Talk:Yerevan/Archive 2

Spelling
Armenian spelling should be corrected. Using the Western Armenian (Mashdotsian) spelling, Yerevan is spelled Երևան, while in Reformed Spelling, it is Երեվան. The official spelling is the Reformed Spelling, as seen in the seal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HayDegha0917 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Population
Following the Treaty of Turkamanchai, tsarist Russia sponsored Armenian resettlement from Persia and Turkey, the Armenian population rose and by the turn of the 20th century the population of Yerevan was 29 033 and consisted of Russians — 2%, Armenians — 48% and Azerbaijanis (called Azerbaijani Tatars by contemporary Russian sources) — 49%.

From the CIA World Factbook on Armenia: Ethnic groups: Armenian 97.9%, Yezidi (Kurd) 1.3%, Russian 0.5%, other 0.3% (2001 census)

Question: what happened to the Azerbaijanis in Yerevan? The article doesn't give any information about this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Siyah Kalem (talk • contribs) 13:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC).
 * They moved back to where they came from.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 14:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * De Waal explains what happened:


 * Yet by the twentieth century the Azerbaijanis people, who had lived in Eastern Armenia for centuries, had become its silent guests, marginalized and discriminated against. The Armenians asserted their right to their homeland at the expense of these people. In 1918 – 1920, tens of thousands Azerbaijanis were expelled from Zangezur. In 1940s, tens of thousands more were deported to Azerbaijan to make way for incoming Armenian immigrants from Diaspora. The last cleansing, in 1988 – 1989, got rid of the rest.


 * Thomas de Waal. Black garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through peace and war. ISBN 0814719457


 * Grandmaster 12:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yerevan khanate
Added info on the khanate and beglerbegate, which for some reason was absent, as if someone wants to conceal history. --adil 06:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The foreign domination/occupation section is sufficient. Don't speculate, it's not very civil.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 20:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You are not civil by your neverending reverts. Yerevan was part of Yerevan khanate, and Yerevan (Chukhursaad) beglerbegate -- come to terms with historic reality. --adil 06:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You are not civil by your neverending reverts. Yerevan was part of Yerevan khanate, and Yerevan (Chukhursaad) beglerbegate -- come to terms with historic reality. --adil 06:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

azeri population
I added back referenced info about expel of azeri populations--Dacy69 20:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's pov. The Azeris left as a result of the war, in the same manner as Armenians of Baku. Who is Brady Kiesling anyhow?--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 20:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It is US Embassy source. Quite reliable. You are engaging in your old manner of removing sourced info. besides, de Waal wrote about Azeri fled from Armenia. yes, it is a result of war - so what. we note the same thing for example on page Ganja--Dacy69 20:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Anything can be sourced, that's not good enough. It is not a US embassy source nor was it produced by a US official, and you're engaging in fabrication as usual. It's a pdf article linked by the US embassy written by an amateur. Answer my question, who is Brady Kiesling? What are his credentials?--   Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 21:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * As a content matter, the "source" is a tourist guide produced by an embassy employee who says "As the after-hours work of a non-specialist who has had time to visit only a selection of the sites mentioned, this guide is far from a complete archaeological, historical, cultural and/or practical guidebook to Armenia." Surely if the facts alleged are true then are additional significant sources to be found.  As a procedural matter, you are probably both in violation of your 1RR parole.  There must be something better I could be doing with my time.  Try asking for a third opinion on this source. Thatcher131 21:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The above comments on the author and content of "Rediscovering Armenia" can only be down to Thatcher131 making assumptions about a book he has never set eyes upon. Actually, that book is by far the best English-language gazetteer of Armenia's monuments and history, and it is certainly not an idiots' mass-market tourist guide. Meowy 19:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The statement "most of the city's Azeri population left" is, from a common sense point, most probably true. However, since the strength of the sources are contested and put through the stringest of tests in these articles, try getting a better source and/or more sources Dacy :) It is true that a non-specialist tourist guide such as that one might be a little shaky and would be contested, so might be better off strengthening the sources.. Baristarim 21:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * But try to keep it cool all the same, with the ArbCom case and all.. Cheers! Baristarim 21:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * And, of course, there is a huge difference between "left" and "expelled." Thatcher131 21:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * First of all, I have not violated 1rr parole - I did only one edit. So, there is no ground to say about 1rr violation. Now about Azeri population in Yerevan. it is fact that Azeris lived in Yerevan and -ok- you insist left the city with flowers and cheers. I don't need even to bring quotes. I don't know why we apply double standards to events in Azerbaijan and Armenia. de Waal, Swietochowski wrote about expel of Azeri population from Armenia. But, guys you need quote. Ok
 * "Significantly, the emergency regime was installed in Yerevan - although there was no ethnic violence there - but not in Armenian mixed-population districts, from where the Azeri population began to be expelled. In most cases, the expulsion was organized by Armenian CP leaders and other officials. Azeri writers put the number of those expelled at 165,000 and those killed at 216, including 57 women, 5 infants and 18 children of different ages.(19) Armenians dispute these figures. "Alexei Zverev.CONTESTED BORDERS IN THE CAUCASUS--Dacy69 22:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There's also a quote from de Waal, which mentions ethnic cleansing of Armenia after the start of Karabakh conflict. See the top of this discussion page. Grandmaster 06:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Which continent?
Surely it can't be in both Europe and Asia? PatGallacher 23:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Europe and Asia don't have specific boundaries. Some sources put it in Asia while others in Europe. The preferred neutral term is transcontinental. VartanM 00:06, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

It is actually in western Asia per the Central Intelligence Agency. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Demirchian (talk • contribs).

