Talk:March Days

Omission of Preceding Events

Baku proclaimed soviet power only 6 days after the victory of the Russian Revolution in Petrograd. The Musavat party took advantge of the Revolution to form its own "government." The nationalist counterrevolutionaries carried out forcible disarming of Russian troops and killed over 1000 Russians on a troop train who resisted this disarming. Organized attacks on Russians throughout Azerbaijan followed. At the end of February 1918, the Azerbaijani nationalist forces invaded Lenkoran and overthrew soviet power there.Kupredu (talk) 22:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

"Massacre"

The story of "massacre" is a dishonest attempt to rewrite history. This was not a "massacre", but was a state of civil war caused by an attempt by Azeri nationalists to unleash a coup d'etat in Baku during which there were casualties on all sides. Kupredu (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

There are many third party sources describing the massacre. Many included in the article, there are more. Grandmaster 18:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Third party sources I've seen describe the failed Azerbaijani nationalist coup d'etat as an episode of the Russian Civil War. Talk of "massacre" is really a misrepresentation of history. Kupredu (talk) 20:29, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

There was no coup d'etat. That was the communist propaganda, but communism is over now. This is how historians describe what happened:

On the basis of the material presented above it is possible to state that the Soviet provoked the "civil war" in the hope of breaking the power of its most formidable rival - the Musavat. However, once the Soviet had called upon the Dashnaktsutiun to lend its assistance in the struggle against the Azerbaijani nationalists, the "civil war" degenerated into a massacre, the Armenians killing the Muslims irrespective of their political affiliations or social and economic position.

Firuz Kazemzadeh. The struggle For Transcaucasia (1917 - 1921), New York Philosophical Library, 1951, p. 75

Grandmaster 04:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Template

Fedayee, please, discuss your changes and do not remove the picture that's currently on the page. It's more relevant to the essence of the event - massacre. And observe WP:NPOV in your edits in parallel vis-a-vis September Days, where you claim exactly the opposite. Such position seems to be reflect nationalism rather than contribution to an encyclopedia. Atabəy (talk) 15:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Azeris' like their propaganda to be thick and heavy, the thicker and heavier the better. Meowy 01:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Focus on subject, Meowy. Atabəy (talk) 02:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

HRW about casualties

Now we have in the article this text: In 1995, Human Rights Watch produced a report named "Communal Violence and Human Rights," in which it stated: "In March 1918, in an effort to seize Baku from local Muslim forces, Soviet Bolsheviks made a pact with the Armenian nationalist ARF. In an orgy of violence that followed, between 3,000 and 3,500 Muslims were massacred

The Human Rights Watch refers to the two sources about this number:

1. Altstadt, The Azerbaijani Turks, pp. 85-87
2. Suny, "The Revenge of the Past," p. 29.

Let's see the sources:

1. Altstadt: By Shaumian's estimate more than 3 000 were killed during two days.
2. Suny writes nothing about the number of victims.(At least I haven't found)

As you see there is a mere mistake in HRW article. Since the article is not an academic source specialised in history and is not peer-reviewed I suggest to remove the text.--Quantum666 (talk) 16:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Peter Symes

The article refers to Peter Symes' article "The Note Issues of Azerbaijan Part I – The Baku Issues" The article is published only at his own website so the source is self-published material. The author is a specialist in the world paper money but not in the history. According to this I suggest not to use the source especially to show number of casualties which is disputed. --Quantum666 (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Dashnaktsutyun

If an author (Suny as Atabay says) supports a version, it never means, that this is a main version per WP:WEIGHT and must be included in the lead. And I didnt find any text where this Suny says Dashnaks were involved directly, its your POV, he just says some Dashnaks helped Bolsheviks. A consensus is needed. Andranikpasha (talk) 06:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, I am not sure why so much time is being wasted on proving whether ARF was involved, when every known source on March Days cites Dashnak participation in the ethnic warfare in Baku. Obviously, if ARF armed gangs participated in massacres of ethnic Azeris, and they did, their formal siding with Baku Soviet or approval of ARF decisionmakers is not relevant. But if you are insistent about Suny's quote, read the end of page 41 and beginning of page 42 with the link included: "in Baku, the political center was held by Russian Social Democrats (SDs) and Armenian nationalists, the Dashnaktsutiun (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) in particular. The Azerbaijanis identified Soviet power in 1917-18 with the Christians, and in March 1918, the city Soviet in Baku put down a revolt by Muslims with the help of Armenian nationalists." So as you can see, R.G.Suny defines Armenian nationalists, who he says participated in putting down the revolt, with Dashnaks. Hence is the connection. If you are doubtful, it would be rather surprising, but you can resolve your doubts by researching references. Otherwise, assertion from R.G.Suny, an ethnic Armenian author, seems to be sufficient of a proof that ARF militia were part of massacres, which would not be surprise to ordinary reader anyway, due to numerous sources and the radical nationalistic ideology of this party. Atabəy (talk) 07:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

