Talk:Farukh

You cannot seize something that does not belong to you
You cannot seize something that does not belong to you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navruz azeri (talk • contribs) 18:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * @Navruz azeriIt is impossible to occupy the de-jure own territory. Please do not vandalise the article. If you in doubt about the fact that former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast belonged to Azerbaijan, then you can read it at least from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh_Autonomous_Oblast Zohrab javad (talk) 08:37, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Nagorno Karabakh oblast has never been azerbaijan

If you in doubt about the fact that former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast belonged to Azerbaijan, then you can read it at least from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh_Autonomous_Oblast --Zohrab javad (talk) 08:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 27 March 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Farukh → Parukh – Reliable sources use both names to designate the village, so I propose to return the former name of Parukh per WP:COMMONNAME: Parukh, Nagorno-Karabakh = 59,800 results, Farukh, Nagorno-Karabakh = 32,200. Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 15:10, 27 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Spekkios (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note for the closer – the OP (Գարիկ Ավագյան) has been banned for paid-editing --— Toghrul R (t) 11:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note for the closer – It seems like this move was requested more than a month before any bans. It could be considered WP:GRAVEDANCING to try to invalidate something they did before being banned. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 21:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Support – Parukh is the clear common name for the village, and the contemporary name used by the local population and administration. AntonSamuel (talk) 17:27, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. Switching to more common name would make sense, per the provided above arguments. The people living in the village use that (more common) name.  --Armatura (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, apparently it is not more common: Google search results: "Parukh" "Azerbaijan" 92 200 results, where "Farrukh" "Azerbaijan" 165 000 result. Thus should be changed from Farukh to Farrukh. Abrvagl (talk) 08:51, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Abrvagl That is not the standard method of determining the article names for villages in Nagorno-Karabakh. As consistent with Talk:Boyuk Taghlar, here is the conventional method per WP:SET:
 * Google Scholar Search:
 * -"Parukh" "Karabakh": 0 results
 * -"Farukh" "Karabakh": 9 results
 * Google Advanced Book Search (hide "Tools" to see totals):
 * -"Parukh" "Karabakh": 262 results
 * -"Farukh" "Karabakh": 465 results
 * Google News Search:
 * -"Parukh" "Karabakh": 5,850 results
 * -"Farukh" "Karabakh": 411 results
 * In summary, "Parukh" had 6,112 hits, whilst "Farukh" had only 885 hits. To reiterate my support comment, the WP:COMMONNAME is overwhelmingly "Parukh"; as evidenced by its appearance nearly 7x more than "Farukh". - 𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 10:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * where is the standard? Can you provide copy? Not including “Farrukh” “Azerbaijan” is illogical, as Farrukh is part of Azerbaijan.
 * moreover, as I stated official name is Farrukh, not Farukh. Thus following results also shall be considered:
 * google news "Farrukh" "Karabakh" 6180 results
 * google scholar "Farrukh" "Karabakh" 171 results.
 * above two, even without considering “Farrukh” “Azerbaijan”, are enough to state that Parukh is not common, the common is Farrukh, thus article should be renamed to it. Abrvagl (talk) 11:01, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: Just for the record google scholar “Farrukh” “Azerbaijan” 1100 results. Google news “Farrukh” “Azerbaijan” 8150 results. Google advanced books “Farrukh” “Azerbaijan” is 357 results. Abrvagl (talk) 11:13, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * As I see, Farrukh is a name of the person. If you take a closer look at the results of the sources, then you'll see that the sources do not talk about the village of "Farrukh", but about people with the name Farrukh. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I had a look, in few exclusions it found as a name, not considerable number that might affect results. Farrukh is majority in all searches, and Farrukh + Farukh is majority in many times. Regards Abrvagl (talk) 19:36, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I had a look too. Farrukh is a person's name, most search results of Farrukh are obviously affected by this. Even the first search results of Farrukh are people like Farrukh Dhondy and Farrukh Saleem. Between Pharukh and Farukh, Pharukh is the common name. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 20:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose According to France 24, DW, Al Arabiya, Yahoo News and many others, the village is mentioned as "the village of Farukh also known as Parukh" which means Farukh is primary. Therefore, the results for Parukh are exaggerated as a result of mentioning both. Also, sole Parukh results are mostly from Armenian or Armenia-backed web sites (see page 2). We have to weigh third party sources more in this care — Toghrul R (t) 11:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support - Clear WP:COMMONNAME per search results, article should be renamed. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support When sources use both versions, it's difficult to say which one has priority. In this case, we should use what the people themselves use. They know best. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Official name is Farukh, plus major news outlets are using Farukh as well, same goes regarding Artaskh only local Armenians use Artaskh neither international media or even Russian media use word Artaskh 91.132.192.33 (talk) 13:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note for the closer – IP  has made few or no other edits outside this topic. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 14:39, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Official name is Farukh. Reputable news outlets mention it as Farukh. Moreover, google search is a weak argument to say that Parukh is more common. --Abrvagl (talk) 14:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Official to whom? It's officially Parukh per Artsakh/Armenia gov. and Farukh per Azerbaijan gov. The people living in the village are Armenians who use the common name Parukh. Also, Google search results are usually used to determine a common name, where's this notion coming from that it's a "weak argument"? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 14:18, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree with Toghrul R. Additional regarding the google searches:
 * Fərrux kəndi 173 000 hits.
