have separate sections starting from the History part, where i hope we can respect mutual interests without taking down any information of the other — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arran Shah ( talk • contribs) 11:46, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am fairly certain the Archbishop resides in Shushi. I would feel more comfortable with the statement to the contrary being removed unless it is referenced. -- RaffiKojian 17:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
This monastery hav several properties that classifies it as udi or alban monastery rather than armenian monastery. Reynhold 02:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Edited the text. Also, Gandzasar is the official Seat of the Archbishop of Artsakh. However, the Archbishopric's main administrative offices are located in Shushi. The Archbishop lives in Shushi. Capasitor ( talk) 00:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Tagging Islamic symbols on Christian churches is insulting to Christian religion. I would welcome the Azeri-stub if the image changes. Note that I'm leaving the wp:AZ tag in the talkpage as it is not highly visible. VartanM ( talk) 21:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
"Eight years after the beginning of Armenian migration, in 1836, the czarist government dissolved the Albanian Church district and brought it under the complete control of the Armenian national church." ref here -- 144.122.135.88 ( talk) 18:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
"After the Arab domination ended, the Caucasian Albanian Church became a diocese of the Armenian Church and the name Aghvan survived only in the name of this diocese associated with the church and monastery complex at Gandzasar, which was the See of the Catholicate of the Caucasian Albanian Church" ref here Please, stop giving misinformation! -- 144.122.135.88 ( talk) 18:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
According to NPOV we should write both names and both states that pretend to possess the territory where the object is located. -- Quantum666 ( talk) 06:36, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
There was false information regarding region of this temple. The monastery is located inside internationally accepted borders of Azerbaijan Republic. It was built as Caucasian Albanian church (as written in the facade of the temple). I hope this information will be taken into consideration. Regards, -- Verman1 ( talk) 05:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)],
Late History of Albanian Church) showing this temple being built as Caucasian Albanian Church. I am trying to do my best in order to follow neutrality, but this article shows Kalbajar region of Azerbaijan as a part of another country (which is unacceptable by any means).
WP:NPOV rule is completely ignored in Mr. Ashot's reverts. I am afraid we are going to ask again for mediator in here too, for the reason that Mr. Ashot will not let any neutral source to be introduced in the article. Regards, --
Verman1 (
talk)
17:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Verman1, who has recently made edits here, was very well aware of Wikipedia guidelines (at least via another discussion at Talk:Tsitsernavank Monastery). Regardless of this, he initiated changes here without preliminary discussion. Hence, his edits are reverted. -- Ashot ( talk) 13:42, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
This just looks like a repeat of what transpired on the Tsitsernvank article. You delete third-party references and insert POV information which is backed up by partisan websites that do not even come close being neutral, let alone accurate. You're even being selective on what to quote from your more reliable sources. In De Waal's book, the author quotes historian Robert Hewsen who plain says that the people who built Gandzasar considered themselves as nothing else but Armenians, even if they were ruling over an antiquated realm known by the name of "Aghuvank", which itself was the Armenian designation for Caucasian Albania. The full quote is the following: "Finally we came to the Karabakhi prince, Hasan-Jalal. Professor Hewsen concluded that "I have found not a shred of evidence that [the meliks] ever thought of themselves as anything but Armenians, albeit members of the Albanian branch of the Armenian Church." This is hardly an innocent case of a content dispute because numerous editors have in the past couple of years tried to rechristen these Armenian churches as Caucasian Albanian, an opinion which holds no water among academia today. Furthermore, Verman's own attitude towards the editing process is getting tedious. He clearly shows that he doesn't like what has been written here and that not only is his version of this article written by him the "correct" one, but that everything else is "vandalism" and thus "unacceptable". That sort of attitude and behavior is not welcomed here with open arms. -- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 06:17, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
"(until Caucasian Albanian Church was annexed to Armenian Church by Russian authorities)" :) Vidovler ( talk) 21:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
2) Gandzasar was the residence of the catholicos of the Albanian Catholicate from about 1400 until 1816, (until Caucasian Albanian Church was annexed to Armenian Church by Russian authorities) In the entire existence years of this claimed Albanian Church it was only devided from the Armenian Church for a century under Byzantine Empire, which separated the Armenian Church. That was from after 590 to 705, and even then, there was no independent Albanian Church. Your edit is a fabrication.