As for me and historians, the radical nationalists are not Dashnaks, but Musavat gangs revolted against official authorities. Related to Suny, he says that "Armenian nationalists" (he didn't say ARF organization itself, rather it's some armed members in Baku, it wasn't party's official policy) helped (not equal to Bolsheviks-organizers) Bolsheviks in putting down the revolt. I dont see any mention about revolt in the lead, while most sources wrote about the events as clear revolt by Azeri radical nationalists. We cant misquote one part of the source and completely left another, so we need add the right term of putted down revolt to the lead. Andranikpasha (talk) 08:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

For you, of course they would be, but don't involve historians. The source clearly pinpoints to Dashnaks as stated by Atabey above. So, there is no reason to twist the subject. Tuscumbia (talk) 13:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, if you claim that the reference is dubious, provide reference to prove otherwise. I have difficulty to believe that Professor R.G.Suny is a dubious reference on the history of Caucasus, at least you are not in position to make such judgment without references. Please, come up with those references proving that ARF/Dashnak gangs were not involved in 1918 March massacres in Baku before further reverting. Atabəy (talk) 05:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

This is 21th century and your behaviour with users backing you and aggressive manner of pov-pushing are not allowed here. We're in Wiki not in a market or in the street. People used to be civil here and discuss in a civil manner! Andranikpasha (talk) 11:38, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Do I need to remind you of Wikipedia:Civility? Tuscumbia (talk) 13:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

So did you read it? [1] Andranikpasha (talk) 14:01, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

You had a doubt and received a proper explanation from another user. I represent not myself, but my opinion and it was reflected on on this page. You can keep doubting the addition all you want, but it doesn't mean it has to prevent the sourced addition of text. Thank you. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I had and I HAVE a doubt. When there is a discussion between A and B users, it means they are two sides who're trying to made a consensus on something. If you believe A or B are right, it's fine, but it never means the discussion ends as soon as a C user supports one of sides. I still have doubts and you don't want to discuss the matter, but aggressively deleting my tags. It's not a fighting, nor Atabay is so weak to call a 'boy' to back him. If you have opinion, discuss here, all other actions and aggressive reverts are against WP:CIVIL. Andranikpasha (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, you are engaging in an irrelevant discussion, focusing on contributors, and violating WP:CIVIL, attempting to create edit conflicts where they really do not exist. I only asked you to kindly provide references proving that R.G.Suny reference is dubious. Again participation of Dashnak gangs in 1918 March massacres was never questioned by any scholar on this subject. Since you are not in a position to challenge expert scholars, unless proven otherwise by proof of qualifications, all I ask you is to provide references to your view. I guess this is more constructive than inserting tags that don't lead anywhere. Atabəy (talk) 16:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

You didnt answer my questions. What you're adding is a clear misquoting, your personal explanation of Suny. SOme armed people's from ARF helped Bolsheviks in putting down the revolt, it means there wasn't a conflict, but a putted down revolt by Muslim gangs. And your text about "a political power struggle between Bolsheviks and Armenian Revolutionary Federation" is an original research, no sources say ARF were in struggle for political power, historically they never were in political power, they just helped bolsheviks, who included ethnical Azeris, Georgians, etc. You have no sources on nonsense, you're adding, this is not supported by your source. Bolsheviks were the ruling political power in Baku in March 1918, there are hundreds of sources on this obvious fact [2][3][4](the last source also calls the events a suppressed revolt). Noone mentions ARF members as equal (not helping) side. Andranikpasha (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, no one doubts that Bolsheviks were ruling power, which is why they are mentioned as perpetrators of massacre. After all, Stepan Shahumian, an ethnic Armenian, directly facilitated this mass slaughter of Azeris despite the warnings from his leader V.I.Lenin to keep calm under control. But the massacre was undoubtedly and indiscriminately executed by Dashnak militias. Here is another proof from Thomas De Waal 2010 publication, which I added to the article:

• De Waal, Thomas (2010). The Caucasus: An Introduction. Oxford University Press. pp. 62. ISBN 0195399765. http://books.google.com/books?id=6X745rS5Ci8C&pg=PA62. "In the so called March Days of 1918, Baku descended into a mini-civil war, after the Bolsheviks declared war on Musavat Party and then stood by as Dashnak militias rampaged through the city, killing Azerbaijanis indiscriminately"

I encourage you to accept the fact affirmed by several scholars so that we can remove irrelevant tags and move on to other constructive contributions to this article. Atabəy (talk) 17:19, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

All of this is irrelevant to discussion! Do you know that Shahumian was called by Heidar Aliev "a son of Azerbaijani people" (Алиев Г.А. «Мужественный борец за дело Ленина, за коммунизм: к 100-летию со дня рождения С.Г. Шаумяна». Баку, 1978 г., стр. 26)? You respected them for decades, what happened now? Shahumyan was a Bolshevik, not a Dashnak, and another Bolshevik comrade of Shahumian, Azeri Meshadi Azizbekov was a member of Communa and one of suppressors of Azeri uprising (see an academic source on this [5]). What pro-Azeri journalist says, rather supports my suggestions, then yours. ARF officially nor formally never participated in these events, only a group of members from Baku possible in their own decision (no parti decision on this). So no need for pov-pushing. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

For the purpose of this article, it does not matter what Aliev called Shahumian and emotional debate about who respected whom is irrelevant to the topic. This is an article about March Days of 1918, a.k.a. the massacre (or genocide) of ethnic Azerbaijanis committed by Armenian Dashnak militia and Bolsheviks. I don't see how the membership of Azizbekov in Commune, or Aliev's words on Shahumian, etc. are supposed to change the historical fact expressed by so many scholars over and over. Atabəy (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

The myth about "Azeri genocide" is nothing but a propagand by Azeri sources. No any reliable source call it a genocide, but many of them call it a suppressed revolt. This is not Azeri Wikipedia, not a good place for Azeri falsifications and your emotional debates if suppressed Azeri gangs and nationalists were martyrs. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Here is a reliable source by Sergei Markedonov on the myth of "Azeri genocide" [6]. Very useful against Azeri falsifications on "mythical genocide" cited here. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, the fact of 1918 March Azeri genocide (as termed by Azerbaijanis and spelled out so in the article) being questioned by generally pro-Armenian political analyst Markedonov is irrelevant to the subject of our discussion. The primary reason for the debate is your insertion of neutrality or dubious ref tags questioning the fact of Dashnak participation in the massacres. So far you have been proven otherwise with strong references, like Thomas de Waal, hence the tags are irrelevant and should be removed. Unless you can prove De Waal wrong and provide your qualification to question the scholar. Atabəy (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

You're not right. The issue is not only Dashnaks (I putted a NPOV tag for the whole article). The lead is a whole POV and must be rewritten according to represented sources (see the next chapter). Andranikpasha (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Please, place the tag in specific area where you disagree without being obviously proven otherwise. The intro is full of neutral references to deem NPOV tag inapplicable already. Atabəy (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality of the lead

Massacred vs killed, conflict vs suppressed uprising

The article's lead needs to be rewritten according to reliable sources:

• "Muslims in Baku revolted in March 1918, but their uprising was suppressed by the city's Armenians". (World and Its Peoples:

The Middle East, Western Asia, and Northern Africa, by Marshall Cavendish, 2006, p. 786)

• "The Baku Soviet took the lead in a counter-offensive, the clashes escalating steadily until March 31, when,"
• "After crushing a Muslim revolt in the city, the Bolshevik-led government, with its small Red Guard, was forced to rely on Armenian troops led by Dashnak officers". (The revenge of the past: nationalism, revolution, and the collapse of the Soviet Union, by Ronald Grigor Suny, 1993, p. 42)
• "in March 1918 Azerbaijanis revolted against the Baku Commune".(pro Azeri author Thomas de Waal, Black garden:

Armenia and Azerbaijan through peace and war, p. 100)