 * fərrux kəndi azərbaycan 115 000 hits
 * Abrvagl (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not English. This is en-wikipedia. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 15:45, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @ZaniGiovanni Then when we exclude .am domain from Google search, there are only about 14 thousand and 16 thousand results. — Toghrul R (t) 08:39, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * When both the AZ and AM domains are excluded, the majority of hits favours Parukh. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Laurel Lodged could you please link the search result regarding exclusion of .az domain and Parukh majority? By the way, Azerbaijani sources call the village Farrukh, not Farukh. Check the result, which is more than 57000. — Toghrul R (t) 10:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * They googled in Azeri language that’s why I said that this is the English Wikipedia and results should be shown for English search. Parukh is more common as simple as that. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Farrukh is official by international recognised low. Because this is official recognised part of Azerbaijan. Lets again look at Google. Farrukh, Azerbaijan shows 355,000 results. Farukh, Azerbaijan shows 611,000 results. Also the preconflict name is Farukh as per Soviet map of 1990. Wikipedia has consensus to name this types of articles with preconflict name. The soviet map of 1990 shows Farukh. https://satmaps.info/us/map.php?s=001m&map=k-38 As per rules name of article must be Farukh. Bu in the article can be mentioned first Farrukh as its de-facto and de-jure name and second Parukh as a declared by separatists. Zohrab javad (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Armenian name can be written on the opening paragraph. Mfikriansori (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose First of all, the village isn't as popular as most English readers would look for, so these results are chiefly made by Azeri and Armenian readers. Also, international agencies like France-24 and DW indicate "Farukh is also known as Parukh" making Farukh the main name and Parukh a secondary name. Moreover, the village has been controlled by Azerbaijani troops. AzeGeopolitician (talk) 20:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * — AzeGeopolitician (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 22:05, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a serious accusation. Do you have any evidences or you are just guessing? Abrvagl (talk) 06:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * About that.... ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:49, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per overwhelming WP:COMMONNAME. Not to mention for the sake of consistency in the trend of using Azeri names in the article name for Azeri-controlled places (Böyük Tağlar, not Mets Tagher), and conversely, Armenian names for Armenian-controlled places (Stepanakert, not Xankəndi). Therefore, because Parukh remains within the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, under de-facto local Armenian administration, the local Armenian name should prevail in the article name. -𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 06:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe after recent developments Farrukh is no more under de-facto control of self-proclaimed NKR. Abrvagl (talk) 13:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe it's best to wait until current events have unfolded before drawing such conclusions, current control is ambiguous, however, the last I checked, Russian peacekeepers (which support the de-facto civil Armenian government of NK) are said to have entered the village some days ago. In any case, in the interim pending the final status of Parukh, I believe it is safe to include it within the bounds of the NKR, in accordance with the 9 November ceasefire agreement. -𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 22:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Nunuxxx Depite the claims of the MOD of Russia, Azerbaijan officially objected to losing the control of the village. Even as of today, excavations are held in the area to find remnants in the area and this is coming from the state-controlled channel (AZTV). Nevertheless, if the control is under question, it should not outweigh the fact that the village is a de-jure part of Azerbaijan — Toghrul R (t) 06:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As mentioned in my previous reply, it's best to see how it plays out before jumping to conclusions; I think this is the logical and rational approach in this scenario, so in the meantime, it's best to assume continued de facto Armenian civil governance of Parukh until the crisis subsides, hence my support for the requested move proposal. - 𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 07:00, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Nunuxxx I agree with you on this; we have to wait until the country/control status is clear. In the meantime, naming NKR-controlled mountainous areas of Karabakh is done by their Soviet names (1923–1991) for stability. The village was called Parukh only after NKR control. You might like to check the detailed map of NKAO here — Toghrul R (t) 07:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose The village Farukh was established by Azerbaijani Turks (of the western Gokce lake area) when they were expelled by Armenians during 1905-1907 conflicts. At that time, the Gokce-lake area of the Caucuses was almost populated by Azerbaijani Turks. Armenians settled in Farukh only when Armenians expelled Azerbaijani Turks during 1988-1994 war. The village (i) being established by Turks, (ii) settled by Turks from 1905/7 till 1988/94 (iii) officialy part of territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, (iv) and this was accepted by the whole the UN are the reasons for opposing. Since Armenians cannot pronunciate "f", they changed the name of the village to Parukh.212.174.38.3 (talk) 09:10, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Fascinating. So we're agreed then. Since the population cannot pronounce "f", then the proposal should be carried. No doubt you'll wish to strike your accidental "oppose" vote. Not that anybody cares how an IP votes. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note to the discussion closer — Votes by WP:SPAs with single contribution to this page, or original research / personal comments not pertaining to renaming policies like WP:COMMONNAME, WP:MPN should be ignored. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 09:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Farrukh village located in the sovereign and internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan, and official name, which used by the 10,000,000 Azerbaijan population, is "Farrukh". Moreover, If we talking about WP:COMMONNAME, then we also shall consider following Google search results: "Parukh" "Azerbaijan" 92 200 results, where "Farrukh" "Azerbaijan" 165 000 results. Considering this search results the name should be changed from Farukh to Farrukh--Abrvagl (talk) 08:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support: Shown above, Parukh is WP:COMMONNAME per neutral searches of the disputed region Nagorno-Karabakh | Karabakh where town is located:, | , . KhndzorUtogh (talk) 20:52, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * as proposer per WP:UCRN and WP:MPN. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 06:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * (Already !voted, because the nomination is considered a support !vote and rationale.)  P.I. Ellsworth &numsp;- ed.  put'r there 03:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support - Socalled "Farrukh" is colonizer name. Support from iranian 198.44.220.5 (talk) 16:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note for the closer —  198.44.220.5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support from policy is preferable to support from iranian. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom and nunuxxx. - <b style="color:#d90012">K</b><b style="color:#000000">evo</b><sup style="color:#d90012">3 <sup style="color:#0033a0">2 <sup style="color:#f2a800">7 (talk) 08:39, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose it fails WP:COMMON as both Farrukh and Farukh are far more popular. Also, Farukh is internationally recognized as a part of Azerbaijan.Eminn (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Farrukh is correct spelling, Farukh is incorrect. Some editors compare only Farukh and Parukh, which is not right, because correct name is Farrukh and it is more common than Parukh. Abrvagl (talk) 19:19, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Farrukh, Azerbaijan shows 338,000 results. Farukh, Azerbaijan shows 515,000 results. Also the preconflict name is Farukh as per Soviet map of 1990. Wikipedia has consensus to name this types of articles with preconflict name. The soviet map of 1990 shows Farukh. https://satmaps.info/us/map.php?s=001m&map=k-38 As per rules name of article must be Farukh. Bu in the article can be mentioned first Farrukh as its de-facto and de-jure name and second Parukh as a declared by separatists. Also Farrukh, Azerbaijan shows 338,000 results. Farukh, Azerbaijan shows 515,000 results. Also the preconflict name is Farukh as per Soviet map of 1990. --Zohrab javad (talk) 08:12, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note for the closer — Zohrab javad (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. . ZaniGiovanni (talk) 11:14, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It is mostly because I mostly make edits in Russian Wikipedia. And I think the importance is not the number of edits, but quality is important. Objectivity, truthfulness, relevance, logic, accurateness of the content make sense. Zohrab javad (talk) 14:14, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Village of 72 people not a primary topic either way should ddd as Khnatsakh, Nagorno-Karabakh Farukh, Nagorno-Karabakh or Parukh, Nagorno-Karabakh either would do. Farukh (disambiguation) In ictu oculi (talk) 11:51, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support There is still no clarity that which is the correct name, thus we should revert back to the older one. --Yoonadue (talk) 16:17, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Yoonadue the previous name was "Farux". One of the users moved the page to Parukh recently, after more than 13 years <span style="font-family: 'Droid Sans', Calibri, Verdana, sans; color: silver;">— Toghrul R (t) 09:02, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agree with and . I am against politicizing Wikipedia. From my point of view, we have to use the official names which are using by the government that rules de-jure (accepted by the UN). Unfortunately, Wiki is not working like that. According to the WP:COMMON we have to use most common names. Because of the last shootings and e.t.c. in Farrukh we can find lots of citations. I read all conversation and can say that common version is "Farrukh" by searching results. But also we should write down there other versions as "Parukh", "Furukh" and e.t.c. - Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 19:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 March 2022
2A01:E0A:173:85E0:6430:DE3D:409C:EC97 (talk) 19:13, 27 March 2022 (UTC) Hello admins,

First - Republic of Artsakh not existing. Kohdjali and Askeran district are Azerbaijani land. So need correction.

Thanks
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Recent move
Hey, moving the article to "Farux" and the way you've rearranged the Azerbaijani and Armenian scripts and transliterations on the page is not an improvement of the article in my view. I don't think the anglicization of "Farux" to "Farukh" is really controversial for the village, the anglicization is a clear improvement of the page's readability. The "long-term"-name Farux was used when the article was a stub, using GEOnet Names Server as the only source, not taking into account any of the historical or political context of the village. AntonSamuel (talk) 05:32, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Neither agree nor disagree, . For the necessary revert back to the long-term-consensus title, let me refer you to WP:RMCI and the Wikipedia policy, WP:TITLECHANGES. Also, a read of WP:OWN is suggested (these are not "our" articles). The rest was covered in the survey and discussion of the move request above. It would amaze me if anybody would be able to discern a consensus in that move request. A no-consensus outcome in a case like this means that the article reverts back to its most stable title, which in this case is "Farux". I would ask, please, that any further discussion about the closure take place on my talk page – thank you for that!  P.I. Ellsworth &numsp;- ed.  put'r there 05:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC)