Template talk:History of the Republic of Artsakh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Kingdom of Parrisos[edit]

Was Kingdom of Parrisos real? because I cannot find anything. --Namsos (talk) 00:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

"Neutral map"[edit]

Brandmeister, You've added a map of NKAO. I don't think it is neutral. Prove Your position. --Ліонкінг (talk) 18:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The map is colored neutrally, like all common maps. The NKR image shows contested borders and unrecognized flag instead, so I think the first one is a good solution. Brandmeister[t] 18:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, as a compromise we can use uncolored map of the NKR. It is not principal for me. --Ліонкінг (talk) 19:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Must it necessarly be a map? Can't we chose an other image that would reflect the history of the region. After all the borders of NK/Artsakh changed many times in the past, and the borders of NKAO are not the same as that of NKR now, or Artsakh in the 7th c. --Vacio (talk) 04:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree; the NKR is not Nagorno-Karabakh is not the NKAO, so picking a single map is reasonably futile. --Golbez (talk) 12:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
The thing is that if we choose another image, it might represent either Armenian or Azerbaijani heritage, unless it is a landscape/nature image featuring local environment. Brandmeister[t] 16:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Seeing how the region has both an Armenian or Azeri heritage, a landscape may be the best choice. (Frankly, I would say go with We Are Our Mountains, but I suppose that has an Armenian tinge to it.) --Golbez (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Brandmeister we don't have the final desicion here. Or You thing that it will You decide which image fill in the template? During the discussion, please don't touch the template. As You see, I was the first who stop reverting and started the discussion. Thanks.
My preposition is to use the image of Tigranakert or Azokh cave as they are both very important from historical view. We Are Our Mountains also can be used as a symbol of Nagorno Karabakh. But as an architect was an Armenian, I think that Azeris will be against (even don't speaking that this monument is not for Armenians, but for the old people in NK). Yet one preposition can be Gandzasar, Tsitsernavank, Dadivank or Amaras. More new cult buildings have less historical importance (for example monasteries, churches and mosques built in the last 500 years). As for me, I don't know any mosque, older than Shushi mosque. --Ліонкінг (talk) 03:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I second Golbez's suggestion here. Yes, we can also put Azykh cave, but the only available image is not pretty imho. Other objects you have picked feature Armenian heritage. Brandmeister[t] 06:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm very pleasent that You recognise that Tigranakert, Gandzasar, Amaras, Dadivank, Tsitsernavank and We our mounains are an Armenian heritage. At least You don't deny it. I've got such picture for this cave. Cave is researching now and as I've visited it I can say that I haven't seen any beautiful views there. I can't understand one thing. According to the Azerbaijan propoganda POV the enemy of Azerbaijan is Armenia, but not Armenians who live in the NKR. So why we can't use the images of the Armenian heritage? Maybe You can propose any sights of the Azerbaijan heritage (except sights, which were built in the last 500-700 years as they are too new). I would have considered with interest your suggestions if they are. --Ліонкінг (talk) 12:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
The landscape image is good and neutral. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)