• "The oil-rich city of Baku had emerged as a stronghold of Bolshevism shortly after the October Russian Revolution, and friction between the Bolsheviks and the pan-Turkic Musavat party sparked a brief civil war in March 1918." (The Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict: causes and implications - by Michael P. Croissant - 1998, p. 14)
• "Soviet government established in Baku 1918 March: Bolshevik supporters resist nationals in Azerbaijan". (The Caucasian republics - by Margaret Kaeter - 2004, p. 147)
• "Muslim revolt earlier in March" (A diplomatic history of the Caspian Sea: treaties, diaries, and other stories, by Guive Mirfendereski, 2001, p. 99)

(may be continued) Andranikpasha (talk) 17:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Again, no one doubts that Bolsheviks called it a revolt and were perpetrators of massacre. But the executors were ARF Dashnaks. Pay a closer attention to Thomas De Waal's exact wording: Dashnak militias rampaged through the city, killing Azerbaijanis indiscriminately

• De Waal, Thomas (2010). The Caucasus: An Introduction. Oxford University Press. pp. 62. ISBN 0195399765. http://books.google.com/books?id=6X745rS5Ci8C&pg=PA62. "In the so called March Days of 1918, Baku descended into a mini-civil war, after the Bolsheviks declared war on Musavat Party and then stood by as Dashnak militias rampaged through the city, killing Azerbaijanis indiscriminately"

Buttino, Marco (1993). In a collapsing empire:underdevelopment, ethnic conflicts and nationalisms in the Soviet Union Volume 28. Feltrinelli Editor. pp. 176. ISBN 8807990482. http://books.google.com/books?id=t5HKjm6vs3YC&pg=PA176. ""Violence increased during the Civil War, with massacres of Azeri Turks - by the combined forced of Armenian Dashnaktsutiun party and the Bolsheviks""

Thanks. Atabəy (talk) 17:34, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

"no one doubts that Bolsheviks called it a revolt" - I represented only third-party, reliable sources. I see no bolshevik sources here!

the executors were ARF Dashnaks - "Dashnaks" differs from "Dashnaktsutyun", and the "executor" (any sources for this description?) differs from the "side of political struggle". The text you added was not about "the executors were ARF Dashnaks", it's a different accusation.

both sources you represent use the "civil war" term. I don't see it in the lead, as well as "suppressed uprisig" term per many sources I represented. The article is one-sided and POV. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

For the purpose of the subject, ARF Dashnaks means members of Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutiun. I am not sure why this is being debated, as if ARF Dashnaks represent some other party or group. As far as civil war and suppressed uprising wording, this achingly reminds me Armenian Genocide article where, for some reason, usage of such terminology is strictly prevented. Not to mention the fact that, for some reason, the wording used there does not seem to raise concerns on your behalf while being equally part of civil war and uprising. I wonder why it is exactly when coming down to massacre of Azeris the concern is being raised with your repeated denial of facts despite multitude of presented references? Atabəy (talk) 17:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

"ARF Dashnaks means members of Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutiun" - right. Members, not the party. If a hundred of Musavatists killed a number of Russians in Ganja, it is not equal if they were killed by Musavat's decision or by it's responsibility. Some Musavatists killes, not Musavat. Aliev was a communist, it doesn't mean the party was responsible for his behaviour.

"usage of such terminology is strictly prevented" - could you cite the relevant wiki rule?

"your repeated denial of facts despite multitude of presented references" - all the sources we discussed untill now were adopted by me, I have nothing against their direct citiations, I just object you permanent misinterpretations and "comments". Wikipedia is not a personal site, our understanding of sources is not so important, as direct citations. They must be used in this article per Wiki rules to represent a neutral pov. Andranikpasha (talk) 18:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, again, Dashnaksutiun members participated, and according to Thomas de Waal, spearheaded the massacres of Azeris in March 1918, do you deny this fact or not? If you do not, then it is quite appropriate to say in English that Bolsheviks and ARF Dashnaktsutiun were on one side of the conflict, first driven by political objective, the other driven by pure nationalist hatred. Atabəy (talk) 18:10, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Since when Thomas de Waal is pro-Azeri and what basis do you have to put this in article text! I think your editing is way out of WP:POV and WP:OR, and along with prior violations WP:CIVIL requires administrative attention. Atabəy (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Intro

I modified the introduction of the article, formatting/fixing all references per Wiki templates and added precise Google books links and quotes. I removed reference to NY Times 1918 source, and the later 1920 NY Times source mentions the figure of 12,000, much like all other sources, therefore is more reliable and confident than initial 1918 estimate in AP article. Atabəy (talk) 16:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