Revan
Revan not a former name, it's a non notable alternative name. Irevan is the more common name used in Azerbaijan, Iran and Turkey. VartanM (talk) 21:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to disagree - I've seen it frequently in old accounts, (mostly used in relation to the fortress, I think). Meowy 20:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I fixed some blatant POV statements. For some reason Iranian and Turkish rule was called "foreign occupation", and Russian and Soviet was not. It is better off without any labeling like that, and Muslim people who lived there for more than a millennium were as native to the region as anyone else. Grandmaster (talk) 05:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I may have put my foot in it, I've changed both the Iran/Turk and Russian history sections to show Foreign occupation - it seems to me that from the standpoint of Armenia, they're all pretty obviously foreign. (I live in Canada, so it's hard for me to judge this). Franamax (talk) 04:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact is that at that time Muslim population was formed a vast majority, so Persian/Ottoman rule was not foreign for those people. Plus, we have Soviet rule too, which was also exported to the Caucasus. So it is better not to label any rule as native or foreign, the reader will be able to make his judgment by reading the text. Grandmaster (talk) 05:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Btw, this anon who reverted with no explanation appears to be banned user. Grandmaster (talk) 05:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Can someone please provide IPA pronunciation (or at least the romanisation)of the original Armenian name? --Atitarev (talk) 23:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I've added Cleanup-IPA to the article. John Vandenberg (chat) 01:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you, do you mean this /ˌjɛrəˈvɑːn/? This is the English, not the Armenian. I can't see the entry in the article. --Atitarev (talk) 01:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Skyline image
I think that just like all other city pages, the skyline image of Yerevan's "Settlement" Infobox should be a picture that shows Yerevan's skyline (not a single building or square) and also be clearly illuminated (i.e. no night-shots with bad exposures). This is following the standard of all other cities, for example those at List_of_United_States_cities_by_population. Serouj (talk) 14:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Republic Square is symbol of Yerevan so there is no problem for put Square picture to Settlement Infobox. And looks like you didin't check carefully other articles Istanbul, Kiev, Mowcow - Vienna. ArmeniaOnline (talk) 12:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Since when is Republic Square a symbol of Yerevan? This is news to me...  As far as I know, there's no more greater symbol of Yerevan than Yerevan's skyline with Mount Ararat in the background.
 * The Istanbul article shows a partial skyline of Istanbul with the 3 structures. You cannot compare the Republic Square to the Hagia Sophia!  Republic Square means nothing internationally, and doesn't mean much even within Armenia.  Now, Ararat, on the other hand, is a different story...
 * The Kiev article also shows a partial skyline of numerous buildings.
 * I don't think we can compare the Red Square in Moscow to the Republic Square in Armenia... Come on now... Serouj (talk)

Unfortunately Mount Ararat is on territory of Turkey... Ararat is very important for us and for our history but no one can say that Ararat is symbol of Yerevan. Then why didin't you write about Viena article? i still wite your opinion. Regards ArmeniaOnline (talk) 13:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Vienna may be an exception. In the vast, vast majority of cases (99% of city articles) if a clear, contemporary skyline picture is available, then it is used! Serouj (talk) 14:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, the attribute for the Settlement Infobox that places the image clearly is called "skyline". (It's not called central square, or symbol of city.)  So then why should we include a picture of an insignificant square (which is NOT the symbol of Yerevan by any means -- indeed, the symbol of Yerevan contains a portrait of Mount Ararat) when we can have a genuine picture of Yerevan's skyline with Mount Ararat in the background.  Honestly, you don't need to be ashamed of the fact that much of Yerevan looks like a village (a գիւղաքաղաք).  It is what it is...  No need to hide the facts.  Serouj (talk) 15:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't make me laugh... Do you really think that Yerevan looks like a village? Have you ever been in Yerevan? You can put your "Fantastic Skyline Picture" on your deskop but not at Wikipedia ArmeniaOnline (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * For your information, I live in Yerevan. Do you?  And yes, certain parts look like a village.  Ever been to Nork Marach?  How about Gond?  Even behind the UN building right next to your beloved Republic Square is a small shanty town of houses made of scrap metal.  I'm a Yerevanite.  Can't I critically comment on my own city?  Now, may I ask, where do you live? Serouj (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I live in Cyprus. Only 2 weeks ago i was in Yerevan also i take some "SKYLINE" pictures from Nork Marash... Don't worry i will upload to Wikipedia then maybe i'll put on Yerevan article. Dear Serouj sorry but i haven't got free time for discuss same things again ArmeniaOnline (talk) 16:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Պարապ տեղ կռիւ մի ընեք... եթէ որոշումի մը չի հասաք՝ կրնաք ֆրանսական Վիքիփեդիայի Երեւանի նկարները գործածել։ Այն հոդվածը «Ցուցափեղկ» է եւ արաւել ունի Skyline նկարներ։ Միայն առաջարկութիւն մըն է... - Fedayee (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The republic square image is no good in that position, I replaced it with a much nicer "skyline" photo from the French FA article. Thanks for the tip Fedayee.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 18:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ճիշտ եք. Բաւական անիմաստ կռիւ մըն էր... Շնորհակալ եմ ընդմիչումին Ֆետ եւ Եուփ.  Excellent suggestion.  Serouj (talk) 21:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I asked for a source for the following unsourced claim in the article:

The early twentieth century saw the governorship of Erivan province by Louis Joseph Jérôme Napoléon (1864-1932), grandnephew of Napoleon I.

Grandmaster (talk) 07:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You did not know of monsieur Napoléon's governship? Surprising for someone who has edited these articles for a long time now. - Fedayee (talk) 18:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I just asked for a source per WP:V. Grandmaster (talk) 05:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Brokhauz used as a source says nothing about Kurdish population of Erivan. If you have different sources about that, please provide them. Grandmaster (talk) 04:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hakob, please provide a quote from your source about the Kurdish population of Erivan. The official Russian statistics do not mention any Muslim people other than Azeris in the city. Grandmaster (talk) 07:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I restored the original wording, as no source has been provided. The Brokhauz figures cannot be altered, if you have different figures from other sources, cite them and attribute them accordingly per wiki rules. Grandmaster (talk) 06:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

ArmeniaNow
Serouj, ArmeniaNow is not a newspaper. It is an online website. It is also not the only "western" style website. For example http://en.zhamanak.com/ is a real physical newspaper that you can buy on any news-stand in Yerevan and it is also financed from the West. Why are you singling out ArmeniaNow.com?

Սահակ/Sahak (talk) 15:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Also why are you putting it in an article about Yerevan? ArmeniaNow covers all of Armenia and not Yerevan. "Zhamanak Yerevan" newspaper for example is specific to the city of Yerevan.