3) There is inscription in the facade of the temple. Inscription contains these writings "I Hasan Jalal, build this temple for my people of Aghvank". Aghvank is ancient name of Caucasian Albania. Therefore it is ridiculous to call Hasan-Jalal an Armenian prince. Aghvank is the Armenian name for Armenian Albania, and any of those writtings on the temple were writen solely in Armenian. Why did he write in Armenian, why did he use the term for Armenian Albania? Did Hasan Jalal ever write in any other language than Armenian?
These information in the 2nd and 3rd parts are published by third-party and by neutral sources. Current form of this article is obviously one-sided and contains falsified information, which can mislead any reader. Regards, That the monastery was part of the Armenian Church, no credible source has ever writen else, from this discussion it's clear you are being evasive. Vidovler ( talk) 05:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Ashot, every point was written by Verman. Why do you delete where it says the church is in Azerbaijan? Why do you delete source Black Garden? It is neutral!
Dighapet (
talk)
14:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I give consensus to Verman's edits. If you agree it is Azerbaijan's de-jure part, then look what you undid: You undid that it is de-jure located in Azerbaijan, you undid the Azeri name (if the church is de-jure in Azerbaijan, then the Azeri name has to be included); you undid the fact that Albanian church was annexed to Armenian church officially in 19 century; you deleted Russian site where it says Hasan Jalal was Albanian, you undid quotation from Thomad de Waal in Black Garden book; you undid link to Culture of Azerbaijan, etc. So stop your deletions and pov and come to consensus. Dighapet ( talk) 14:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I included both claims and restored neutral sources. Since church Albanian or Armenian is still discussed and there is no consensus both will stay in the article. So don't undo Dighapet ( talk) 14:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hahahahaha :) you now contradict your comment. How can I add "POV" if it's in line with NEUTRAL sources? I know you don't like it but please read WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Dighapet ( talk) 15:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC):Why
Please write something meaningful to discuss, not for play of words. Ashot said no consensus was achieved and I said I give consensus to Verman. Where do you take I dismiss others? Dighapet ( talk) 15:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC) haha! I rest my case lol! You're just typing. Since you did reply to my comments without addressing them, I established the other version, since you had nothing to disagree about. Vidovler ( talk) 15:38, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
The Albanian Church had already been well incorporated into the Armenian Church by the 9th century. The priests that resided at Gandzasar in the 19th century when the Russians abolished the CA Catholicate were ethnic Armenians, they had be ordained by the Armenian Church.-- Moosh88 ( talk) 01:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I've protected the article. Please discuss on the talk page in good faith. I have no clue which version is correct and will revert to a different version after a few days if the side that currently has its version up does not make a good faith attempt to resolve this. -- rgpk ( comment) 16:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
What does Thomas Dewaal confirm? He does not confirm nothing. Vidovler is not historian. Albanian church was independent before Arabs.. It was passed under Armenian diocese when Arab Khalifs came and occupied Azerbaijan and was converting population to Islam. After Arabs left, Turks and Mongols came and occupied Azerbaijan but Albanian church existed in all Azerbaijan including Karabakh and Kabala, that's why it remained. If Albanian church was not independent Russians would not abolish it and pass to Armenian diocese in XIX century. They passed to fully armenize Albanians. In general, if you are so good in compromise, why you not changing at least the map in article. You already said Karabakh is de jure Azerbaijan. Dighapet ( talk) 13:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Read what I write carefully. I said Thomas Dewaal confirms nothing in reply to your "De Waal confirms the opposite". Yes, Arabs occupying Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is a region, not just a country's name. You should research in historical books first. Dighapet ( talk) 14:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I read. What do you want to say? Thomas is just describing his view of what a historian Mamedova said. Mamedova does not say Gandzasar and Hasan Jalal was Albanian because she thinks so. It is also written by other historians that Hasan Jalal was son of Vakhtang and comes from Mihranid family. Dighapet ( talk) 15:27, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
