Talk:Tasy Verst

Recent move from Tasy Verst to Onverst
Hey again, as I stated earlier, move discussions are usually the best way to go for Nagorno-Karabakh villages. It is the general recommendation for potentially controversial moves - see WP:RM, which many if not most pages connected to Nagorno-Karabakh and the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict are. There are many factors to consider, what reliable sources (if available) call the locality, and when trying to identify the common name - using not just regular Google search engine tests but also pointing towards the prevalence of the names in more scholarly sources from Google Scholar och Google Books for example. The historical background of the name and the village is also relevant. Only the Azerbaijani source you've added uses the name "Onverst" among the sources on the article. It seems that the village was renamed from Tsaghkadzor/Saxkadzor to Onverst in 1999 by the Azerbaijani government. 

WP:NCGN recommends using modern names used by English-language sources or local names if there is a lack of sources. The name used by the linguistic majority of the locality is recommended when there are multiple local names and there is a lack of English-language sources mentioning the locality.

AntonSamuel (talk) 18:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @AntonSamuel @Kheo17 I would also add that Kheo17 did a questionable edit recently, replacing Arm timezone with Az one under a partially misleading edit description [1 ]. And for some reason, they omitted Republic of Artsakh mention in the infobox edit here, despite the village seemingly being under Arm control. They have also been notified of AA sanctions, but that didn't stop them from moving multiple AA articles without a RM. This doesn't look good. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Whatever reasoning behind the move, I'm assuming good faith since the guidelines can be a bit tricky and I wanted to follow up on my previous statements regarding common names and search engine tests. So let's focus on the issue at hand. When it comes to AMT vs AZT, I've thought along the lines of de facto status being a reasonable dividing factor for NK villages, since Artsakh uses Armenia Time, however it could also be acceptable to use "UTC+4 (UTC)" in my view if a more neutral term is desired. AntonSamuel (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand, I will take into account the points you mentioned in my future edits. Thanks.
 * I am still in the process of editing Shusha villages. I will put correct coordinates and mention who de-facto controls it for all the settlements. KHE&#39;O (talk) 18:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain these edits too? [1 ], [2 ], [3 ], [4 ], [5 ], [6 ]. First you reordered the provinces 5, now you're removing the de facto province? I don't quite understand the reasoning behind these edits, kindly explain your rationale. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * ZaniGiovanni It is pretty simple. These settlements are not part of the Artsakh Republic administrative division. They are officially not recorded settlements for the separatist government. Why do we have to keep the template where that specific article is not listed?!KHE&#39;O (talk) 18:53, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Kheo17 Who said so? I just see bunch of WP:OR from you. The settlements are de facto under Shushi province of Republic of Artsakh. If you have nothing else to add, please revert your disruptive edits, or we'll talk in ANI along with your recent undiscussed moves. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * ZaniGiovanni, I did not remove de-facto control tag from the infobox, I removed the template for Sushi Province where these particular settlements are not listed. If you can prove that these settlements are officially administered and recorded by the separatist government, I would be more than happy to revert all of my edits. ThanksKHE&#39;O (talk) 19:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)