This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Khojaly massacre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Khojaly massacre was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
Khojaly massacre is within the scope of WikiProject Artsakh, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Artsakh and Artsakhians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArtsakhWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsakhTemplate:WikiProject ArtsakhArtsakh articles
Khojaly massacre is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Azerbaijan-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 November 2022[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
"though as many as 500-1,000 may have died", should be "though as many as 500–1,000 may have died", utilizing en dash. 85.132.96.210 (talk) 10:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Howdy - Worth adding a simple link to BTR (vehicle) for the unexplained acronym in the first para describing the limited equipment available to the defenders. 74.96.123.134 (talk) 16:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Quote: "Political analysts and genocide scholars say that Azerbaijan's politicization of civilian deaths at Khojaly is an example of projection or a "mirroring" tactic which is common among genocidal regimes and here "involves accusing Armenia and Armenians of committing the crimes that it has committed or is planning to commit."
The following links were provided as references to support the idea of "political analysts and genocide scholars" accusing Azerbaijan of "politicization of civilian deaths at Khojaly":
The problem is that none of the references has any mention of Khojaly proper, let alone its "politicization" by Azerbaijan. Hew Karlani (talk) 08:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I double-checked the sources and indeed, there is no mention of the Khojaly massacre in them.
I am also removing the following sentence because Len Wicks, an Armenian-based Australian aviation engineer publishing for a news blog, is not a reliable source. The fact that Lemkin Institute, a so-called genocide prevention initiative, refers to such a source in claiming that there was no investigation of the Khojaly massacre when, in fact, there were two of them (one by Human Rights Watch and one by Memorial, both cited in the body of this article) speaks loads to the credibility of Lemkin Institute itself. Parishan (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He does not say any investigation (or report, as they are called), he says there was never an "independent fact-finding mission". Neither organization used this phrase in their report, and Wicks was obviously aware of the HRW report because he mentions it. And nowhere on The Blunt Post's about page is it described as a blog, it is a news journalism magazine.
As for the credibility of the Lemkin Institute authors, Dr. Elisa von Joeden-Forgey (leader of the research team) is associate professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Stockton University and first vice president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, and Irene Victoria Massimino is Head Professor in the Department of International Education at the Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero, Argentina and Stockton University. There does not seem to be any reason to doubt their credibility. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Len Wicks is not an expert on this subject. His expertise is aviation management and tourism: [1] How can this person and those who refer to him be considered reliable sources on Khojaly massacre? And as was mentioned above, there were 2 independent investigations. Both HRW and Memorial visited the region and talked to witnesses on both sides. So the claim by Wicks that There has never been a credible, open and independent investigation in Azerbaijan about what took place near Aghdam is false. Azerbaijani government also conducted its own investigation, if Wicks refers to Azerbaijani government, and not third parties. Therefore, Lemkin and Wicks are not acceptable for use in this article. Grandmaster 10:53, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Upon further review of the Lemkin source, it specifically refers to an independent investigation of the claim that Khojaly was a "genocide" (which is undue), not any investigation at all. Which is exactly what the source is attributed for, in a paragraph about the use of the word genocide and why it is incorrect. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any source that refers to Wicks, an aviation manager, is unreliable here. And Lemkin claims that "that there has never been an independent fact-finding mission allowed into the area and no independent scholars can verify the facts and arguments offered by Azerbaijani state authorities and state-supported researchers". That is certainly a false claim that has no place in any serious publication. I suggest to remove both the aviation specialist Wicks and Lemkin that refers to him. Grandmaster 08:53, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Any source that refers to X is unreliable" What RSN discussion decided this? Should Thomas de Waal, a Russian language major, also be considered an unreliable source (and all references by him and their attributed content in this article removed) because he cites genocide deniers such as Stanford J. Shaw, Guenter Lewy, and Heath Lowry? If you read the Lemkin passage in full, those arguments it is referring to are the genocide label. We could remove the Wicks source itself, but the Lemkin source is written by research experts. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wicks should certainly be removed. But Lemkin is no good either. De Waal is a respected researcher on the topic, author of the best book on Karabakh conflict. Not the same thing as this little known NGO that refers to a random guy on the internet to make false claims. And it is not just about genocide claims, Lemkin makes a general claim that there was no independent investigation at all, which is clearly not true. Grandmaster 08:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is not a researcher, he is a journalist and spokesman for a think tank, and has been repeatedly criticized for making false claims. On the other hand, Dr. Elisa von Joeden-Forgey is a true researcher. How can a university professor on genocide studies and vice president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars be "no good"? KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:21, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
De Waal is a researcher for a well-known think tank. Lemkin is an little-known small NGO. Big difference. Having a PhD does not automatically make a source reliable, especially if that source makes clearly biased statements, calling Azerbaijan a "genocidal state", claims that there were no independent investigations, while there were 2 of them, and refers to an aviation manager to support this claim. Grandmaster 09:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a strong argument to be made that Carnegie and think tanks in general. Again, De Waal is not a researcher or any kind of qualified expert in anything; being a "fellow" at Carnegie just means he receives lots of funding to write what he does. But I am not arguing to removal De Waal from the article. Do you have any source questioning the credibility of Lemkin or the researchers? KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does Lemkin have to do with de Waal? If you want to question de Waal, it is a subject for another discussion. Regarding Lemkin, it is too insignificant and little known for others to criticize it. But Lemkin's partisan nature is obvious, and a source that refers to an aviation manager to make claims that do not correspond to reality cannot be considered reliable. Grandmaster 10:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I already said, De Waal cites genocide deniers. It's the same logic you are using for the Lemkin paper. There is nothing partisan about the source, it is objectively written by academic experts. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my response to @KhndzorUtogh regarding his comment on the Thomas De Waal's competence as a researcher and expert.