Սահակ/Sahak (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I concur. But i'll wait and see what Serouj has to say before removing the link.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 15:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Physical newspapers are (for the most part) a thing of the past. I don't have a problem in adding other newspapers to the page given that they're non-political in nature (usually this means non-partisan).  Although ArmeniaNow is about all of Armenia, we all know -- to put it a bit bluntly -- that not "much" happens in Armenia outside of Yerevan to be reported on.  (The majority of articles deal with Yerevan.  Maybe over 50%.)  Zhamanak is a political, partisan newspaper.  Not too many stories there about general life in Yerevan.  I would add Hetq Online to this mix (as far as I know as it's another non-partisan paper).  I think Zhamanak can be included in newspapers under the Armenia article (or perhaps in a separate article if there are many of them) and perhaps we should have sections on partisan vs non-partisan papers. Serouj (talk) 07:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

If there has to be any newspaper link in this article about the city of Yerevan I propose to put a newpaper called "Zhamanak Yerevan" (Yerevan Times). http://www.pressinfo.am/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=175&Itemid=28 Սահակ/Sahak (talk) 15:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with this, but I think it's better if it were placed in the Armenia article because the paper's topics are all political -- not much else like culture, schools, life, etc in Yerevan. (Compare this to ArmeniaNow or to Hetq which has articles of general concern to citizens other than politics.)  Serouj (talk) 07:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What about this http://zhamanak.com/art/ ? Սահակ/Sahak (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Zhamanak is a political, opposition newspaper, It will have POV issues. If there should be anyone newspaper, it would have to be official city of Yerevan publication. I suggest working on List of Armenian newspapers. A sections can be created that lists all the newspapers published in Yerevan and elsewhere and linked to this article. VartanM (talk) 20:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Merger Proposal
Hey. I just found Yerevan International Film Festival on the new pages patrol. Today, this stub is exactly one month old. I think it would benefit from at least getting a paragraph here. If that's the case, the paragraph would of course be unique to the future article. This article, after all, is long, and I'm not sure how you guys would feel about adding to it. On the other hand, the month old stub...is a month old stub. I'll leave it up to you guys. If bystanders want to merge after a week, I will do so. --Call me Bubba (talk) 05:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I went on a slightly different tack and bulked up the YIFF article a bit. At first glance, there's not much there, so hopefully some editors more familiar with the topic can help with expansion and references. Certainly the topic of Armenian film-makers is notable, anchored by Sergei Parajanov and Atom Egoyan - so the YIFF topic may extend beyond the scope of this city article.
 * The YIFF is already mentioned here, in the Cinema section, as the Golden Apricots. HOWEVER, it's way out-of-date, there are many more sponsors than Moskva, the latest awards were in 2008 not 2007 - so the paragraph here badly needs updating. Can someone more familiar address this? Franamax (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll at least add a picture of the 2008 Golden Apricot FF which I attended... Serouj (talk) 08:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I also suggest a separate article on GAIFF, as the topic is not just Yerevan-related. Gazifikator (talk) 07:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm going to remove the merge tag, the film festival is notable enough to be a topic in its own right even if it was just Yerevan related. Pahari Sahib  13:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Yerevan's spelling in traditional Armenian orthography.
Serouj, in traditional Armenian orthography Yerevan is spelled as Երևան

You can see it for example in this Bible published in 1666 http://gallery.nen.gov.uk/image74221.html

When writing in ALL CAPS, in traditional orthography it is spelled as ԵՐԵՒԱՆ, and in modern orthography as ԵՐԵՎԱՆ

In modern orthography Երեվան spelling is incorrect. It is only used when spelling in ALL CAPS ԵՐԵՎԱՆ In traditional orthography Երեւան spelling is incorrect. It is only used when spelling in ALL CAPS ԵՐԵՒԱՆ

-Սահակ/Sahak (talk) 22:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

New Mayor
Yerevan has a new (interim) mayor since 4 March (see fr:Erevan). Sardur (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