And Andranikpasha again did a wholesale revert messing up all the formatted references. So much for contribution to encyclopedia. Atabəy (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Do not remove sourced material and push your pov. Not "few sources", all reliable sources call the events a revolt and civil war. No reliable source on genocide myth by azeri governmnt, and Sergei Markedonovs criticism I represented earlier. Andranikpasha (talk) 17:49, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Andranikpasha, this is your 5th violation of 1RR/week on this article:

• 1. The article text clearly says that Azerbaijan considers it a genocide (not other sources), while few (so far only one, non-scholarly Marshall Cavendish source, where you took the text out of context too) claim it part of civil war/unrest. I would, in this case, draw a comparison with Armenian Genocide article, where "genocide" vs. "civil unrest" does not seem to be an issue for you, is it?
• 2. Markedonov is not particularly an expert on history, though I am not sure what your quoting of him has to do with essence of what we are discussing, let alone be a reason for endless reverts in violation of 1RR rule.
• 3. Your wholesale revert actually removes some valuable references and formatted material in favor of nationalist WP:POV pushed in encyclopedic article, and for what reason - to deny someone else's loss. All this bickering with numbers, attempts to cook up the lowest available threshold figure of Azeri victims out of any source you can find in scholarship, has a single purpose - deny the fact that happened.

Whether 3,000, 12,000 or whatever, whether called genocide, massacre or civil unrest, whether victims are called Azeri or Muslim, it's a fact that from March 30 to April 2, 1918 Bolshevik Baku Soviet led by ethnic Armenian, Stepan Shahumian, in cooperation with armed Armenian ARF Dashnak militia (as proven with multitude of references) have conducted a systematic massacre against civilian Azeri/Muslim population of Baku with the aim of diminishing/annihilating/destroying that part of population to reassert their power. The article is built around this fact. Please, keep it in mind before trying to remove or reword another piece of reference, in violation of 1RR rule. Atabəy (talk) 21:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Baku during March 1918 experienced civil unrest during which counter-revolutionary Muslim forces e.g. Savage Division and right-wing elements of the Musavat conspired to seize power in the city and displace the Baku Soviet Government, composed of a coalition of Bolsheviks, Socialist Revolutionaries, Mensheviks, as well as left-wing sections of the Armenian and Muslim communities. In the lead-up to the civil war events, there was the massacre of Russian soldiers in Shamkhor on the railways, aggressive events in Lenkoran and Mugan, and above all the the killing of Soviet representatives by the Savage Division aboard the Evelina. Professor Suny in his scholarly book "The Baku Commune", published by Princeton University, has an entire book chapter about "March Days" that goes into detail about the conflict, which was essentially a civil war between rival actors. This is a peer-reviewed, scholarly book published by a University and written by a leading expert on the region, and is unassailable.

It's also a bit of a distortion to cast events in Baku as "massacres" and "genocide" against Muslims when in fact there were ethnic and political divisions between the Muslims, as Suny states. Many Muslims supported the Baku Soviet, represented by the Hummet and Socialist-Revolutionaries. Large numbers of Muslim workers in Balakhany and Romany avoided the battles, while the Persian workers entirely refused to take sides. Suny writes, "It may be said most accurately that the soviet defended itself against the national counterrevolution with the aid of an opposing natinoal group. The end result of this maneuver was to put the Left bloc in power and establish a Soviet commune." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.191.230.178 (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Tuscumbia's edit

Tuscumbia's allegation about my removing "massacres" of Muslims is not true. For example, my version has details about the claims of massacres.

Azerbaijani accounts of the time claim that 12,000 Azerbaijanis were killed during the March events. In 1919, the Peace Delegation of the Republic of Caucasian Azerbaijan presented to the Peace Conference in Paris: "In that bloodthirsty episode, which had such fatal effects upon the Muslims, the principal part was played by the Armenians, who were then in Baku, clustering as elsewhere around their nationalist party [ARF]... The truth is that the Armenians under the guise of Bolshevism, rushed on the Muslims and massacred during a few frightful days more than 12,000 people, many of whom were old men, women, and children.

Whereas Tuscumbia's reversions deletes the fact of the Shamkhor Massacre against Russian soldiers in January 1918, the aggressive moves of the Evelina in March, the details of interaction between Shahumyan and Dzhaparidze with the Muslim representatives, and the fact that large numbers of Muslims either supported the Soviet or remained passive. This is unacceptable.