This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
Armenia,
Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
In 1923, when Lachin became the capital of the newly-formed Kurdistan Okrug, its name was changed from 'Abdallar'. The corridor constituted a part of the Kurdish autonomous unit of Azerbaijan, which is clearly seen on the following maps: http://www.kurdistanica.com/english/geography/maps/map-05.html (one of them is posted in the respective article). The corridor thus may have been claimed or controlled by Armenia within the short period of active territorial exchange in 1921-22 but never officially belonged to the Armenian SSR and subsequently could not have been "completely transferred to Azerbaijan in 1931." Parishan 00:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
The version by User:Vartanm is, despite being better than the previous versions, still a revert of what I consider a better wording. Let's compare:
Current, Vartanm version: "The Lachin corridor is a mountain pass within the borders of Azerbaijan, it connects Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh. Following the 1994 cease-fire agreement in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, it came under the control of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, although officially it is part of the Lachin rayon of Azerbaijan."
My version: The Lachin corridor is a mountain pass in the Lachin region of Azerbaijan, the shortest route which connects Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. Following the 1994 cease-fire agreement in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, it came under the military control of ethnic Armenian forces, along with other regions of Azerbaijan, although officially it is part of the Lachin rayon of Azerbaijan.
To begin with, "within the borders of Azerbaijan" sounds weird -- is California "within the borders of USA", or is it part of USA? The latter wording is more precise and preferred. Secondly, the indication "shortest route" (at least land-wise) is important, because it emphasizes and explains the importance of the Lachin corridor -- as opposed to, for example, "Kalbajar corridor", or "Zangilan corridor". Thirdly, the article is primarily of geographic value, and thus, when describing that the route connects one country (Armenia) with another (Azerbaijan), it is grammatically and stylistically correct to add "Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan". Fourthly, the preferred wording of in the English-language media, as well as Wikipedia, is "ethnic Armenian forces" as opposed to "Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh", since everyone knows and understands that only an actual state, such as Armenia, with an actual budget, human and financial resources, army, can militarily occupy large swath of territory. All relevant organizations, from UN to PACE to US State Department and US President, have recognized that Azerbaijani territories (Karabakh plus 7 regions) are occupied by Armenia (all relevant quotes were presented at length in the main NK article's Talk page last year). Hence, this wording too should be adjusted accordingly to reflect the reality and facts, not POV.
Also, this should be made part of the page, as it is specifically about the corridor and peace negotiations: "It is the issue of communication of the Armenians living in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan with Armenia and that of the Azerbaijanis living in the Nakhchivan region of Azerbaijan with the rest of the country. We suggest the using of the so-called Lachin corridor – which should be called "Road of Peace" - by both sides in both directions provided that security of this road willbe ensured by the multinational peacekeeping forces at the initial stage". [1] -- AdilBaguirov 04:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm warning you the last time -- cease and desist from placing your POV into the article! The UN SC (along with everyone else -- see archives of Nagorno-Karabakh page, I've provided more than enough references there) resolutions are very clear that it's the "ethnic Armenian forces" and also mentions "Republic of Armenia". Armenia's authorities acknowledge it as well, both by conduction negotiations with Azerbaijan and sending troops to serve in the occupied territories. This issue has been presented and agreed upon long ago in all other NK conflict related pages, so refrain from your POV and Original Research, and don't be putting some "NKR" in the text. -- AdilBaguirov 15:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Whether NK is de-facto independent or not is irrelevant to this article, and is a non-neutral POV unacceptable to one of the sides in the conflict. A more neutral fact is that the corridor is outside of NK and connects NK to Armenia via territory of Azerbaijan, currently under control of Armenian forces. Atabek ( talk) 13:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
"Lachin is scenically built on the side of a mountain on the left bank of the Hakari River." This is wrong this river is in the south of the country. I remove this. -- Io Herodotus ( talk) 12:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
I do not see a mountain pass (a connection over a mountain ridge connecting two valleys). The road comes down from Armenia on the western side of the Aghavno river valley and climbs up on the eastern side of that valley.---- Bancki ( talk) 12:16, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I did some work on Lachin corridor and 2022–2023 blockade of the Republic of Artsakh. I think the articles flow better now and the proper parent-child article structure is reflected better. There is some more ce and reference cleanup/fill in needed, but I wanted to post here (and on the other page) so see if there were any objections to the edits I have made before I continue. Greetings from Los Angeles. // Timothy :: talk 22:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Helius Olympian took issue with the following bolded statements which have since been restored since this editor removed them:
On April 23, 2023, Azerbaijani officials set up a
checkpoint in the corridor, claiming it was meant to prevent the "illegal transportation of manpower, weapons, mines"
[1]; however, the republics of Armenia and Artsakh have denied these allegations and the
ceasefire agreement does not explicitly limit the use of the Lachin corridor to humanitarian needs.