foreign rule?
I have read that section and it is written relatively neutral. However the title "Foreign (Persian and Ottoman) rule" is very biased. Yerevan and in general the territory of the contemporary Republic of Armenia has been part of subsequent Iranian empires. So its possession by Safavids cannot be considered as foreign rule, especially when their Armenian and Muslim inhabitants were considered as Iranian subjects. The same can be said about Russia but the difference is that Russia fought a war with Qajar Iran and conquered the area  while the (Muslim) subjects resisted.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 16:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There's some logic I don't understand : Iran did conquer the area as well, didn't it ? Sardur (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Btw, it's a historiographical point (and an interesting one). Sardur (talk) 21:33, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * In any case, I removed "Foreign" as it is useless. Sardur (talk) 21:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Its OK. You can say that Iran got the area during thje medes or Achamenid times. We do not know if any war or conquest happened. Maybe it did. Anyway Ottomans and Russians cannot get the same status as Iran.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Even if was at one point or another part of the Iranian empires, that didn't mean that its native Armenian populace greeted them with open arms, whether it was during Sasanid or Safavid rule.--The Diamond Apex (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * see the talkpage of article Armenia--Babakexorramdin (talk) 18:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've reverted Baba's removal of "and Ottoman" in the section heading (which was accompanied by the edit summary "since Iranian rule was interrupted by Ottoman occupation". The crux here is where the centre of rule is located - locally or at the centre of an empire? By this definition, the Persian, Ottoman and Russian Empires all qualify as "rule". Contrast this with the "Brief independence" section or the current situation, which would also qualify as an independent state.
 * Sardur, I'm OK with your removal of the "Foreign (xx) rule" wording but I disagree that it was useless. I made that change just about a year ago and it remained stable until now, so that has had some utility. It avoided bitter nationalistic arguments about precise words, which arguments flame around some things which to an outside observer look pretty simple to resolve. That said, I thought your changes were good, they simplify the heading while remaining neutral. Franamax (talk) 01:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We are not talking about natural rule, unless you legitizme this rule on the basis of certain criteria. In this case you use the ethno-nationalistic criterium: Armenia for Armenians, ruled by Armenians. Well this is a 19th- early 20th century European ideal (in eastern Europe and Post-Communist states is still the case), which is alien in most other parts of the world and has certainly not been the case in the history. If you apply the territorial criterium and do not disqualify Multi-ethniciy and Multi-Culturalism, you won't be so hostile towards multi-cultural imperial rule. Obviously many ethnic groups can be part of an empire and participate in that Empire. As I have described the territory of modern day republic of Armenia (I am not talking about Western Armenian lands in the Ottoman Empire!) has been part of the subsequent Iranian empires, only with short periods of interruption after warfare. The same thing happened in many other regions of Iran, even firmly Shiite Regions such as Lorestan and Khorasan were once under occupation, yet noone questions the Iranian ownership of these regions. And I have explained to you that the demographic structure of Armenia was already altered in the favor of moslems, since medieval time and already before the Safavid times. I have also explained that Armenians were not treated as outsiders during the subsequent Iranian empires. This was certainly not the case during the Pre_Islamic empires and even not the case with the Shiite Safavid Empire. Honestly I do not see much reason neither on territorial, nor on ethno-religious reason why Armenia(ns) should be singled out. Nonetheles I do a prpoospal. Dor you agree with the same type of formulation as in other articles? I propose to change the title to "Medieval and Early Modern Period".--Babakexorramdin (talk) 10:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * When soldiers and administrators arrive from somewhere else and kill the people who disagree with them, that's called "rule", no matter what part of the world or era of history you're in. I'd love to see your reliable sources saying otherwise. And you might want to have a word with the people of Korea, Tibet and East Timor among others, telling them they should be OK with being "owned" by other entities.
 * When I read in the section in question "Yerevan was conquered", "seized and pillaged", "changed hands fourteen times" - we're talking competing versions of foreign rule. Certainly ethno-religion is a distinguishing factor. The people of Yerevan aren't exactly voting to rejoin their putative "natural empire" in Persia (Iran) today.
 * If you want to change titles, you would need to address all the sub-titles in the History section. Do you have a proposal to revamp the lot of them? Franamax (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * what you mean is probably occupation and not rule. As I see you have a very ethno-nationalistic sense of logic. I do not know your origin and it is irrelevant but this sense of ethno-nationalism is responsible for many mischiefs. Which sources say that All people of Yerevan resisted this or the other empire? There were certainly some governors, warlord and let's say certain segment of society that resisted this or the other ruler, but there are no evidences that all did. The usage of all is another ethno-nationalistic understanding of history and politics. Morreover as I have told you the demographic structure of Yerevan and generally eastern Armenia had already changed in favor of Moslems, so it is more imaginable that the Russian occupation had faced with firece resistance (it is documented! and there are sources!), than the Safavid Iranian re-incorporation of territory, especially when Armenians were exempted from paying taxes and left free in their religious and communal affairs.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 20:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Please Babakexorramdin, I don't mean to be rude, but could you stop your OR-speech and tell us what you exactly want to change in the article? It would be much more constructive. And much easier to address. Sardur (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC) Franamax, what I meant with "useless" is that of course "Russian", "Persian" or "Ottoman" are "foreign", nothing more. Sardur (talk) 21:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly. I should have seen that when I made the edits a year ago, but I was just trying to put out a fire at the time. :) Your version makes much more sense. Franamax (talk) 00:36, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is easy what I say. Ottoman rule should not get the same status as Iranian rule. Ottoman rule has interrupted long periods of Iranian (Safavid) rule. --Babakexorramdin (talk) 08:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Persian and Turkic (Ottoman) spelling in the lead
Both countries ruled in Yerevan for hundreds of years. Also in some periods of time persians and turkic people formed majority of population in the city. According to WP:NC these spelling can be added to the lead. Although some users keep removing them with vague explanations or without any explanation. Unible 03:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. Since the city was a part of Ottoman empire at certain periods in history, and had a Turkic majority population until the creation of the Republic of Armenia in 1918, the Turkish name belongs to the lead. I see that many locations in Turkey have Armenian spellings, and I see no reason why locations in Armenia should not have Turkish spellings included. Grand  master  07:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yerevan was part of Iran, and not the Ottoman empire. Ottomans had conquered it many times and claimed it but could not hold it. In the traty of Zohab it was agreed that Transcaucasia was Iranian while Baghdad and Mesopotamia was given to the Ottoman Turks. The Iranians in Yerevan were mainly Turkic speaking, there were also communities of Kurds and Persian Speakrs as well as Armenians, but not as much as it became the case after the Russian conquest.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 08:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * At certain periods in history the region was controlled by Ottomans, and they installed their governors. It was also a part of the Seljuk empire for centuries. And the city had an Azeri majority according to the censuses held in the Russian empire. For instance, in accordance with the last census conducted in the Russian empire, the city had 49% Azeri, and 48% Armenian population. Grand  master  08:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * read what you wrote it was all about Ottoman Turks, ... Turks, ....Turks. Nothing about Iran. You are one of the best ones, but in general the editors from republic of Azerbaijan try hysterically to attack their own Iranian heritage. probably because they feel an existential treat if they admit the Iranian nature of their country. But there is no need for such fears and hysteria. --Babakexorramdin (talk) 17:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Please read carefully what I wrote. We agree on the ethnic composition of the city, but you are giving too much credit to the Ottomans, while deliberately under-represinting its Iranian heritage.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 08:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * How do I deliberately under-represent its Iranian heritage? Please mind WP:AGF. I never objected to inclusion of the Persian name. It also belongs here. Grand  master  12:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * How long it was under the control of Persia is irrelevant here. It was under control of several turco/mogol tribes, arabs, romans too. I do not try to under-represent persian heritage, otherwise I wouldn't have suggested it. Stick to the topic. Unible 09:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

If you are all that concerned about what should or should not be in the "alternative / former names" sections of articles then why not start a process that will hammer out some guidelines that can be applied to all articles? Until there are rules, every such article could have endless arguments. Meowy 16:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * we have added Armenian names on the pages about Armenian places in Iran. I assume that you guys also let lose some of your nationalism and let us to add the Persian name gere. As I also said to our friend from Baku, these things do not mean loss of wonership or existential treats. These are just history and culture--Babakexorramdin (talk) 17:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Current guidelines at WP:NC outlines guidelines clearly. But of course, in reality, those guidelines are not practical for some political reasons. Many cities in the area have been inhabited/ruled by several nations/countries and I suspect that alteration of the lead of these cities, adding different spellings, would not be appreciated by rival parties. Just to let you know, I'm comfortable with current WP:NC provided that it is applicable to all cities. But since this seems like not to work, I suggest to move all additional spellings to the relevant etymology/history sections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unible (talk • contribs) 16:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Erebuni/Yerevan
The article gives us information about foundation of Erebuni as foundation of Yerevan. It is not correct as only Armenian historians write about their equality. Neutral sources write only about the possibility of two cities correlation. At least there is no enough scientific proof of such correlation. --Quantum666 (talk) 13:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

This text The history of Yerevan dates back to the 8th century B.C., with the founding of the fortress of Erebuni in 782 BC by king Argishti I at the western extreme of the Ararat plain. refers to the source '''Katsenelinboĭgen, Aron (1990). The Soviet Union: Empire, Nation and Systems. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. p. 143. ISBN 0887383327.'''

