Talk:Armenia/Archive 3

Thanks
Thanks to all of those who supported me in my RfC, Don't worry Armenia is not in Europe, so says 99.9% of every reference book on earth. I am going to go for mediation, wish me luck!Caligvla 05:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Map
Does anyone prefer this image? Image:LocationArmenia.png the currnet map makes Armenia look insignificant way off in the corner, This page is about Armenia and Armenia should be proudly placed in the center of the map.--Hamparzoum 05:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I like the new map—it doesn't really matter if Armenia is in the center or not, because it's highlighted. Khoikhoi 05:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Something like this

http://www.metametrics.com/images/armenia.gif would be really cool, but it's not very consistent with other articles but hopefully you get the idea, Armenia should be the center of the world in this article.--Hamparzoum 05:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Are you claiming that Armenia is in the center of that (probably copyrighted) map? Are you kidding us?--Tekleni 08:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The map stays.--Eupator 13:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Did I say to use THAT map, NO! I said to do something like it, where Armenia really pops out.--Hamparzoum 19:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This one is just fine where it is.--Eupator 19:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Pēters J. Vecrumba (see Talk:Armenia/Archive_2)
This is only a fringe hypothesis that Armenians descended in Balkans. In reality Armenians came to Caucasus from South-East, not from West. Anyway, it happened many thousands years ago, At this time scale, all Indo-European peoples originated in Europe, which does not make them European.--Nixer 00:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If what he says is a fringe hypothesis, what you're alleging is an uber fringe hypothesis, hell even further beyond that...Welcome back btw.--Eupator 04:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah Nixer, good to have you back, I have been all alone and under attack!
 * Anyway, I have an advocate now, and the conversation continues here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Walton_monarchist89.
 * --Caligvla 05:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Straw poll-Armenia
Moved from << User talk:Walton monarchist89. - Francis Tyers · 12:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

NB This poll will close at 10.30 AM Greenwich Mean Time, on Friday 10th November. Please leave comments before that time. Walton monarchist89 14:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

NB This poll has now closed, it being Friday 10th November and about 10.30am where I live. The numbers are as follows: As such, no mandate has appeared for making the requested changes to the article. As previously advertised, Caligvla and I are taking a break from this dispute for a week. After this, the case may be taken to the mediation cabal, although I hope to avoid this eventuality. Walton monarchist89 10:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support 6 (although User:Hamparzoum's existence has been disputed by User:Tekleni.
 * Neutral 1.
 * Oppose 10.


 * Support: On the Armenia page, change this sentence Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe to this sentence:  Armenia is situated at a cultural, historical, and religious intersection and located at the crossroads between Europe and Asia, in the southern Caucasus.
 * Oppose: Leave this sentence Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe where it is.

Support

 * Support:I have support, for this statement.--Hamparzoum 00:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support:I think it's a fair compromise, although it may also be useful to include the fact that Armenia has a European-style of government and belongs to European political organizations. -- Augustgrahl 14:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support:I agree to the proposed change as it is written, The 3rd paragraph of the Article mentions that Armenian is a member of the Con. of Europe. In the politics section it mentions the type of govt. So I think those areas are covered. Thanks.--Caligvla 15:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support:I will agree to this, but it should say between Europe and the Middle East, Armenia doesn't have many links with India, Mongolia or China, but a large part of Iran,(which is in the heart of the Middle East) use to be Armenian property and there are so many Armenian-Iranians so it seems unfair to leave out this deep cultural connection. I will agree to the proposal, there is already an article on Armenian-Iranians so if someone has a hunger for more info. it can be found.--Craig Thomasian 20:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support but it also should be pointed explesitely that Armenia is in Asia. It is not transcontinential nation.--Nixer 21:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. For the above. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 16:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

 * Neutral for now. I've not seen good enough sources (though they may exist) that we need to change the status quo. - Francis Tyers · 12:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Strong Oppose The proposed change is very ambiguous while the current version is very clear and concise as well as neutral. The transcontinental portion already covers the "crossroads" issue in a much less ambiguous manner.--Eupator 15:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose While I do not believe that "Armenia is situated at a cultural, historical, and religious intersection and located at the crossroads between Europe and Asia, in the southern Caucasus" is at all incorrect, I still think it should be mentioned that Armenia is often considered part of Europe. I have no problem if the above sentence is added to the article, but I think "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe" should still stay. The two statements do not contradict each other, and so there is no need to replace one with the other.The Myotis 23:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per Eupator. I have also explained my position in other talk pages. (If the straw poll will be moved, i will vote there as well). Hectorian 23:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. Also, I think sockpuppet and open proxy checks are an absolute necessity for the result of any poll to be considered reliable, given this history of certain users around here in the sockpuppet field (e.g. User:Wordlytrin).--Tekleni 00:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, for many reasons besides the inane illogicacy--MarshallBagramyan 01:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, will this ever stop? •N i k o S il v e r•  12:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, no serious reason for change--Staberinde 15:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, and I agree with Tekleni: it's time to go to WP:RFCU. Khoikhoi 16:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Why replace ? --Lysytalk 21:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Eupator (and per WP:WEASEL) Duja► 08:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Additional Comments