No he does not say that but he presents his view on Mamedova's argument. All other sources say Hasan Jalal was a Mihranid, not Armenian. At last Gandzasar was subdued to Armenian church and sometimes it was under Armenian rule but it is an Albanian church. Dighapet ( talk) 16:04, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
There is not one evidence that there ever was an independent Albanian Church, any of you has to provide still one. For a century the Armenian Church was divided by the Byzantine Empire that region to become Chalcedonian, yet, even then, it was still not an independent Church. You claim De Waal does not confirm anything, but yes HE DOES, at the pages I provided you. I'll quote just one (even though he specifically write about the two monasteries) : All of this confirmed what perhaps no one should have doubted in the first place: that the man whose dagger in the Hermitage bears an Armenian inscription was not in fact a latter-day Caucasian Albanian. Yet it needed a scholar in New Jersey to prove it. Vidovler ( talk) 15:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Neftchi, the reason I undid your latest additions to this article is because they do not correspond at all to the more specialist literature on Armenia, Artsakh, and Caucasian Albania. Ronald Grigor Suny, it should be remembered, is not a specialist of this region nor even of Armenia. His area of expertise is the Soviet Union, modern Europe, and modern Georgia (just have a glance at his works, which have nothing to do with the ancient or medieval period). Much of the conclusions he reached in Looking toward Ararat are based on a quick, and somewhat simplified, treatment of Caucasian Albania. He does not seem to understand that Caucasian Albania by the time of the tenth century was nothing but a geographical designation and that the princes who built Gandzasar considered themselves as nothing but Armenians, a fact that has been pointed out by historians like Robert Hewsen.
You are trying to establish a fringe opinion that is at odds with those of other scholars, and it does not matter if the material is "sourced" if the sources are not the state of the art in academic literature. Furthermore, your use of the book Heritage of Armenian Literature does not support the contention that Gandzasar was a "historically Caucasian Albanian" and appears to be a misreading of their own text.
You have already been exporting these misconstrued views to other Karabakh-related articles, and after a quick glance I regret to say that the same problems that are found with your edits are encountered in those articles, namely tendentious interpretation and forced attempts to insert fringe opinions. -- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 23:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
"Should this article mention in the lead that this monastry was historcialy Caucasian Albanian?" [1]. Mursel ( talk) 02:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Please check the "clarify" tags I have put in. But these are just small issues. There is no proper description, really. So much on politics & war that the church is almost left out.
Any monastery walls & annexes old enough as to merit mention?
Why is the narthex treated as a separate element?
There should be a description of
I'm not getting an image of the church yet from what we have. Of the Azeri fringe (as in: BS) theory, more than I wished to know :) Arminden ( talk) 03:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I went ahead and linked to the Principality of Khachen, but is it correct? That article doesn't start as early as the 10th c. Also, there's no explanation of the name (a town? A ruler?), and WP only has a town by the name of Khacen much farther south, in Iran. Arminden ( talk) 12:45, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
This edit removed 3 §. The content was:
How bad are the referenced sources? -- Saippuakauppias ⇄ 11:58, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
What is bad about the sources? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Arran Shah (
talk •
contribs)
06:19, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi!
I suggest, since Gandzasar is common heritage and since both Azeris & Armenians consider it dear to their history and identity, we should make two separate sections one for Armenian version another for Azerbaijani.
I have tried to to add some relavent information regarding the monastery, with out adding much, just to see that pointlessly it was being taken down with no particular reason.
Lets have separate sections starting from the History part, where i hope we can respect mutual interests without taking down any information of the other — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arran Shah ( talk • contribs) 11:46, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)