Katsenelinboĭgen writes "King Argishti in 782 b.c. built the fortress Erebuni ( the contemporary Erevan) and refers to Bolshaya Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia (Big Soviet Encyclopedia) published in 1972.

Big Soviet Encyclopedia writes about Erebuni : ''Эребуни, крепость, построенная на С. государства Урарту царем Аргишти I около 782 до н. э. Развалины Э. обнаружены на холме Арин-Берд на северной окраине Еревана. Раскопками (с 1950) открыты мощные крепостные стены с воротами, дворец, 2 храма и хозяйственные постройки, около 20 строительных надписей. Во дворце и одном из храмов — остатки росписей: орнаментальные фризы, изображения богов, сцен охоты и др. В 1968 в связи с празднованием 2750-летия Еревана на Аринберде были произведены крупные реставрационные работы. Территория Э. превращена в археологический музей-заповедник.'' The article contains no statements about correlation between Erebuni and Yerevan. --Quantum666 (talk) 12:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced statements
This edit adds information that is not provided by the source. So this is OR. I return the article to the original version. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:53, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, I have modified the phrase. Yerevan is located in the historical Greater Armenia and had always been populated with Armenians, until the arrival of the Turkmens and Tatars who migrated from Asian Turkistan crossing the Caspian Sea. The fact is simple: the Armenian identity of Yerevan was restored through the efforts of the Russian Empire. Kevorkmail (talk) 11:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * You wrote it as it was Russians' goal "to restore Armenian identity". But you should know that their goal was to make Christian majority in the region as they thought it would be more safe to have christian majority near the borders with muslim states: Iran and Turkey. So please provide sources and do not change the original version until our discussion is finished. (Please see WP:CONSENSUS, WP:Reverting and WP:DR. --Quantum666 (talk) 11:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks like an editing war is set by Quantum666 (as usual). Kevorkmail (talk) 09:41, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Is this all you have to say? Then as you provide no sources I will remove the text you added. --Quantum666 (talk) 10:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Funny!!! This is exactly the same way as Ilham Aliyev is used to threaten the Armenians since 2003! And you call this discussion?!! Kevorkmail (talk) 12:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually it becomes more and more sad. You can discuss Ilham Aliyev's statements here. --Quantum666 (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's put an end to this boyish dialogue. Kevorkmail (talk) 18:35, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. Then try to answer my comment in nonboyish way please.
 * You wrote it as it was Russians' goal "to restore Armenian identity". But you should know that their goal was to make Christian majority in the region as they thought it would be more safe to have christian majority near the borders with muslim states: Iran and Turkey. So please provide sources and do not change the original version until our discussion is finished. (Please see WP:CONSENSUS, WP:Reverting and WP:DR. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there anything wrong with the Armenian identity of Yerevan? Does it need a source to prove that the city was of Armenian identity throughout the history? Whatever was the Russians' goal, the fact remains a fact and the Armenian identity of the city was restored through the repatriation process. Salah Mar1978 (talk) 10:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * At the moment I am not argueing whether Yerevan has/had/will have Armenian identity because I don't know what "Armenian identity" means ? And what does "restoring identity" mean? Please eхplain it to me referring to RS.
 * However putting together two facts - resettlement of Armenians and "restoring identity" - is OR. And the second problem is that such linking misleads readers about the purposes of the resettlement. --Quantum666 (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It doesn't mislead the readers at all. The autochthonous population has been pushing the Russians to do just that long before they set foot in the Caucasus or established some sort of an agenda. It was an Armenian initiative, not a Russian one. See Joseph Emin or Israel Ori.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 16:44, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see any relationship between the activities of those people and "restoring identity". --Quantum666 (talk) 18:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You made the false assertion that Tsarist Russia had some sort of a hidden agenda to create a Christian majority in the region when the fact of the matter is that the Russian presence was result of the Armenian national liberation movement.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 19:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have any RS to prove this supposition? --Quantum666 (talk) 19:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The idea of the mentioned phrase does not suppose any relation with the intentions of the Russians, and since you are not interested with the definition of the Armenian identity, it is preferred not to involve yourself in the discussion. Kevorkmail (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please answer my questions in nonboish way. Thanks. --Quantum666 (talk) 05:21, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I answered in the way that you deserve. Kevorkmail (talk) 06:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen any answer for these questions:
 * 1. What is "Armenian identity of the city"?
 * 2. What is "restoring Armenian identity"?
 * 3. Do you have any sources linking resettlement of Armenian population with "restoring Armenian identity"? --Quantum666 (talk) 07:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Please try to understand the idea of the text: Armenian identity here (in this context) refers to the Armenian population of the city which had existed for centuries before the foreign invasions. "Restoring" here means "to gain back the Armenian majority of the city's population". So the proposed idea here becomes clear from the context. Kevorkmail (talk) 07:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean that "Armenian identity" = "Armenian majority in population". I am not sure that such wording is used by any RS. --Quantum666 (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I changed the sentence to mention both of the sity's major ethnic groups according to WP:NPOV. I think it must be OK now. --Quantum666 (talk) 10:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I put the POV flag until the dispute is resolved. --Quantum666 (talk) 12:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * What dou you mean with the "neutrality disputed"? Is there anything wrong with "Yerevan regained its Armenian majority"? Kevorkmail (talk) 13:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You are writing only the half of the truth. Yerevan also lost it's Azeri majority. That is why I object to your edit and have put the POV flag. --Quantum666 (talk) 13:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Historically, Yerevan did not have Tatars before the invasions. Kevorkmail (talk) 13:39, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Historically it had Azeri majority. You cannot deny the fact. See the sources please. --Quantum666 (talk) 13:47, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not denying that fact, I said clearly "before the foreign invasions". Kevorkmail (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not understand mentioning "the invasion" here. What is it's relationship with the resettlement? Do you have any RS confirming this relationship? --Quantum666 (talk) 13:59, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you get the text carefully, you will find that it is a consequence rather than a relationship or a goal. Kevorkmail (talk) 14:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I see no consequence between "the invasion" and the resettlement. But the sources say about relationship between the resettlement and decreasing Azeri majority of the city. --Quantum666 (talk) 14:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Quantum666, you are intending to turn down our talk into empty spaces. It's a waste of time to keep discussing with you. Kevorkmail (talk) 10:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * What do you mean? --Quantum666 (talk) 15:20, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Kevorkmail, after the resettlement Yerevan gained Armenian majority but lost Azeri majority. You cannot write about one fact and ignore the other.That is why I object to adding your text. That is why I put WP:NPOVD tag. So please discuss the problem and stop removing the tag. --Quantum666 (talk) 11:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I suggest not to insert any text about Azeri and Armenian majority as the figures are presented in the article and readers can make their conclusions themselves. --Quantum666 (talk) 10:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

History post-independence
Talking about demonstrations in the history section does not represent an important period in the history of the city. If you want to talk about those events you are welcome in this article. Kevorkmail (Kevorkmail) 19:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

User ArmOvak
ArmOvak is insisting to bring informations from nowhere regarding the area and the metro population of Yerevan. The area of Yerevan (227 sq. km) is based on the area of each district of the 12 districts in Yerevan. How come the metro population of the city 18,900,000??? While all the population of Armenia does not exceed 3,200,000. Salah Mar1978 (Salah Mar1978) 10:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Revert on sight.--  Ευπάτωρ   Talk!! 16:45, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Site Statistical Service of Armenia stated that the passenger station is 18900000, and an area of 229 square kilometers of Yerevan was in 2001, now it composes 300 sq.km. About this everywhere indicated. Incidentally, the Armenian population in the statistical service of the Armenian people is 3238000.ArmOvak (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Dear ArmOvak, I know that you have good intentions, but the term Metro Population does not mean the number of the passengers that visited Yerevan. Actually, "metro population" refers to the population of the subject city including the surrounding areas and suburbs (the city and its extended urban agglomeration). In our case, the metropolitan area of Yerevan includes the suburbs of Jrvezh, Argavand, Arinj and so on. Regarding the figure (300 sq. km) you have presented, please provide us with a reliable source as you have mentioned that it is "everywhere indicated". Salah Mar1978 (Salah Mar1978) 04:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that the number of passengers, I mean, it's passenger traffic among the residents. Judge for yourself if you count on your data, you might think that each of the Yerevan-all only once ridden on the subway, but this is impossible. One person can ride the subway a few times. And that is noted on the Statistical Service of Armenia. This is a passenger in the year. And at the expense of the square of Yerevan, see here ArmOvak (talk) 09:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ArmOvak you are confusing two different things. Metro population refers to the population of the city including its neighbouring areas and has no relationship with subway or any other transport or number of passengers. I think the reason is that in Russian метро (transliterated metro) means subway. --Quantum666 (talk) 09:48, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe I'm wrong to write, I want to say-volume of passenger traffic in year.ArmOvak (talk) 10:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I would say you just chose a wrong section to insert the information. I think the Metro section of the article is a better place for the information. --Quantum666 (talk) 10:14, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ArmOvak, I hope you got the meaning of "Metro Population". On the other hand, the area of Yerevan is 227 sq. km according to this website . I think the information given by the Official Armenian Statistics Service is more reliable than the one provided by a touristic service site. Kevorkmail (Kevorkmail) 16:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Kevorkmail, The information you provide, was published in the 2001-2003 year, I think you can logically surmise that in 10 years, the area has changed significantly. Moreover, type in any search engine, you get the answer 300 sq.km.ArmOvak (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Quantum666, Now I understand you, at the metro population of public subwayArmOvak (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Armovak, even though, it remains an official document, while the source you have provided is not an official one. Kevorkmail (Kevorkmail) 18:18, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Even if it's unofficial source, the rules of Wikipedia, did not prohibit sources from any sites. In addition, your information is outdated prescription. ArmOvak (talk) 19:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Articles in Wikipedia should be based on reliable sources according to Verifiability (published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy). Note that if you are going to involve yourself in a reverting war, admins will be informed. Kevorkmail (Kevorkmail) 19:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My source reliable.ArmOvak (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ArmOvak, Your stubbornness will ruin our efforts to improve this article. Kevorkmail (Kevorkmail) 04:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not opinionated, I divide edits after the fact, and you lapse of time ArmOvak (talk) 12:59, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Administrators will be informed about your edits which are based on non-official sources, and your involvement in an editing war. Kevorkmail (Kevorkmail) 14:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Administrators will be informed about your edits which are based on obsolete source sources, and your involvement in an editing war.78.138.171.171 (talk) 18:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion
I was asked to come here by Kevorkmail regarding your dispute over the city's area. In my view, both sides are valid - it's always better to use official sources rather than tourist sites but, as ArmOvak says, the source used on this article is out of date and the city would have indeed grown in size since 2001. I've done a quick source on Google and found this document prepared by the city authority last month - on page 23, it states the city's area as 260 km2, although the source is from 2004. In the absence of a more up-to-date official figure (or even an official estimate) I would suggest using this. I've also tried searching using the Armenian alphabet, but I don't know how useful this is - I guess you guys would be more qualified. Anyway, I hope this is helpful. All the best,  Bettia  (talk)  08:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Population
There is evidently newer data on the population. I can find where I think it is on the RA National Statistical Service site (the 2010 Yearbook ), but as the English translations there are not complete in the Yearbook section, I am not sure if this is Yerevan the city, or the larger region. Note this figure is smaller than any of the previous figures, so I suspect it's whatever is the smallest area. I have added it in the 'total' field in the infobox, but it may want to be in the other field. I have cited to the News.am piece in the article, but would appreciate it if someone with better language skills could cite to the actual RA page. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Azerbaijani version of the name
Azerbaijani people have lived in this city for centuries and have been deported by Soviet or Armenian authorities. Lots of people from this city are of Azerbaijani decent. They all use Azerbaijani version of the name of this city. Thus, Azerbaijani version of the name also should be published. --Verman1 (talk) 15:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You arguments are not very clear. If I understand right, than you mean that if at any time there lived an ethnic group in a city, then it would automatically make their language relevant in the article intro? I don't think that is always a sufficient argument. Think about that there are cities with dozens of ethnic groups all over the world. Also, if we add the Azerbaijani name of Yerevan in this article, we should also, for instance, add the Armenian name of Baku in the article Baku, which also had a considerable Armenian population until 1992. What is your opinion about that? --Vacio (talk) 10:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Baku has never been native city for the Armenians. All Armenians living in Baku were either immigrants or descendants of those immigrants, who came to the city after so-called "oil rush". But we cannot say this about Azerbaijanis, who were living in Yerevan. They were rather native dwellers of the city and surrounding villages, not labor immigrants. --Verman1 (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you think the problem is here, since there are two ways to interpret this - well two good ways. Either
 * Lots of people use this name, we should publish the fact for the sake of people (mainly non-Azerbaijanis) who read the article.
 * The people who use this name, of whom there are many, will expect to see it on the article.
 * Which is it? Rich Farmbrough, 23:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC).


 * It's a slippery slope. If we are to use residence as the sole criterion to include a foreign language, what's going to stop someone from adding the Russian spelling to Brighton Beach or the Armenian to Glendale, California? The fact is that the Muslims of Yerevan never identified themselves as Azerbaijanis until the early 20th century and, again, their presence is not only the reason we would have to take into consideration for adding a new spelling. By the same token, we might as well add the Armenian spelling to Tbilisi and Baku, since those cities at one time not only had Armenian pluralities who left their imprint in architecture, the arts, and culture. But I don't see anyone scrambling to make such additions because it's much more better to just leave them out altogether. A much better case can be made for adding the Russian alphabet to these three cities since they were, in effect, under Russian control for the past 200 years. But again, it's unnecessary and it's quite obvious Verman1 (as evidence by his edits on other articles) is trying to inject his own POV by simply removing Armenian/inserting Azerbaijani.


 * Is it any wonder he has cut and paste the same explanation on no less than four articles?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 04:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes I did put this discussion to other cities in Armenia, because I think they have same characteristics as Yerevan from historical demographics point. --Verman1 (talk) 18:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I want to emphasize again. It is not the simply residence of the town, but the relationship of the residents to this town makes sense in this case. Armenians in the Glendale are not native residents, they are mostly recent labor immigrants. Most of them even were not born in that town. The same thing we can say about other samples you show. But in the case of Azerbaijanis of the Yerevan, they were the people who built this town through centuries, making the majority in there. The only language spoken in Yerevan until Russian annexation was Azerbaijani. Your thought about "The fact is that the Muslims of Yerevan never identified themselves as Azerbaijanis until the early 20th century" is very contentious and needs to be proved by facts. --Verman1 (talk) 18:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Likewise you have to proof that Azerbaijanis built this town through centuries. Please provide any source to confirm your claims. As far as I know, Yerevan had a significant "Tatar" population only for a short time, namely during the second Russo-Persian war (1826–1828) when most of the Armenians were dispelled from the region. And Also, you did not reply on my note about Armenians in Baku. --Vacio (talk) 18:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The Azerbaijanis were not natives of Yerevan - there's not a grain of truth in such a statement. Before the late eleventh century AD, there was no recorded settlement of any Turks in Armenia, or Anatolia for that matter. I don't know if you have read this article's history, but the city's history goes back to the year 782 B.C., and Yerevan was part of a number of Armenian kingdoms and populated by Armenians long before the influx of the Turkic Muslims of eleventh-fourteenth centuries. The Muslims living in present-day Caucasus never identified themselves as Azerbaijanis until the early 20th century: tribe and family came first, then a particular domination of Islam (Sunni, Shiite), and so on, but nationalism - the sense of a collective nation and people - did not truly take root among Muslims until the early 1900s. George Bournoutian makes this clear in his review of Audrey L. Altstadt book The Azerbaijani Turks: Power and Identity Under Russian Rule in the Armenian Review. 45, no. 3, Autumn 1992, pp. 63-69.

Do you have anything more to add? If not, then the above "discussion" comes nowhere close to justifying the inclusion of the Azerbaijani and will be duly removed. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In the article Safavid Dynasty you can clearly see that The Safavids by the time of their rise were Azerbaijani-speaking although they also used Persian as a second language. The language chiefly used by the Safavid court and military establishment was Azerbaijani. Safavid power with its distinctive Persian-Shi'i culture, however, remained a middle ground between its two mighty Turkish neighbors. The Safavid state, which lasted at least until 1722, was essentially a "Turkish" dynasty, with Azeri Turkish (Azerbaijan being the family's home base) as the language of the rulers and the court as well as the Qizilbash military establishment. Azerbaijani language were in wide use long before 20th century. As we know, Safavid Dynasty included Yerevan too, there is no doubt that Azerbaijani was the main language in this city even 5 centuries ago, let alone beginning of the 20th century when Azerbaijani population was still in majority. --Verman1 (talk) 19:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Your arguments seem to be OR. You identify the countries which Safavid dynasty once ruled in the 16th century with the Safavid dynasty itself. Even if this dynasty spoke Azerbaijani (among other languages), it does absolutely not proof that Yerevan had a significant population which spoke that language and lived there for a significant (before 1820).
 * No comment on my note about Baku? --Vacio (talk) 20:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I have already replied to question regarding Baku in my previous posts for MarshallBagramyan. Unlike Azerbaijani population of Yerevan, Armenians of Baku were not native people of the city, they were labor immigrants, also Armenians have never been majority in Baku. For Safavid dynasty, the article states that majority of the ruling party spoke in Azerbaijani language. If we add to this the fact that majority of the population were Azerbaijani people (if not, then how Azerbaijani people appeared in Yerevan in 19-20th centuries?), then I guess there can be no more questions for this matter. --Verman1 (talk) 06:47, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm re-asking this question - of Verman1 specifically since it relates to his intention in his reasoning. Other people do not know what his intention was and should therefore let him answer for himself.
 * To re-cap you said:

"Lots of people from this city are of Azerbaijani descent. They all use Azerbaijani version of the name of this city. Thus, Azerbaijani version of the name also should be published."


 * I ask:
 * I'm not sure what you think the problem is here, since there are two ways to interpret this - well two good ways. Either
 * Lots of people use this name, we should publish the fact for the sake of people (mainly non-Azerbaijanis) who read the article.
 * The people who use this name, of whom there are many, will expect to see it on the article.
 * Which is it? Rich Farmbrough'', 10:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC).
 * The people who use this name, of whom there are many, will expect to see it on the article.
 * Which is it? Rich Farmbrough'', 10:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC).