 * This poll should be moved to Talk:Armenia and conducted in the orthodox manner. - Francis Tyers · 20:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Agree with Francis. Never seen that before in my wiki-life! •N i k o S il v e r•  20:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Poll was moved. - Francis Tyers · 12:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd be prepared to bet my monthly wage that Hamparzoum is a sockpuppet of Caligvla. I mean it seems to be a single purpose account entirley devoted to supporting Caligva's POV, and taking Calivla's place when he is blocked for disruption.--Tekleni 12:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This isn't a racetrack. If you've got an legitimate evidence, take it to RfCU. --InShaneee 18:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Since this appears to be at a deadlock, would any of the "oppose" voters care to suggest an alternate text as a compromise? There seems to be clear feeling that it should be changed, so the quickest way to end this would be to find something that everyone could agree on. --InShaneee 18:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * We are not deadlocked nor is there any "clear feeling" that there should be a change. I count 2 (the other two new user votes are debatable) vs 8, and if I were to inform various users of the ongoing vote as caligvla did (he didn't canvass just said there is a vote to selected users) we would have a few dozen extra votes in support. In addition, the existing version is already a compromise.--Eupator 18:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * "Debateable" or not, there does appear to be sentiment that there needs to be a changed. I didn't ask your opinion on who was 'right' (you've made that painfully obvious to everyone), I was asking any 'oppose' voters if they have any suggestions on wording that everyone could agree on. --InShaneee 20:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It doesn't appear to be so at all. Where you got that notion, I couldn't begin to assume. The Oppose header clearly states:Leave this sentence Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe where it is. When you vote for oppose, you are not voting against the other sentence you are voting against any changes. As for the debatable votes, i'm sure you know very well that single purpose account's of new users cannot vote. --Eupator 20:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I am aware of this, but the fact is that this poll shows that not everyone is happy with that sentence, thus some sort of change remains the best way to get everyone back on the same page. Since CLEARLY you're not happy with the current proposal, I thought one of the oppose voters might want to suggest something else that the 'support' voters might be able to get on board with. --InShaneee 20:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Have you ever seen a poll conducted here with a unanimous result? Of course the initiator of the problem is not going to vote for opposed nor would the two suspicious new users. So there is one actual user(Augustgrahl), and even he isn't exactly onboard with that suggestion. The only thing that will satisfy caligvla is the removal of this sentence. I can't see how that is ever going to happen therefore I don't see how I could offer a suggestion to satisfy caligula's demands. But hey, lets see what others say, if they say something at all.--Eupator 21:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Calm down, and don't make accusations. No, not every poll ends unanimously, but that doesn't mean you should just take an "I'm right, you're wrong" stance and ignore/belittle the opposition. The suggested new wording is what's called a 'compromise'; it's where each side steps down just a little to something that both can live with. I ask again, any 'oppose' voters want to suggest a better phrasing to help end this? --InShaneee 21:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm calm as a quiet sea on a sunny day, i'm not the one making accusations or shouting for that matter. As far as i'm concerned a "compromise" is not a requirement nor is there anything here that can warrant a call for compromise, not to mention that not all raised disputes are closed with a compromise. Like I said lets see if any of the oppose voters disagree with me here. --Eupator 21:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's precisely the problem; you don't see the need to make compromises when you can just dub someone 'right' and everyone else 'socks'. You could always...you know...give it a try this once. --InShaneee 21:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Is that a fact? Enough with the accusations already...--Eupator 21:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, that was a fact. --InShaneee 21:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Call it what you will, it still is nothing more than a personal attack.--Eupator 21:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, it's an explanation of why these 'discussions' always devolve into chaos. --InShaneee 04:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting that nobody seems to share your opinion.--Eupator 15:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oddly enough, it's still correct. --InShaneee 19:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You saying it's correct doesn't make it so. It's not a dictatorship.--Eupator 19:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nor does you throwing out attacks like that make it untrue. --InShaneee 21:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Tohmahto, pohtatho...--Eupator 21:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I know I'm a little late here, but it does seem to me that the whole point about this poll was to come to a compromise. The sentence to be added about the crossroads was carefully crafted in an attempt to be acceptable to both sides of this very polarized issue. It was soundly rejected, however, and it seems to me that there is no compromise that will be acceptable to both sides, since the argument is a black-or-white issue. If Armenia is noted as part of Europe, group A will never be happy. If Armenia is not noted as a part of Europe, group B will never be happy. You can reword sentences till the cows come home, but one of those impressions is going to be left at the end of the day. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 13:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Continental dispute
I would like to point out that I have adjusted the disputed sentences in such a way as to (I hope) satisfy all parties. Remember, the "border" between Europe and Asia is wholly arbitrary, and my version makes that point explicitly. DS 16:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me.--Eupator 16:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * NO! The geographic and cultural borders of Europe have been clear for 1000s of years, to call the border arbitrary is original research.--Caligvla 17:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * How have they been clear for thousands of years?--Tekleni 17:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * How can the borders have been clear for thousands of years when thousands of years ago nobody had a precise knowledge of the landmasses of the globe? Can you provide a source that has clear, undisputed, universally agreed-upon borders between Europe and Asia? -- Augustgrahl 17:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict)Calling the borders "clear for 1000s of years", as you have done, Caligvla, is too a violation of OR|riginal research policy, should you fail to provide a source. M a rtinp23 17:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is just Caligvla's POV pushing nonsense (the true "nonsense" around here). There is no universal agreement on continents even today (their definition can vary from country to country).--Tekleni 17:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you please give any source that defines the border of Europe such a way that Armenia cames out to be situated in Europe?--Nixer 18:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's an arbitrary boundary. Here's an example:Where is the border between Europe and Asia? The artificial boundary between the continents of Europe and Asia lies along the Ural Mountains south to the Ural River and the Caspian Sea and the along the Caucasus Mountains to the Black Sea. Europe and Asia are physically one great landmass commonly called Eurasia.--Eupator 18:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Another interesting link:http://www.insideeurope.org--Eupator 18:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Even if it is arbitrary, there is not source that puts Armenia (or India, or Afghanistan) in Europe. Most souces draw the line along Caucasus. I do not know other ways used to define borders of Europe in the region. If you know - please give souces. Is there any source defining the border such way that puts Armenia in Europe?--Nixer 18:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well yes. COE, EU and all member states, BBC, the Canadian government, the Armenian gov obviously etc. --Eupator 18:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Really? How they define the borders of Europe?--Nixer 18:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * With Armenia in it.--Eupator 18:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Where the border between Europe and Asia lies in this version? Or is Armenia an exclave?--Nixer 19:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not an exlave because Georgia is within Europe as well. --Eupator 20:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Georgia is only partially in Europe. Or according your definition all Christian states in the Middle East are entirely European and the border between Europe and Asia lies exactly along the state border?--Nixer 08:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I urge everyone to read this (including nixer and caligvla):http://www.libertas-institut.com This covers absolutely evrything!--Eupator 18:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Funny paper. The author says that restricting EU membership to only European countries is racism. No comments :-) --Nixer 19:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no such thing in there. It said restricting EU membership to "core" European countries is quasi racism. By core the author meant Western Europe obviously, read carefully. That's obviously history now since the accession of Cyprus and soon Romania and Bulgaria.--Eupator 19:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

From the above source:

Only European states can belong to the EU. The question is if Armenia is a European state. Those who say no can say only that its geographical location is in what is often denominated in Europe as “Smaller Asia”. However, there is a large front of pros: A restriction to core-Europe is today considered, after all, as quasi-racist.
 * membership in the Council of Europe
 * clear orientation of its population towards Europe
 * large consensus with Western European values
 * Western European civilization elements prevail
 * membership in many European bodies

'''Armenia is also in the evaluations of most geographers a European state, but “at the edge” towards the East, towards Asia.''' Armenia should not deny this, but positively display this fact towards the rest of Europe. The head of the EU Delegation for Armenia and Georgia, Torben Holtze, said clearly that “as a matter of principle Armenia is a European country and like other European states it has the right to be a EU member provided it meets necessary standards and criteria”. Also, the European Parliament noted on 12 January 2002 that Armenia (and Georgia) may enter the EU in future; many official documents contain this wording10.

--Eupator 18:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I know that Wikipedia isn't a forum, but would you class Azerbaijan as European? It fits many of the criteria you list above. If not, where do you draw the line? - Francis Tyers · 00:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not all of them, and those aren't my criteria. My criteria are very very different and I rather not share my pov.--Eupator 03:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As I have pointed out, all the countries of the Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) can be considered European. -- 00:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I would agree with you. To be honest I don't really cut much ice with any kind of exclusion. - Francis Tyers · 00:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, here's how I look at it. Armenia wanted to join the EU, Council of Europe, etc. (who wouldn't? It's a better market than say former soviet republics like Uzbekistan). The U.S. and UK are members of SEATO, despite not being in South East Asia or considered Asian. The US is also an observer to the Council of Europe, but likewise is not considered European. Just because Armenia wants to be European doesn't make it European, just like the fable about the mouse that wanted to be a lion. Remember: Mother Russia was considered Barbaric and Asiatic, even in its own projected self-identity, until Peter the Great thought his country would be better off Westernizing and imitating France. Similarly, I joined the Royal Society of Geographers (RSG/IBG) in the UK for their pretty magazines, not because I'm a geographer or British...and neither will it make me British or a geographer. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 04:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not true about Russia. Yes, it was considered something barbaric (before Ivan the Great), just as Germany was considered barbaric in the past, but never considered Asiatic.--Nixer 08:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You might want to reread your Russian history. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Which page?--Nixer 16:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is only one of multiple reasons for why Armenia is considered to be a European country; I gave a whole list of scholarly sources placing Armenia partially or wholly in Europe. -- Augustgrahl 04:27, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Your sources, and your criterion...don't work. You know, Angola has a lot of Western European elements that prevail in their culture...formerly communism (invented in England, transported by Russians, etc.), experiences of Dutch and Portuguese colonialism shaping their government, cities, economy. I don't see them being considered European. Same with Brazil. Still not European. Heck, even the United States....lock stock and barrel European in terms of prevalent culture (religion, economic system, political system, most of their culture, etc.). Are they? Nope. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 04:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The debate has not been that simple. There is a full archive if you're interested in seeing the arguments that have been put forth. -- Augustgrahl 05:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know the arguments, it's on you're approaching this with a blatant POV. I have no stake, and thus no bias. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not agree that Western European civilization elements prevail in Armenian culture. It is clearly unsupported POV of the author. I think that Asian elements prevail in Armenian culture and those European elements that exist are from East and Southern Europe. Yes, Western-European names like Robert, Harry, Ronald, Edmond are very popular in Armenia, but having European name does not make you (western)European.--Nixer 08:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know a Chinese guy named "Shmuel" that doesn't make him Jewish though. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 20:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The only chief european part of the culture is in the religious constitution of Armenian culture with its orthodox/catholic influences, as with its connection to greek. Everything else is basically turkic. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I dare you to name one turkic element in Armenian culture. Unlike Albania, Russia, Bulgaria etc. Armenia has no turkic elements at all. Zero.--Eupator 17:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If that's the case, since Armenia's more turkic than european, it must have a negative integer value of European elements. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 20:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Huh? Please be serious.--Eupator 21:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know about Armenians, but Greeks certainly have Turkic elements in their culture, e.g. Karagiozis. Now if I've understood the position of Nixer and CDThieme correctly, that makes them Asian.--Tekleni 21:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, that does not make them Asian. Culture itself cannot make somebody European or Asian. You pointed that Armenia has European culture and I dispelled this thesis.--Nixer 06:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How exactly did you "dispell this thesis"? You brought claims, not facts. There's a difference.--Tekleni 10:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The Cold Truth
Eupator and CO. have the POV pushing issue, if the Armenian Govt. is perfectly fine with defining Armenia as contained within Asia Minor. See http://www.gov.am/enversion/links.htm & http://www.armeniainfo.am/about/?section=people And yes the 2nd link may well be publically traded but content is still controled by the govt. Armenia is still a developing nation and still in the transition process from an controled economy. So, what is the big stink about?


 * Could it be that Armenia is at conflict with ALL their neighbors.
 * Could it be that possible membership in the EU would have great economic benefits?
 * Could the desire to be European, be an intentional backhanded insult to other Asians?
 * Could it be that the Middle East is not that trendy of a vacation spot and sharing a border with Iran hurts tourism?

If you want to pretend to be Europeans, great! It's a better way of life, and I am sure it will work to your benefit. But it still doesn't put Armenia geographicly in Europe and if you are geoographicaly in Asia Minor you are part of the Asian family of cultures. For generations, part of Nagasaki Japan has a Dutch speaking community with Dutch style homes, and people wear Dutch clothes and eat Dutch foods, They have windmills and if you saw a photo you would swear it was in the Neitherlands. But it's not is it? You are still in Asia!

This Article is not the place to push a political agenda, or a racist POV, it should contain factual information and avoid controversy. There is a reason why this site http://www.armeniainfo.am/about/?section=people doesn't say Armenians are Europeans, because it's nonsence.--Caligvla 22:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Armenia is not a developing nation according to official classification (all former Soviet republics were declared developed, but this classification used rarely at present).--Nixer 08:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Empty anti-Armenian rhetoric. Yes, racist pov is wrong as you say, help us get rid of it by ceasing to spam. What does your unsourced, unreferenced and baseless orignal research have to do with anything? And for the last time, the government has nothing to do with that company.--Eupator 23:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * My God, where to begin. Armenia is not in conflict with all of its neighbors, cordial relations with Georgia and Iran are vital to the economy of the country. How does sharing a border with Iran hurt tourism? If anything, I'd think the fact that Armenia and Azerbaijan have yet to agree upon peace terms to be the biggest factor affecting tourism to Armenia. The sites you provide neither say that Armenia is entirely in Asia nor that Armenians are Asians. You keep talking about how the notion of Armenians being Europeans insults you, Europeans, and Asians. Could you not consider the idea that your attempts to disown the Armenians as Europeans can be seen as hurtful and racist by them? Saying that we are "pretending" to be Europeans is nothing less than a personal attack on the Armenian editors here, and saying that's it's better to be a European is also racist. -- Augustgrahl 22:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Asian culture?
I keep seeing Nixer speaking of Asian culture; what the heck is "Asian culture"? Asia is not like Europe, Europe is far more smaller and homogenous than Asia. With a few exceptions, Christianity is the main religion in Europe and this has had significant influence in shaping the people and culture. As for Nixer equating "Asia" with "barbaric", LOL. I'd bet that the medieval Arabs and Chinese were more civilized (from our point of view) than e.g. the medieval Danes. In searching for a definition of this "Asian culture", I tried to find what cultural elements Arabs and Chinese have in common. Would Nixer care to enlighten me?--Tekleni 09:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Where did you find me equating "barbaric" and "Asian"? Just the opposite: I pointed that Garmany for example was barbaric at some stage of its history, but not Asian. Just the same Russia. It was ExplorerCDT who equated the two (different in my opinion) terms.--Nixer 09:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... good point (your post of 08:13, 9 November 2006). However you do say that "Asian elements prevail in Armenian culture". What are these "Asian elements", would you like to give me an example.--Tekleni 09:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. Armenia co-existed long with great kingdoms of Ancient East and interfered with them. Armenian language consists many Persian borrowings, especially related to government and politics. The Bible also consists some ancient legends related to Armenia. Christianity cannot be counted as European influence because when Armenia adopted it there were no country in Europe to confess Christianity. Just the opposite: at that time Christianity could be considered only as Asian influence in Europe.--Nixer 11:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So Persian loanwords are that which make Armenia Asian. I guess England is also in Asia, see list of English words of Persian origin.--Tekleni 11:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of these words related to Persian culture and unique Persian and Indian features. In Armenia these words became generic for the language and constitute the major layer of the language, playing the same role as Greek and Latin words in European languages.--Nixer 11:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's incorrect Nixer. You need do your research better. The loanwords first of all are not Persian, they are Iranic mostly Parthian and Scythian. Many Russians themselves today claim Scythian therefore Iranian descent! Again, the combined Greco-Roman loanwords wouldn't be much less (for example most religious words in Armenian are of Greek origin such as the word for Church which is yekeghetsi derived form the Greek ekklesin). Also 90% of those Iranic words are only available in Armenian and no other language on earth including any of the surviving Iranian languages. Now, that means absolutely nothing. Magyar is an Asian langauge entirely. So is Maltese. Russian alone has just as many Tatar and other Turkic loanwords. At least all those loanwords in Armenian are of IE origin.--Eupator 15:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, you correct, it's Iranian, not specifically Persian borrowings (although Parthia is an old name for Persia). Russian language being Slavic in no way related to the Iranian branch other than that both descending from PIE. There are very little Iranian borrowings in Russian. In fact that many Armenian borrowed words have unclear origin. They were borrowed from non-Indo-European languages. Magyar, Komi and Finnish belong to Finno-Ugric family, which cannot be said to be Asian because the majority of speakers live in Europe, but I agree the origin of the language says little about the contemporary culture of the country. What says much more is the borrowings which reflect the cultural impact in historic perspective.--Nixer 16:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Parthia and Persia are two very different things, but that's bdesides the point. Russian is closer to Iranian languages than say German or Italian. There aren't many iranic loanwords in Russian but there are many many Turkic loanwords in Russian and very few of those loanwords are a result of the Mongol-Tatar yoke but they are part of Russian ethnogenesis. We are not talking about Finnic, we are talking about Ugric, Ugric languages are completely native to East Asia while Finnic is both antive to Europe and Asia.--Eupator 18:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting. How do you determine that Russian is closer to Iranian than German or Italian? :-) And there are very few turkic words in Russian in fact.--Nixer 06:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Guys, loan words are totally irrelevant to this discussion. Contact waxes and wanes, influence rises and falls, common identification grows and dies.  The vocabulary of modern English is largely French, and while the Normans influenced and changed English culture a great deal, England is not French. English is still a Germanic language (loan words can't change that) but here's the kicker: England isn't German either.  England is English.  Armenia is Armenian.  Is Armenia European?  I dunno, but its loan words aren't going to give you the answer. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 14:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See WP:OR.--Tekleni 11:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See --Nixer 11:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What's your point?--Tekleni 11:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The Armenian language is a separate Indo-European tongue sharing some phonetic and grammatical features with other Caucasian languages, such as Georgian. The Iranian languages contributed many loanwords related to cultural subjects; the majority of the Armenian word stock shows no connection with other existing languages, however, and some experts believe it derives from extinct non-Indo-European languages.--Nixer 11:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So?--Tekleni 11:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See above.--Nixer 11:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Nixer, in your view, does the opinion of the Armenians themselves and/or their elected government count?--Tekleni 16:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, very interesting question. This is not neutral opinion, dont you agree? Of course this opinion may be mentioned in Wikipedia (if well sourced). As I already said Russian living in Moscow will say he is in Europe. Russian, living in Novosibirsk will say he is in Asia. And what will say Armenian in Yerevan?--Nixer 17:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's easy. Why don't you go to Yerevan and take a survey?--Eupator 18:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet, but the rose itself doesn't get to chose its own identity. Armenians can't fiat their European-ness by saying they're European. No matter how hard they concentrate on their ruby slippers. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 20:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