Quote: "Again, De Waal is not a researcher or any kind of qualified expert in anything"-@KhndzorUtogh
I have found several links that undermine the upper-mentioned statement:
A major Armenian website news.am calls Thomas De Waal a "leading researcher at the Carnegie Foundation and expert on the Karabakh conflict".
We are not discussing De Waal here, who is a reliable source. We are discussing Lemkin, a little known organization that makes false claims referring to a partisan source. I see no reason why it should be kept in this article. No valid argument has been presented, the only argument is support was WP:OTHERCONTENT, which is not acceptable. Grandmaster 09:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Elisa von Joeden-Forgey (via Lemkin) is arguably an even more reliable source. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because she has a PhD does not make her reliable. We see how her organization makes inaccurate claims. Grandmaster 08:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A Google Books search of her name shows she is widely cited in a variety of different genocide subjects, and we have no source against her reliability. Do you have a source for Lemkin making inaccurate claims or is that your own original research? KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found some inaccuarate claims made by the "Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention".
According to Lemkin Institute, those who perputrated the Khojaly massacre was committed by "individual Armenians" and their crimes were "never supported by the Armenian state".
First, it totally distorts the historical facts of involvemnet
As a matter of fact:
Serzh Sargsyan (then head of the "NKR Defense Committee") not only was never persecuted for his crimes in Khojaly but even became President of Armenia.
Monte Melkonian (commanded the attack on Khojaly) was posthumously awarded the title of the National Hero of Armenia.
Manvel Yeghiazaryan (head of the Arabo batallion). The members of the batallion, according to Markar Melkonian, were stabbing the Khojaly residents with knives) received numerous awards.
In addition, I did not find any information regarding massacres in Meşəli, Qaradağlı and other places on their website. The information of devastation of Aghdam, Fuzuli, Jabrayil and other districts is also absent. Instead, they use the map of "Artsakh" as an object of "agression" by the Azerbaijani army. The map includes not only former NKAO but also 7 districts that were populated by Azerbaijanis and later ethnically cleansed by the Armenia and/or "Artsakh administration".
I have not found any information on the "Lemkin Institute" website related to the number of killed and displaced Azerbaijanis during the first Karabakh war. Supposedly, they hid it because the number of displaced Azerbaijanis from what the "Lemkin Institute" considers the terriotory of "Republic of Artsakh" was several times higher than the entire ethnic Armenian population of the 1994-2020 Armenia-occupied region (former NKAO+7 adjacent districts).
While ignoring, whitewashing the massacres of Azerbaijani civilians of Karabakh perpetrated by state-backed military units, they zealously use the term of genocide regarding the murder of transgender persons, which is indeed usually done by individuals.
Hence, I would not consider the "Lemkin Institute" to be a reliable organization, at least when the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict os concerned.Hew Folly (talk) 07:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This organization tends to act as a mouthpiece for ANCA, which is a political lobby wing of the Armenian nationalist ARF party. Why would an unbiased NGO share on its website content from ANCA honoring Karabakh separatist leaders? [2]Grandmaster 08:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since there appear to be no objections regarding Wick's unfitness as a source, I have removed the reference from the article. Parishan (talk) 16:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 February 2024[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
There are mistakes on the page. CIS doesn't have armed forces. The 366th Guards Motor Rifle Regiment was Russian troops under the direct command of the Ministry of Defense of Russian Federation. SantiniG (talk) 05:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jamedeus (talk) 07:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jamedeus (talk) 07:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)