[2]
MOS:CLAIM: Describing it as "claim" is accurate since the ICJ and third-party neutral reliable sources described Azerbaijan's claim that the Lachin road is being used illegally for illicit purposes as "claim" and/or "allegations"
See Eurasianet: "[the ICJ] also rejected Azerbaijan’s request that the court demand new measures related to allegations that Armenia has continued to plant land mines on Azerbaijani territory." [2]
See PACE: "Azerbaijan alleges systematic and large-scale misuse of the Lachin road for illicit purposes, contrary to the Trilateral Statement of 10 November 2020, which it claims constitute security threats. Without accessing the area, it is not possible to verify these claims. On the other hand, the suffering of the inhabitants in Nagorno-Karabakh, and the resulting serious humanitarian crisis, has already been well-documented." [3]
WP:PRIMARY. This is not primary. Multiple third-party sources (see above, e.g., eurasianet) have described these allegations. Also, in this context PACE is not primary because it is describing another distinct document; that is, the ceasefire agreement. Also, even if it were considered primary, WP:PRIMARY source states "a primary source may be used...only to make straight forward descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person access to the primary source" Humanatbest ( talk) 15:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Apollo (Helius Olympian) 16:50, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
All contributors post in their individual capacity, and their opinions do not necessarily reflect the official position of Opinio Juris, the ICJ, or any organisation with which the author is affiliated.[4], please see WP:NEWSORG.
References
The Trilateral Statement contains no provision limiting explicitly the use of this road to humanitarian needs.
Hello, am I correct if this was the old road and this is the new road (that is currently blocked by Azerbaidjan) ? Bouzinac ( talk) 08:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Armenia absorbed Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023. Does the Lachin corridor still hold importance beyond its historical significance? Either way, this article needs some reframing LbPirate ( talk) 23:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
Armenia,
Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
In 1923, when Lachin became the capital of the newly-formed Kurdistan Okrug, its name was changed from 'Abdallar'. The corridor constituted a part of the Kurdish autonomous unit of Azerbaijan, which is clearly seen on the following maps: http://www.kurdistanica.com/english/geography/maps/map-05.html (one of them is posted in the respective article). The corridor thus may have been claimed or controlled by Armenia within the short period of active territorial exchange in 1921-22 but never officially belonged to the Armenian SSR and subsequently could not have been "completely transferred to Azerbaijan in 1931." Parishan 00:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
The version by User:Vartanm is, despite being better than the previous versions, still a revert of what I consider a better wording. Let's compare:
Current, Vartanm version: "The Lachin corridor is a mountain pass within the borders of Azerbaijan, it connects Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh. Following the 1994 cease-fire agreement in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, it came under the control of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, although officially it is part of the Lachin rayon of Azerbaijan."
My version: The Lachin corridor is a mountain pass in the Lachin region of Azerbaijan, the shortest route which connects Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. Following the 1994 cease-fire agreement in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, it came under the military control of ethnic Armenian forces, along with other regions of Azerbaijan, although officially it is part of the Lachin rayon of Azerbaijan.
To begin with, "within the borders of Azerbaijan" sounds weird -- is California "within the borders of USA", or is it part of USA? The latter wording is more precise and preferred. Secondly, the indication "shortest route" (at least land-wise) is important, because it emphasizes and explains the importance of the Lachin corridor -- as opposed to, for example, "Kalbajar corridor", or "Zangilan corridor". Thirdly, the article is primarily of geographic value, and thus, when describing that the route connects one country (Armenia) with another (Azerbaijan), it is grammatically and stylistically correct to add "Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan". Fourthly, the preferred wording of in the English-language media, as well as Wikipedia, is "ethnic Armenian forces" as opposed to "Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh", since everyone knows and understands that only an actual state, such as Armenia, with an actual budget, human and financial resources, army, can militarily occupy large swath of territory. All relevant organizations, from UN to PACE to US State Department and US President, have recognized that Azerbaijani territories (Karabakh plus 7 regions) are occupied by Armenia (all relevant quotes were presented at length in the main NK article's Talk page last year). Hence, this wording too should be adjusted accordingly to reflect the reality and facts, not POV.