So what makes one "European", CDThieme? How would you define a "European"? What are the criteria?--Tekleni 21:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how he defines it, what matters is what the actual definition is.

American Heritage Dictionary Eu·ro·pe·an (yr-pn) n. 1. A native or inhabitant of Europe. 2. A person of European descent.

Do you want the full OED text too?--Caligvla 21:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So Caligula, based on that definition you agree that a Frenchman of Nigerian descent is European? :)--Eupator 21:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In first meaning - yes, in second meaning - no.--Nixer 06:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Eupator, this is not about race, I also find it odd you like to bring up Nigerians a lot... --MCMLXXI 08:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Armenia is on the cultural boundary of European and Near Eastern ( as opposed to generically "Asian") culture. Geographically it is situated in Asia Minor (SW Asia). I really fail to see how pages of discussion can go into such obvious points. dab (&#5839;) 21:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As long as there are xenophobes who can’t stand the thought of Armenians being connected to Europe, they will do everything in their power to push it the Armenians away, despite public consensus or any former decisions.The Myotis 23:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nobody says Armenia is not somewhat connected to Europe (just as most countries in the world). The issue is whether Armenia is European which is not true.--Nixer 12:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As I've said before, there are two POVs on the issue and therefore both get represented in the article (as is done at present, with including both Europe and Asia and saying Armenia is in Eurasia rather than Europe or Asia). You remember the statement of the Armenian Foreign Minister cited above: "Armenia is in Europe; this is a fact"?--Tekleni 12:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There are two opinions: that Armenia is both in Europe and in Asia and that Armenia is wholy in Asia. The second (the only correct) opinion is not represented. The minister's words are influenced with contemporary politics and intention on European integration rather than actual situation, geography and history.--Nixer 12:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, Armenia isn't really in Asia Minor (which is a peninsula), but otherwise, I agree.--TigranTheGreat 22:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * May I ask something? Is Armenia a member state of the Council of Europe?--Yannismarou 15:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. The Council of Europe (as well as European Union) is already trans-continental organization. The terrnitory of Council of Europe's member states belonging to Asia is greather than that lies in Europe.--Nixer 18:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Which goes to prove that there is no Europe or Asia as a static concept and that the border between Europe and Asia is only political and cultural.--Eupator 19:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It does not prove anything. Council of Europe is only one of regional organizations and accepts not only European countries. Membeship in an international organization does not make a country Asian or European.--Nixer 20:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You don't happen to have a source for that do you? Membership is only open to European countries.--Eupator 20:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Cyprus being Asian is also a member. And Greenland was a member in the past. Anyway the Council can allow exceptions from the rule such as in case of Armenia and Cyprus.--Nixer 20:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no wording in any official document that Cyprus, Armenia or Georgia are exceptions. Not one! That's your assumption based on your pov.--Eupator 21:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion
We shall point the following issues:

1. Geographically Armenia is situated in Asia near the border of Europe.


 * We already say that.--Eupator 19:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

2. Culturally Armenia influenced by both Middle-Eastern and European cultures with Middle-Eastern influences mostly ancient and European influence is more modern.


