![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 19 August, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is now a finished 2011 documentary film with the title 'Janapar' on IMDB. Suggest creating a disambiguation page for the hiking trail and the film. Djpeanut ( talk) 12:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. pls, first of all discuss on Talk Page. The name of this city in all official editions is Shusha. As regards to Shusha's "Armenian name", it's acceptable maybe in Armenian editions. here is English Wikipedia. -- Aydin mirza ( talk) 22:00, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Many cities have another transcription in different languages. it doesn't mean that we schould use it in encyclopedic editions. All reliable sources say "Shusha", not "Shushi". In Azerbaijan editions nobody use "Irevan" and etc. So, pls, don't drive us to edit warring. -- Aydin mirza ( talk) 22:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
The article is about now non-nonfunctional Armenian tour trail which used those Armenian names at the time when it was in use. Applying Azerbaijani names now, anachronistically, is not a constructive step, Toghrul R. --Armatura ( talk) 11:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
@
Achemish, Hi I didnot quite understand your comment Undid a number of unwarranted removals
. How removal of unsourced information is unwarranted?
Provided markers are blue with a yellow footprintaccording to the source. Yet, you reinstated that unsourced information back.
(Girmizi Bazar)from the photo description - This information is relevant, and the fact that territory is located inside the sovereign territories of Azerbaijan is giving weight enough to mention as per MOS:ALTNAME.
the astonishingZontik Waterfall - whole article used to add one word, which adds no value, which is POV of the author, which is not encyclopedic, and absolutely irrelevant. I can't understand why it is restored.
And so on, and so on... can you please explain, how removal of the unsourced information lowering the quality of the article
?
A b r v a g l (
PingMe)
15:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Achemish ( talk) 07:59, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 19 August, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is now a finished 2011 documentary film with the title 'Janapar' on IMDB. Suggest creating a disambiguation page for the hiking trail and the film. Djpeanut ( talk) 12:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. pls, first of all discuss on Talk Page. The name of this city in all official editions is Shusha. As regards to Shusha's "Armenian name", it's acceptable maybe in Armenian editions. here is English Wikipedia. -- Aydin mirza ( talk) 22:00, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Many cities have another transcription in different languages. it doesn't mean that we schould use it in encyclopedic editions. All reliable sources say "Shusha", not "Shushi". In Azerbaijan editions nobody use "Irevan" and etc. So, pls, don't drive us to edit warring. -- Aydin mirza ( talk) 22:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
The article is about now non-nonfunctional Armenian tour trail which used those Armenian names at the time when it was in use. Applying Azerbaijani names now, anachronistically, is not a constructive step, Toghrul R. --Armatura ( talk) 11:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
@
Achemish, Hi I didnot quite understand your comment Undid a number of unwarranted removals
. How removal of unsourced information is unwarranted?
Provided markers are blue with a yellow footprintaccording to the source. Yet, you reinstated that unsourced information back.
(Girmizi Bazar)from the photo description - This information is relevant, and the fact that territory is located inside the sovereign territories of Azerbaijan is giving weight enough to mention as per MOS:ALTNAME.
the astonishingZontik Waterfall - whole article used to add one word, which adds no value, which is POV of the author, which is not encyclopedic, and absolutely irrelevant. I can't understand why it is restored.
And so on, and so on... can you please explain, how removal of the unsourced information lowering the quality of the article
?
A b r v a g l (
PingMe)
15:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Achemish ( talk) 07:59, 22 October 2022 (UTC)