Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of damaged Islamic and Azerbaijani sites during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. The quality of the discussion is poor. It rarely addresses the policy questions at issue: do the sources in the article sustain it in the light of WP:N, WP:RS and WP:NOR?  Sandstein  10:44, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

List of damaged Islamic and Azerbaijani sites during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This incomprehensible bulk of POV text and unverifiable list of partisan claims does not meet basic criteria for an article on English Wiki and serves to incriminate the "enemy vandal nation" It violates WP:ADVOCACY, WP:VERIFY, WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV policies. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. --Armatura (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. Poorly sourced article. Fails verification by third party, non-partisan sources. The title alone is a violation of NPOV (Islamic and Azerbaijani ???) and should be renamed to List of cultural and religious sites damaged during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and include both Azerbaijani and Armenian damaged sites, the list is pretty short anyways. Still in favor of deleting it rather than keeping it with these sources. Eurofan88 (talk) 19:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep and Improve. Destruction of Shusha city was describes with neutral sources in the lead. Article has references from BBC and Amnesty International. I also agree on adding Armenian sites damaged during the war. Also in talk page, one user called it one that serves to incriminate a whole nation, and to advance dangerous Armenia vs Islamic World concept. With that logic, we should delete any article about Islamic terrorism since it may anger Muslim readers.--Abutalub (talk) 21:44, 18 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. First, there is a problem in the title of the article: "Azerbaijani" and "Islamic" mean the same thing, why separate them? Secondly, since there is no press freedom and Azerbaijan is ranked 167 in the World Press Index Freedom, so the "Azerbaijani side claims" section looks very much like propaganda, since even years after the war, the claims were not confirmed by third-party sources. Also, a title proposed by Eurofan88 List of cultural and religious sites damaged during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict seems controversial. Since the conflict has lasted from 1988 to the present day, how can one qualify that this or that building was damaged during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict? For future, "List of [cultural and religious] sites damaged or destroyed in Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding areas" can be my proposed option using only third party reliable sources (without any claims from all sides). Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 19:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you read the article because it includes neutral sources about how Shusha and Azerbaijan graves are destroyed.--Abutalub (talk) 22:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think the title could be improved. As for the context, destruction of Azerbaijani cultural heritage is well documented by third party sources, and there is also plenty of photo and video evidence. Grand  master  21:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep and Improve. If it can include both Azerbaijani and Armenian monuments and be renamed to List of damaged Azerbaijani and Armenian sites during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict it should be kept.Carthago814 (talk) 14:04,20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * What means "during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict"? For example, is the destroyed medieval Armenian cemetery in Nakhijevan considered destroyed "during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict" or not? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 08:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It should only include cultural heritage sites destroyed in the first and 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh wars and not the Armenian cemetary in Julfa that is cultural destruction. Carthago814 (talk) 10:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Julfa is also in Nakhchivan not Nagorno-Karabakh Carthago814 (talk) 10:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Most of the sites in the list are outside of Nagorno-Karabakh. So it should be renamed to either "during Nagorno-Karabakh war" or "in Nagorno-Karabakh" as the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict started in 1998 and continues to this day. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 10:40, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Btw, destruction of the Armenian medieval cemetery was described as 'the worst cultural genocide of the 21st century'. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 10:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It also includes the former Armenian-occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh. But renaming it to "List of damaged Azerbaijni and Armenian sites in Nagorno-Karabakh" would be clear. And the destruction of Julfa is already on the List of destroyed heritage while some Azerbaijni damaged heritage is not on the list. Carthago814 (talk) 11:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your interest in Islam, Turkey and related topics, but have you read the "article"? It is a classical case of kompromat - damaging information which may be used to create negative publicity. Roughy like Israeli demolition of Palestinian property. We have to remind ourselves the Advocacy policy which dictates that Wikipedia is a not a place for advocacy, and advocacy is exactly what this "article" does. Wikipedia is not a repository either, what is the encyclopedic value of keeping a list like that? Have you looked at the sources? - 1news.az "Армянские вандалы разрушили (Armenian vandals destroyed)..."""". " "Erməni təxribatı (Armenian Provocation)".... etc. And what are "Azerbaijani sites" anyway, can anybody define that clearly? Sites in Republic of Azerbaijan? Soviet Azerbaijan? First Azerbaijan Republic? Iranian Azerbaijan? Would that include the disputed Nagorno Karabakh itself? If yes - which borders - before 1992-1994 or before 2020? How about sites that precede Azerbaijan as political or cultural entity? There are so many issues that I am afraid the best solution is deletion or a move to draftspace and only when it meets basic standards of wikipedia - to be reviewed and nominated for inclusion. The creator does not appear keen on improvement either - reverted an attempt of cleanup and constructive suggestions in talkpage were met with resistance and avoidance of questions. --Armatura (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , "Azerbaijani" here refers to Azerbaijani population of Nagorno Karabakh and adjacent territories. Are you denying that OSCE fact-finding mission found the Fuzuli city in ruins? Or Insitute for War and Peace reporting that Armenians burnt down Azerbaijani homes in Shusha? I am sure we can find Armenian sources that Azerbaijanis burnt down their own mosques too, right? Since we have article called Israeli demolition of Palestinian property, we can rename this article to List of damaged Azerbaijani properties.Abutalub (talk) 11:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a place for advocacy and ethnonational struggle, as simple as that. --Armatura (talk) 17:48, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