 * No. That can be said about every single country on earth. At the time of that ancient influence most of Europe was covered under a layer of ice and there was cultural and ethnic continuity between South European and Near Eastern cultures/peoples.--Eupator 19:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This is delirium. Ancestors of Europeans lived in Europe for more than 9000 years. The origin of Indo-Europeans is also in Europe. Most European peoples (i.e. Germanic, Celtic, Italic, Baltic, Slavic) developed from Battle Axe culture.--Nixer 19:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So? Here, escape the delirium Neolithic Europe.--Eupator 20:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * At that time there was no Armenia.--Nixer 20:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So why did you bring it up?--Eupator 20:29, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You said that Armenian culture was influenced from Middle-East only when Europe was under ice layer. This is not true. Armenia was influenced from ancient times, but also when clear differences between Indo-European peoples had already established. Do you disagree that Armenian culture was influenced with Middle-Eastern?--Nixer 20:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't say that, I said when it was exclusively influenced by the Middle East, Europe was under ice except Southern Europe of course which was under the same influence that Armenia was. That's because there was no other source capable of influencing other than the Middle East. And I don't disagree, the same Middle Eastern cultures influenced the emerging European cultures. Study Ancient Greek history. What do you call Carthage's influence on Southern Europe for example? Middle Eastern. And that's a very very late example. Egypt? --Eupator 21:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And when it was? When did Armenia exist while Europe was under ice layer? Give the certain date. And I do not disagree that Europe was heavily influenced with Eastern culture, especially with religious beliefs such as Christianity or Manicheanism. So if you dont disagree that Armenia was influenced both by European and Middle-Eastern culture and Middle-Eastern influence mostly more ancient than what's your objection?--Nixer 21:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * My objection is that it's applicable to Greece, Italy, Spain, France and any other country in Europe today that existed in one form or another at a time when it could be influenced by the Middle East!--Eupator 21:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * May be. And what? Do you disagree that Armenia could have something in common with Italy?--Nixer 21:51, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What? --Eupator 22:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You disagree with the statement because it is applicable to Italy or Greece. What is wrong with it?--Nixer 07:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, but what are you trying to say here? Are you just posting this for the sake of posting? What's the point?--Eupator 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Any objections?--Nixer 19:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Eupator, why don't you come up with a revised statement, as opposed to rejecting every suggestion that comes up. You wrote this line "Culturally, historically, and politically, Armenia is considered to be part of Europe." You wrote this line so I understand you are very attached to it. It's too bold of a statement and needs to be toned down. The weasle words that follow do not correct the situation. --Caligvla 05:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I thoguth you were taking a week long break from your anti-Armenian crusade, couldn't last that long eh? Btw, i didn't write that line, it was written by ldingley I think at the Georgia article, the same line alebit a little different is at the Cyprus one.--Eupator 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Come on guys! Armenia is a European country. Geographic definitions are not applicable anymore. Geographically Turkey and Cyprus were once regarded as Asian countries. But now nobody denies their European cultural and political identities. Armenia is even more European (culturally) that Turkey. Forget these old geographic criteria. Nobody cares about them any more. For me Armenia is clearly a European country and there are many events proving that:
 * Armenia is a member of the Country of Europe. EU has defined as European countries and possible future members the members of the Coutry of Europe. So the membership in the Council is the only definition of the European country EU accepts.
 * Armenia is member of all the athletic European confederations and federations.
 * What else can I say? Culturally, Armenia was always regarded as a vital element of the European civilization. Do you accept that Greece is a European country? Well, Armenia is as European as Greece!--Yannismarou 09:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And yet another Greek with the same POV. We all know that both Greeks and Armenians have suffered greatly from the Turks and that common bond has brought you close together. I find it nice you are such close friends. Yet, I can assure you the Europeans who have heard of Armenia surely do not consider it European at all. --Caligvla 10:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not only this is original research it is of dubious nature and delusional.--Eupator 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Do they consider Albania, Bulgaria, and Montenegro European? They had also been under the Ottoman rule and equally subjected to "Asian" cultural influences? Do you see any major differences with Armenia? Oriental influences and minor differences in racial appearance don’t prevent people from being European, I guess.--Kober 14:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And why do you consider Armenia European? Because of Christianity?--Nixer 15:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Israel also participates in European athletics. Over 80% of population in Israel support accention into EU. But we do not call this country European.--Nixer 12:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Armenia was the first country to accept Christianity as a state religion. Christianity is the core of Europe. Implications are obvious. Case closed. -- Ghirla -трёп-  12:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * At that time there was no country in Europe to confess Christianity. So Christianity cannot be considered a a European influence. Rather it was Asian influence in Europe at that time.--Nixer 12:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * By accepting Christianity Armenia became the first country in Europe to do so and paved the way for the rest. Christianity is a syncretic religion, based on Greco-Roman values, Mithraism as well as Semitic traditions. --Eupator 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Armenia became the first country in Asia to accept Christianity.--Nixer 19:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Christianity became a vital component of European culture and identity. Islam penetrated many "geographically European" countries, but never actually became part of European civilization. --Kober 14:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yee, and what? At the time when Armenia was baptisized it was not European influence.--Nixer 14:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Says who? You couldn't tell a difference between Armenia, Greece or Rome. People looked the same, dressed the same and knew the same language(Greek).--Eupator 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * At the time of Hellinism Greek was known in many countries, such as present-day Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, parts of India etc.--Nixer 19:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How do you define European and Asian influences in the 3rd century AD? --Kober 15:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What an improper comment by Caligvla!! My friend I said that Turkey is also a European country. So, where is my POV? And instead of searching for inexisting affiliations, try to articulate some arguments. And to Nixer: Ok with athletics! Is Israel also a member of the Council of Europe and I donot know it?! In this case, I'm with Ghirla; for me it is case closed.--Yannismarou 13:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please read the discussion above. Council of Europe is already transcontinetial organization.--Nixer 14:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As I proved you above already, it is not. Only European countries can be members of COE.--Eupator 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Such as Cyprus and Armenia :-)--Nixer 19:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You are so wrong. The Council of Europe is not a transcontinental organization. As a jurist I know some things about the philosophy and the principles of the Council of Europe, I can tell you that only European countries are accepted in this organization. Both Cyprus and Armenia are European countries. And after all Cyprus is also a member of the EU (European Union - Council of Europe). What is this invention of yours with the "transcontinentality"?!!!--Yannismarou 19:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As I already pointed, the territory of the CoE member states lying in Asia is greather than that lying in Europe. European Union is also transcontinentia and has territories in Europe, Asia and South America (formerly also in North America).--Nixer 20:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer, when are you going to inform the COE and the EU about your discovery? I suggest your start a letter writing campaign.--Eupator 20:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

"Yet, I can assure you the Europeans who have heard of Armenia surely do not consider it European at all." I forgot to comment on this comment of Caligvla. If some "Europeans who have heard of Armenia surely do not consider it European at all", this is their problem not Armenia's. And it is their problem because they ignore the history of their continent. They ignore the existence and the diachronical importance of the Eastern European civilization, vital member of which was Armenia. For instance:
 * Do these Europeans of yours know that even before the Middle Ages, even before the development of the Western Civilization the Armenians were culturally one of the most influential nation in the Eastern Europe?
 * They probably were influential, but not in Europe.--Nixer 20:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No they were influential in Europe and I can cite you a long catalogue of sources verifying that.--Yannismarou 20:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK. Arabs were also influential in Europe.--Nixer 20:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Arabs not nor ever considered themselves to be European nor did anyone else consider them to be European. So what's the point?--Eupator 21:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Exaclty! Tha Arabs do not regard themselves as Europeans. The Armenians (at least most of them) regard themselves as Europeans. So, they claim their European identity, while the Arabs donot!--Yannismarou 21:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Do they know that during the dominance of the Byzantine Empire the Armenians were one of the strongest nations within these clearly European empire?
 * Bysantine Empire (as well as Roman Empire) had possessions in three continents (Europe, Asia and Africa).--Nixer 20:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, but most of its territory was in Europe and its influence in Europe was tremendous.--Yannismarou 20:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No. You're not right. Most Byzantine territory was not in Europe (except the time near its end). And its influence in Asia and Africa was also great.--Nixer 20:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * But it was a European state. Peter Charanis even called a period of 300 years of the Empire as the greco-Armenain Empire. Some two dozen Emperors were Armenians.--Eupator 21:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not only it was a European state. Most of its territory was European, because for me Asia minor (where the roots of the ancient Greek civilization lie) is European territory!--Yannismarou 21:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Do they know that the Armenians were one of the most important communities in Byzantine Constantinople, a city geographically belonging to Europe?
 * Probably. And now Arabs constitute a strong community in Paris, which does not make any Arab state European.--Nixer 20:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the Armenians have historical ties with this city. They were not immigrants in the way, at least, Arabs are in Paris. They were integrated in the culture of Constantinople (Something that the Arabs have not unfortunately yet achieved in Parisd). Therefore, you compare different things.--Yannismarou 20:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Are Armenians living in Russia integrated in Russian culture? Are they immigrants? Are they integrated better than Kazakhs or Uzbeks or Tajiks?--Nixer 20:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nobody in Russia is integrated in Russia culture. Russia is a multicultural state.--Eupator 21:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If they are Russian citizens they are a vital part of Russia. The Armenians were Byzantine citizents and thus were integrated in the Byzantine culture and the Byzantine-European civilization.--Yannismarou 21:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Do they know that the Armenians being such influential within the Byzantine Empire were also very influential for the whole Europe, because for more 500 years the Byzantine Empire was the strongest (culturally and politically) state of Europe?
 * And Egyptians, and Ethyopeans were also influential.--Nixer 20:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No they weren't. Especially the Ethyopeans! You don't know that good the Byzantine history!--Yannismarou 20:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And how about Antiochians? Are they European?--Nixer 20:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Which ones? The Greeks? The Armenians? Or the Franks? --Eupator 21:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Antiochians?!!! Is there such a nation today? I really want you to meet me an "Antiochian" who claims and demands the recognition of his European identity!--Yannismarou 21:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