Also, this should be made part of the page, as it is specifically about the corridor and peace negotiations: "It is the issue of communication of the Armenians living in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan with Armenia and that of the Azerbaijanis living in the Nakhchivan region of Azerbaijan with the rest of the country. We suggest the using of the so-called Lachin corridor – which should be called "Road of Peace" - by both sides in both directions provided that security of this road willbe ensured by the multinational peacekeeping forces at the initial stage". [1] -- AdilBaguirov 04:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm warning you the last time -- cease and desist from placing your POV into the article! The UN SC (along with everyone else -- see archives of Nagorno-Karabakh page, I've provided more than enough references there) resolutions are very clear that it's the "ethnic Armenian forces" and also mentions "Republic of Armenia". Armenia's authorities acknowledge it as well, both by conduction negotiations with Azerbaijan and sending troops to serve in the occupied territories. This issue has been presented and agreed upon long ago in all other NK conflict related pages, so refrain from your POV and Original Research, and don't be putting some "NKR" in the text. -- AdilBaguirov 15:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Whether NK is de-facto independent or not is irrelevant to this article, and is a non-neutral POV unacceptable to one of the sides in the conflict. A more neutral fact is that the corridor is outside of NK and connects NK to Armenia via territory of Azerbaijan, currently under control of Armenian forces. Atabek ( talk) 13:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
"Lachin is scenically built on the side of a mountain on the left bank of the Hakari River." This is wrong this river is in the south of the country. I remove this. -- Io Herodotus ( talk) 12:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
I do not see a mountain pass (a connection over a mountain ridge connecting two valleys). The road comes down from Armenia on the western side of the Aghavno river valley and climbs up on the eastern side of that valley.---- Bancki ( talk) 12:16, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I did some work on Lachin corridor and 2022–2023 blockade of the Republic of Artsakh. I think the articles flow better now and the proper parent-child article structure is reflected better. There is some more ce and reference cleanup/fill in needed, but I wanted to post here (and on the other page) so see if there were any objections to the edits I have made before I continue. Greetings from Los Angeles. // Timothy :: talk 22:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Helius Olympian took issue with the following bolded statements which have since been restored since this editor removed them:
On April 23, 2023, Azerbaijani officials set up a
checkpoint in the corridor, claiming it was meant to prevent the "illegal transportation of manpower, weapons, mines"
[1]; however, the republics of Armenia and Artsakh have denied these allegations and the
ceasefire agreement does not explicitly limit the use of the Lachin corridor to humanitarian needs.
[2]
MOS:CLAIM: Describing it as "claim" is accurate since the ICJ and third-party neutral reliable sources described Azerbaijan's claim that the Lachin road is being used illegally for illicit purposes as "claim" and/or "allegations"
See Eurasianet: "[the ICJ] also rejected Azerbaijan’s request that the court demand new measures related to allegations that Armenia has continued to plant land mines on Azerbaijani territory." [2]
See PACE: "Azerbaijan alleges systematic and large-scale misuse of the Lachin road for illicit purposes, contrary to the Trilateral Statement of 10 November 2020, which it claims constitute security threats. Without accessing the area, it is not possible to verify these claims. On the other hand, the suffering of the inhabitants in Nagorno-Karabakh, and the resulting serious humanitarian crisis, has already been well-documented." [3]
WP:PRIMARY. This is not primary. Multiple third-party sources (see above, e.g., eurasianet) have described these allegations. Also, in this context PACE is not primary because it is describing another distinct document; that is, the ceasefire agreement. Also, even if it were considered primary, WP:PRIMARY source states "a primary source may be used...only to make straight forward descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person access to the primary source" Humanatbest ( talk) 15:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Apollo (Helius Olympian) 16:50, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
All contributors post in their individual capacity, and their opinions do not necessarily reflect the official position of Opinio Juris, the ICJ, or any organisation with which the author is affiliated.[4], please see WP:NEWSORG.
References
The Trilateral Statement contains no provision limiting explicitly the use of this road to humanitarian needs.
Hello, am I correct if this was the old road and this is the new road (that is currently blocked by Azerbaidjan) ? Bouzinac ( talk) 08:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Armenia absorbed Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023. Does the Lachin corridor still hold importance beyond its historical significance? Either way, this article needs some reframing LbPirate ( talk) 23:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)