 * I would like to say both options are good, but for me, first option is much more interesting and this was the sole reason why I began the discussion. Unfortunately, people outside of this region mostly are unaware of problems in here, specifically in our case the Deportation of Azerbaijani people from Armenia. This article doesn't even mention why Azerbaijani people of Yerevan, once consisting majority of the city, have been disappeared? I guess this is the main reason why my opponents are against publishing alternative spelling. They simply want to cover up historical background of the city. For confirmation of my words, you for example might wanna look at this edit of MarshallBagramyan. Regards, --Verman1 (talk) 17:47, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK I see your point. As far as names go, in general, we need to limit the number of names we report in line one of an article.  Generally these are the English name and the name as used in the city itself. Of course there are many exceptions where a third, or even fourth name is provided (sometimes an official or full name, sometimes when the city has two  languages spoken there), but it has to be seen to be significant.  When pronunciations are added even one alternative can become quite unwieldy, for an example see Tunisia - here we don't even give the French name, despite the strong association, many millions of people will use the name "Tunise".
 * Now your second point is more important. It concerns the ethnic and linguistic make-up of Yerevan, and events mainly in the twentieth century, which may have a role to play in the article. If so they should be covered in the history section or new linguistic or ethnic sections.  It is also possible that these matters should be dealt with elsewhere, in more general Armenia articles such as History of Armenia or more specific ones, History of Yerevan or cross cutting articles such as the one you mention above Deportation of Azerbaijanis from Armenia.  Trying to raise awareness through oblique means is as likely to be productive as attempting to suppress it that way.
 * Rich Farmbrough, 12:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC).


 * OK seems like we are getting closer to the consensus. If we compare Yerevan pronunciation with other cities, it is important to mention article Kars. MarshallBagramyan has engaged in another edit war in article Kars, where thinking that he had got "consensus" (which wasn't even achieved in there), he is trying to push POV by such edits like this one. Do you think that adding a single foreign name to the city is acceptable? While there is no Armenian living there, majority of population is made by Azerbaijani and Kurdish nationals. I don't even say that Armenians have never been a majority in Kars (unlike Yerevan) in reported period. Moreover, without getting over this consensus User:Yerevanci made uniliteral change in here. I am very suspicious him to be suckpoppet of MarshallBagramyan, it looks like MarshallBagramyan wanted his sockpuppet to do the job instead of him, since he himself engaged many edit wars lately. --Verman1 (talk) 10:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone else think that the behavior exhibited by Verman1 is remotely acceptable? Let's allow the baseless claims about Yerevanci being my sockpuppet slide but Verman1 clearly does not demonstrate a grasp of any of the ground rules of Wikipedia even after being an editor here for all these months. The comparison with Kars is misleading and it's quite unfortunate that Verman1 is going to such dire lengths to misrepresent the facts of the discussion that took place there over three years ago. This aggressive point-of-view pushing, little to no knowledge of Wikipedia guidelines, and liberal use of the facts shows that even after his 6-month block, he has yet to learn anything on how to establish consensus and present one's views without thrashing the other side. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait, why is my name mentioned here? Is there something wrong I did? If yes, then report me, if not please do not blame me for "not demonstrating a grasp of any of the ground rules of Wikipedia". If you think I'm wrong, then feel free to report me. And MarshallBagramyan why should you do all this pointless discussion? Just because some Azeris think that the Turkish name should be here, doesn't mean it should be here. And one more time. The sockpuppet discussion is over and it's proved that I'm not. Please stop it. --Yerevanci (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Yerevanci, my comment regarding "he clearly does not demonstrate a grasp of any of the ground rules of Wikipedia..." is referring to Verman1. I have edited that line to allow for clarification. Sorry about the confusion.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, it's my fault. I didn't read it carefully. --Yerevanci (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Tatar
Can someone explain why the source used as a reference, i.e. Brockhaus and Efron, is being tampered with and misquoted? The source clearly uses a term Azerbaijani Tatars: Население Э. (17345 мужчин и 11688 женщин) слагается из русских — 2 %, армян — 48 % и адербейджанских татар — 49 %; What's the point in introducing personal interpretation of the source into this article? Grand master  06:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The term Azerbaijani Tatars was not used prior to 1918, as Azerbaijan never existed as a state before that period. Enough with your reverts, otherwise an administrator will be informed about your edits.--Preacher lad (talk) 08:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary was published in 1890–1906, so clearly the term was used prior to 1918. We have already had a discussion with you about that at User_talk:Preacher_lad, but you decided to resume an edit war and remove sourced info. I think it is time to alert the admins about your behavior. Grand  master  16:47, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have yet to see a source for "Caucasian Tatars". Grand  master  07:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Malware Link Removal
-- Gary  Dee  15:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Malicious URL: ( Hex Obfuscation, Obfuscated script )
 * https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/a3ffd0182273d8410efc818e74aaa81a3de2c28f5b1ca6b4c1ca64b9b9461220/analysis/1373639624/
 * hxxp://www.aysor.am/en/news/2012/05/26/somali-president-elections/
 * https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/941d224a6e58e42bd77f82cb2594bd98e08f7df7323c84199302e411bd1def98/analysis/
 * http://urlquery.net/report.php?id=3689748
 * HTML as an APP = Malicious Intent
 * https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/74578bfd90d860ce278a00213163da2ff2fa3caeff7472e4b05f1ad9c865eb74/analysis/1373639372/
 * http://quttera.com/detailed_report/www.aysor.am
 * hxxp://www.aysor.am/js/load_js.php?c=23
 * https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/7844a57599cffd0713fa31c8a3d9b0cbc116c558fff7bdc3a6e9ebe4af0adb1c/analysis/1373639106/
 * http://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.aysor.am
 * http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/www.aysor.am
 * A suspicious code was identified loading content from a blacklisted domain:
 * DOMAIN:
 * hxxp://ads.adfox.ru/
 * https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/119624c049e1752eeef36152079754c2bb6398c62c708216414c3d3c0b853748/analysis/1373639977/
 * http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/ads.adfox.ru

Google Ngram Viewer
Yerevan vs. Erevan vs. Erivan -- Ե րևանցի talk  01:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)