After all this how can you say that Armenia is not a European nation. Armenia is not just European; Armenia is a part from the flesh of Europe.--Yannismarou 20:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Is Ethyopia European?--Nixer 20:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer, you have the habit of answering a question with another question, usually a completely irrelevant one. It's not doing your quest any good.--Eupator 20:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Is Rusia European or not? I ask that because more than 50% of its territory is in Asia? And the fact that some European countries have territories in other continents does not prove that the Council of Europe is a transcontinental organization. If you say that to any jurist he will just laugh! You are the only prson in the world who regards the Council of Europe as a "transcontinental" organization!!! According to your reasoning, Denmark is also not European, because Denmark also has Greenland, but Greenland is much much bigger than Denmark itself; thus most of the territory of Denmark is not in Europe; so Denmark is not a European country!!!--Yannismarou 20:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Russia as I already said is a transcontinential country with most terrytory lying in Asia and most people living in Europe. Denmark (as meropoly) is European, but if consider all territories under Danish crown, we should consider it transcontinential empire (just as British Empire)--Nixer 20:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Your criteria lead you to false assessments. We don't just take a ruler and start counting territories to decide where a country belongs. We take into consideration cultural, politican factors that you insist to ignore. And that is why you caracterize as "transcontinental" countries with a clear European identity. Just tell to a Danish that his country is transcontinental and not European! By the way, we should also rename the EU. According to your criteria this is not a "European Union" but a "Transcontinental Union". Who were these stupid guys who called it "European"?!!--Yannismarou 20:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think nobody in Russia will be offenced by the fact that he lives in a transcontinential country. I do not know about Danes, but Britanians were proud that they lin in the empire that has possessions all over the world. If we talk Britain in narrow meaning (i.e.British islands), it is clear European.--Nixer 21:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Britain has its own culture. They self-identify themselves more often as British than as Europeans. But it is their choice. It is the choice of the Russians not to be offended with this caracterization (transcontinental). But you cannot impose the choices of self-determination of the British and the Russian nations to other nations who are European and want to be called like that.--Yannismarou 21:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It is so funny: I just read from the article of Greenland that "Though geographically and ethnically an Arctic island nation associated with the continent of North America, politically and historically Greenland is closely tied to Europe." Well, the Greenland nation underscores its European ties and we wanted here to deprive the Armenians from their right to say that "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe"! With respect to the altera pars, for me this is absurd!--Yannismarou 20:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Dont you see the difference between "tied" and "considered"?--Nixer 21:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I think the Armenians deserve a stronger verb than the nation of Greenland!--Yannismarou 21:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

What about Armenia
Don't you think this is starting to get insulting to Armenia? It seems that many here feel that the most important thing about Armenia is that it's "European". Armenia is ARMENIAN first! The Armenian cutlure is very special and unique to the world and one of the world's greatest jewels. We should say that Armenian, politics, culture, language, and people are unique not European. Europeans are not the ultimate people, Armenians are! I am very tired of this. Our culture took the best of ALL our neighbors past and present and made something better.--Hamparzoum 16:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:NOFEEDING--Eupator 16:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * If anyone had been overfed it's those who are trying to "white-wash" our culture. The winds of time have made us stronger, better, and inriched our culture. To show open shame for part of us doesn't serve our culture. It's it clear that this debate has nothing to do with Armenian's location but has everything to do with a small minority that can't stand who they really are. I am proud of who I am, all of me!--Hamparzoum 17:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Good for you :)--Eupator 17:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

National Geographic
I was in a university undergrad lib. today, I ran across the NG world Atlas. There is no mention of Armenia or Armenians having a European culture.

You can add this to the 1000s of other sources that place Armenia exclusively in Asia.

So I took photos of it for all to see!



It's time for this nonsense to end and remove the line about Armenia being considered culturally IN Europe--Caligvla 03:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It's impossible to read what the atlas actually says about Armenia, so it's completely useless as far as determining what it says about Armenian culture. Somebody could take that picture and claim the text says Armenian culture is European, or South American, or anything. It also lists Cyprus as a country in Asia. According to the Wikipedia article here, Cyprus can be considered European and Asian. -- Augustgrahl 04:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * CLICK ON THE PICTURE ONCE AND IT WILL GET BIGGER. CLICK ON IT AGAIN AND IT WILL GET EVEN BIGGER, THEN YOU CAN READ WHAT IT SAYS! Cyprus is IN Asia, look at the Europe template or every reference book on Earth.--Caligvla 07:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok. The text says that Armenia is a bridge between Europe and Asia, which doesn't seem to support your argument. It says nothing about Armenia having an Asian culture. Are we looking at the same picture here? -- Augustgrahl 15:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeap, it clearly states: "As a bridge between Europe and Asia...". Now Caligvla, it says nothing about history, culture or politics being Asian. What was your point again?--Eupator 16:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This book is also out of date. Look at the flags of Afghanistan and Georgia. -- Clevelander 15:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the atlas is at least ten years old, judging from the flags. -- Augustgrahl 16:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It doesnt matter if it's a 1000 years old nations don't jump around every 10 years. for the record it's 7 years old and the most recent version from NG [] Armenia is a brige, but that bridge is located in Asia not Europe. Get a clue and stop lying about Armenia's location --Caligvla 22:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Time does count when it comes to countries. When was the last time you heard of Prussia or Rhodesia in the news? -- Augustgrahl 23:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:CIVIL and WP:No personal attacks.--Eupator 22:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * There was no personal attack, however you have done nothing but lie and personally attack me, zero legitimate sources to back up your claims instead you have called me a racist, LIE, PERSONAL ATTACK claimed I used Nazi written materials LIE!!, PERSONAL ATTACK.

All I have done is try to improve this article by correcting it. I have cited countless well respected sources you have done absolutely nothing of value here. By your own admission you are a bully and loaded with self shame and are abusing this site for your personal agenda of hate. This should never be tolerated! You constantly bate people and game the system. Your violations are egregious and sardonic. I have posted this message in complete compliance of WP Rules see WP:IGNORE, Wikipedia will be much better with our your lies, personal attacks, bating, edit wars, wikistalking, disparaging userboxes, and hateful attitude --Caligvla 22:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Most people beleive you are a racist based based on hard evidence (your past edits) . Nobody will be willing to agree with you if they see evidence to suggest a sinister alterior motive. Those farmiliar with Caligvla know its not an issue of where Armenia is but more that Caligvla can't stand the though of Armenians being 'classed' as Europeans.  The Myotis 00:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey Caligula. Thanks for the source.  I think that reinforces the idea that Armenia geographically is a border nation between Asia and Europe.  (For example, WordNet also includes Armenia as part of "southwestern Asia" and others WorldAtlas.com consider it a part of Europe (albeit with a footnote:"In recent years some sources now consider them to be more closely aligned with Europe based on their modern economic and political trends."))  I won't comment anymore on geography, except recognizing the fact that it's on the border of both Europe and Asia, and this is bound to stir a debate.
 * On the issue of culture, however, I think that Armenia has historically been European. For example, the Armenian alphabet is considered a European script by the Unicode consortium (See the Unicode standard).  See Armenian_Kingdom_of_Cilicia as well for Armenia's role during the Crusades).  Nevertheless, Armenia has also been at a crossroads, with part of it belonging to "the West" and the other belonging to "the East," so it's natural to find cultural elements from both worlds.  In the beginning of Armenian history, the divide was between the Greek Empire and the Persian Empire (Armenia was split in two); in this age, Armenia adopted both Hellenic gods and Zoroastrian gods, often blending the two together to form an Armenian version.  Then the Byzantine Empire and Persian Empire.  Then Ottoman Empire and Russian Empire (strangely, during this period, the geographically West was the culturally East, while the geographically East was the culturally West).  During this time (the 1800s to 1920) there were two distinct Armenian cultural centers: Tblisi, Georgia (Eastern Armenian cultural hub) and Istanbul (the Wester Armenian cultural hub).  Clearly, Armenia has been at a crossroads historically.  Presently, its alignment is overwhelmingly "West" (European; democracy; Christian) and not "East" (whatever that is... Islam/Buddhism/Hinduism; dictatorship; theocracy).  My take: is Armenian culture European?  Yes.  Does it have Eastern cultural elements? Certainly.  Could it be both?  Perhaps...  Cheers.Serouj 00:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Armenia IS the lesser Caucasus mountain chain. The population is also Indo-European, speaks Indo-European, is Christian (yes, this DOES matter), looks towards Europe as its sister countries, and was certainly considered part of Europe on just about every map in Soviet times...  Armenians consider themselves European for the most part, though they obviously see that Asian influences exist in Armenia.  I vote that Armenia is considered a part of Europe for geographic, political and cultural reasons.  --RaffiKojian 17:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Is Ethiopia European? It is also Christian.--Nixer 06:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Obviously, there are a number of criteria. Religion is but one of many...  Other criteria include language (Indo-European or native European), alphabetic writing system (must be European), bloodline (Armenians emigrated from Europe to Anatolia), culture (Western literature, philosophy, religion, architecture), political ties to Europe (e.g. Council of Europe, NATO, Crusades, kingdoms).
 * Ethiopia fails the language test: Ethiopian languages are Semitic (like Arabic and Hebrew).
 * Ethiopia fails the writing system test: the Ge'ez alphabet is a Semitic alphabet, and not a recognized European alphabet (see the Unicode standard).
 * Ethiopia fails the bloodline test: they are indigenous to Africa (they weren't Europeans who migrated south)
 * Though Ethiopia passes the religion test (they adopted Christianity in the 4th century), failing the language, writing, and bloodline tests eliminates them from being considered European.
 * Armenians pass each of these tests, and are therefore Europeans. Cheers.Serouj 06:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How Armenian alphabet could be European? It is used nowhere in Europe. Ancestors of any Indo-European people such as Tajiks and Indians emigrated from Europe as well. Armenian literature is not Western (or did you meant that Western literature is popular in Armenia?). Armenian architecture never uses Classicism or Barocco styles, native to Europe. United States or Australia or Brasil would meet all the criteria you specified, but nobody considers them European.--Nixer 08:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * wtf? as if Australia and the US don't have a primarily European culture? --Danlibbo 09:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer> How Armenian alphabet could be European?
 * I think you need to do some basic reading on linguistics, specifically on the history of alphabetic writing systems: "Greek is in turn the source for all the modern scripts of Europe." The Armenian script is derived from Greek, therefore, it is a European script.  Also, have a look at the article on the Armenian alphabet.  If you're still not convinced, see what the Unicode consortium has to say: specifically, read Chapter 7 European Alphabetic Scripts in the Unicode Standard v. 4.0 available here.Serouj 09:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer> "Armenian literature is not Western."
 * Yes it is.Serouj 09:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer> "Armenian architecture never uses Classicism or Barocco styles, native to Europe."
 * Again, you need a crash course on Armenian architecture. The city of Ani had dozens of cathedrals (around the year 1000) when Europe proper didn't even have any cathedrals yet (see the cathedral of Ani from the year 1000, which still stands in what is today Eastern Turkey)...  In fact, an Armenian architect named Trdat built the dome of the Hagia Sophia.  Here are even more cathedrals (many before 700 AD) before the cathedrals of Europe proper.  The Zvartnots cathedral (650 AD) is of particular importance, as it was one of the largest cathedrals in the world at that time.Serouj 09:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Are they Classical or Barocco or Gothic?--Nixer 11:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * All fot he above and more. In fact Gothic architecture is native to Armenia according to Josef Strzygowski, Christina Maranci and many others.--Eupator 15:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Good question; These are all considered Byzantine architecture (including the Hagia Sophia). Baroque architecture wasn't around until 1600.  Gothic architecture wasn't around until the mid-18th century.  We're talking about 1200 years before Baroque and 1350 years before Gothic!  Try 5th century to 11th century western architecture: it was called Byzantine architecture then.  I don't mean to be bragging, but Armenians had master architects when the rest of Europe was in the Dark Ages.Serouj 19:44, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a photo of a mosque in Lebanon. It is definitely in Byzantian style, but nobody calls Lebanon European.--Nixer 08:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's not Byzantine lol. Also, nobody cares about Lebanon here but you. Stop bringing inirrelevant topics.--Eupator 18:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right! No one calls Lebanon European.  But people do call Armenia European.  FYI: Lebanese people write in Arabic script (Semitic alphabet; not European).  They speak Arabic (Semitic language; not European).  Their bloodline is mainly Phoenician with a mix of European blood from the Crusades.  Lebanon is not in Europe.  Culturally, Lebanese are Middle Eastern, with a good amount of European culture specifically in the Maronite Christian Community.  Grade for being European: F.  (failed language, writing system, and location.)  Cheers.Serouj 09:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Armenian alphabet is not European also. All the alphabets: Greek, Latin, Cyrillic, Armenian, Arabic, Hebrew and even Mongolian derived from one source: Phoenicean alphabet which is Semitic. Indo-European language group is not specific to Europe and Armenian language is unique in its own family which is nowhere spread in Europe. Armenians belong to Armenoid racial type along with most Middle-Easterners (including Lebanians and Israeli Jews). Your "grades" for Europeanness is completely OR.--Nixer 12:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Jackpot! I'm gotta save this one. Nixer you finally acknowledge that your underlying thesis is based on outdated and debunked racial theories. The last time the weord "Armenoid" was used in a scienticifc publication was 1936. If you like such quasi scientific racial stuff, I suggest you go to Stormfront and talk to the Armenians there, they will be pleased to tell you that most Armenians are Med, Alpine and Dinaric. Just don't mention to them your ethnicity. Cheers :)--Eupator 18:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know that many Armenians helped Hitled in attempt to prove that they "Aryan" or "European". Indeed, Hitler agreed with them just as he declared Tajiks and Iranians to be "Aryan". The Armenoid type is a valid thing (although in some works it is replaced with Eastern .--Nixer 19:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're embarassing yourself Nixer. Dienekes is your source for a "valid thing"? lool. What do Hitler and Tajiks have to do with this? What a joke. I'm not interested in that silly bs that has no room in Wikipedia, go to Stormfront and take it with the Armenians there.--Eupator 20:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer, you've clearly not been listening to my arguments nor reading the Wikipedia articles on history that I've been sending you. You are clearly a racist and lack any concept of history.  Please leave this discussion before you become banned.  You are wasting valuable bytes in Wikipedia's database by repeating the same arguments which have already been disproved above.Serouj 19:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It was your arguments that were disproved. Now you accuse me in racism. It was you who started talking about blood, ignoring the fact Armenians have the same racial type with their Middle-Eastern neighbours.--Nixer 19:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer> "United States or Australia or Brasil would meet all the criteria you specified, but nobody considers them European."
 * You're absolutely right (with the following caveat: they aren't European geographically, but they are, arguably, European culturally - and certainly by bloodline); I forgot to mention that the country has to be geographically in Europe. The United States is considered part of North America, geographically.  Australia is part of Australia, geographically.  Brazil is part of South America, geographically.  Armenia is part of Europe geographically; albeit on the border of Europe.  Thanks for pointing that out!  Cheers!Serouj 09:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Armenia is not geographically in Europe.--Nixer 11:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nixer> "It (the Armenian alphabet) is used nowhere in Europe."
 * Sure it is. Armenia, which is geographically part of Europe, uses it.  It's also used by the Armenian communities in Europe which have been around for centuries: from Venice to Marseille to Paris and to England.  Oh, yeah, and several emperors of the Byzantine empire (a European empire, mind you) were Armenians, including John I Tzimiskes, Philippikos, Leo V the Armenian.  Cheers.Serouj 09:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Armenia is not geographically in Europe.--Nixer 11:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're still beating a dead horse. It is according to many, it's not to some. Just like the article puts it. --Eupator 15:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You were given many sources that say that Armenia is geographically is not in Europe.--Nixer 07:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So what? You were given many others that said it is.--Eupator 17:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No one. Give please one source that say Armenia is geographically in Europe. Anyway the overwhelming majority say it is Caucasus mountans that define the geographical boundary of Europe.--Nixer 19:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Tons of verifiable sources were given. If you want to see them again, search the archives.--Eupator 20:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok. If so then why not to include both sources and say "these sources say Armenia geographically in Europe and these (map of Russian Empire for example) say it is geographically in Asia"?--Nixer 20:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * We're already doing that. NEXT...--Eupator 20:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You are not doing it well, the staments are VERY misleading--Caligvla 05:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * What on earth are you talking about, Caligvla? -- Clevelander 12:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

seriously guys this is getting ridiculous - it's in the middle, let it go --Danlibbo 07:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Khojaly genocide
The article is heavily biased and lacks NPOV. There is no mention of Khojaly genocide took place the night from February 25 to 26, 1992. It is very important for countries to acknowledge the facts and only the facts for historical events.Srhlg
 * The Khojaly Massacre has its own article. If you want to read about it you can go there. There's no reason to include an extremely specific event in a very broad overview of Armenia when the overall impact it had on Armenian history was limited. -- Augustgrahl 17:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Khojaly genocide might be a specific event but it is one point in the big picture of human rights abuses towards azerbaijanis and it is an ongoing process which is spread over many years of armenian history. There are many other "specific events" like Susha, Lachin, Kelbajar, Agdere, Agdam, Fizuli, Cjebrail, Kubatly, Zangelan and Goradiz which are quite important in a country's history and we need to talk about those to draw a neutral general picture of armenian history.Srhlg
 * This is not an article about the Nagorno-Karabakh war, and the rivalry between Armenia and Azerbaijan constitutes about ten out of three thousand years of Armenian history. Saying that the article should focus on negative things that were done by Armenians is simply pushing a POV, however you look at it. -- Augustgrahl 18:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Srhlg, the war is mentioned. Anything more than that would be silly. I mean even the Azerbaijan article doesn't mention it and for Armenia it's a very insignificant event unlike Azerbaijan. Both main articles mention the war, not every single battle or massacre during the war. It's like saying why doesn't Azerbaijan article link to the Maraghar Massacre--Eupator 18:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You do not have to get defensive I did not mean to offend anyone, I am just saying negative or not this is a main evet after the independence of armenia, we do have to acknowledge that, thats all. You might not think this is a big part of armenian history and I understand you do not want to give a negative impression of the country but that certainly does not change the fact that in numbers (number of years this events took part or number of people it effected)this is a major event.Srhlg
 * It's a minor event during war overshadowed my many other parts of the war, 90% of the population of Armenia or in the diaspora is unaware of its existence at all. The most famous event was the Battle of Shushi and even that is not very well known. Bottom line is that other than the fact that a war occured no other information is necessary to be included.--Eupator 21:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

If there are thousands of defensless civilians murdered anywhere in the world for any reason belonging to any nationality it is not minor. I am talking about human beings I dont care if they are armenian or azerbaijani...they are people. I think everyone should put their differences and egos aside and think about these events in humanitarian perspective Srhlg
 * There was nothing minor about the Khojaly massacre, it was a terrible war crime. However, the impact of the massacre was minor on Armenian history as a whole. There are only a few lines about the Nagorno-Karabakh war in both the articles for Armenia and Azerbaijan. Mentioning the massacre is giving undue weight to the event in the larger scope of things, and if we're going to mention the crimes committed by Armenians, why not also the terrible things done by Azeris? All of this can be saved for the article on the Nagorno-Karabakh war. -- Augustgrahl 21:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually you are right about the total impact part. I believe this is because they werent represented well enough in the international area thats why it is our job as objective people to be their voice... only for the sake of equality and everything else our religion teaches us.Srhlg
 * I think people in general are ignorant about the Nagorno-Karabakh war, and it's sad that such a tragic and devestating conflict which still threatens stability in the region goes relatively unknown. But, as I said, a more specific analysis of the war should be left to the article on the topic. -- Augustgrahl 22:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me put this into perspective Srhlg. The Armenian Genocide, which completely changed the history of Turkey AND Armenia, continues to cause a freeze in relations, and is a major taboo in Turkey, plus affected all of Anatolia and is not mentioned on the Turkey page, and you think that Khojali (one village) must go on the Armenia page?  I mean, I haven't thought about it one way or the other, but I do think I'd like to see you focus your efforts on getting the Armenian Genocide mentioned on the Turkey page, then bring up this possibility.  --RaffiKojian 17:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)