According to OSCE fact finding mission, 7 occupied districts of Azerbaijan are almost completely ruined. Which means that every Azerbaijani cultural monument there is ruined too. There is plenty of photo and video evidence available even on wiki commons. Grand master  22:26, 23 October 2021 (UTC)


 * , the problem is that we can't use Azeri news websites. We need third-party sources like BBC, Amnesty International and so on.Abutalub (talk) 10:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m getting tired of saying this, Grandmaster, but one can’t just synthesise and makes news article from available photography, that’s WP:OR and WP:SYNTH --Armatura (talk) 11:31, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * We don't have to synthesize anything. There are plenty of sources on destruction of mosques in Shusha, for example, or the mosque in Agdam. And the photos illustrate their present condition. Here is a source about Agdam's mosque and bread museum:  Grand  master  15:00, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , I can't enter rferl.org. Can you copy information about Agdam's mosque and bread museum here and I can use it in the article.Abutalub (talk) 20:28, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * There are photos that show ruins, and caption under the bread museum says: A Soviet-era mural still stands amid the city ruins. The caption under mosque photo says: The neglected and damaged interior of Agdam's once-glorious mosque. Grand  master  21:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This needs less allegations of partisanship and more discussion of the sources that are actually cited in the article: do they sustain the article in the light of WP:N, WP:RS and WP:NOR? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:16, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Obvious case of WP:SOAPBOX. --Steverci (talk) 02:26, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, but improve, with more third-party sources. Also, perhaps should be renamed to something more specific, e.g. "cultural heritage" instead of just "sites". All available evidence indicates that some damage to Azerbaijani cultural heritage has been made during the conflict. Brandmeistertalk  19:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , we should rename it just as in Israeli demolition of Palestinian property.Abutalub (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't mind. Brandmeistertalk  08:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Agdam​ was once a bustling centre for wine and agriculture and a thriving black market hub. Now it looks like a post-apocalypse movie set. The roads have been reclaimed by nature, and the few remaining patches of asphalt indicate where to find a path through thickets of shrubs and wild plants. Traces of its former elegance remain in the high arched windows of the public theatre or the destroyed façade of the city hall. Above the Muzei Khleba, the Soviet-era bread museum, its mosaic still showing a woman carrying a basket of grapes and a man in an astrakhan hat playing a lute, is the minaret of the 19th-century mosque – which, in an act of petty cultural revenge, was used as a barn after the city’s capture in the first war. Ghaith Abdul-Ahad. Each rock has two names: In Nagorno-Karabakh. London Review of Books, 17 June 2021  Grand  master  09:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment 9 items of the list are provided with third-party sources: Azerbaijani graves in Jabrayil, Agdam Mosque, Aghdam Bread Museum, Graves in the Martyr’s Alley in the Aghdam district, Grave and commemorative complex of Natavan Hurshudbani, Istisu resort, Mamar Mosque, Giyasly village Mosque, Azerbaijani religious monuments in Shusha (including Ashaghi Govhar Agha Mosque). I think this is enough for making article to exist.Abutalub (talk) 21:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is just a bulk of POV text, it doesn't serve encycolpedic purposes. Violations of WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE, topped with WP:SOAPBOX claims. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 05:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Another source on Agdam:


 * Comment The topic itself is notable and certainly there was destruction of Azerbaijani sites. As it was suggested earlier, it would probably be better to have one article for all cultural monuments destroyed or damaged during the NK conflict. The article as is has major problems:
 * Many sources are questionable. "Third-party views" are often quoted from Azerbaijani media which raises concerns about the bias and reliability.
 * The scope is not clear. The title says "sites" which means that every damaged house falls under the scope of the article. In that case the format of list wouldn't work.
 * As is, it's mostly throwing things so that something sticks. The article mentions piles of hay in village mosque (which is bad!) but it's hardly an example of damage. Similarly, there are smashed graves in Kelbajar cemetery (which is also very bad!), but most likely they weren't cultural heritage objects.
 * Considering that the said problems affect most of the article I feel it would be better to delete, decide on scope and start anew, incorporating useful bits from the current article. Alaexis¿question? 11:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to change the title to the List of damaged Azerbaijani cultural heritage sites during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, to narrow its scope and make it more precise. As for stacks or hay, the mosque was used as a barn. It is an insult to the religious feelings of Muslims, and therefore it is bad. But the mosque itself was plundered and damaged. Obviously, its interiors were not in that condition before Armenian forces took control of the area. Grand  master  13:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Renaming it as you suggested is also an option. Then we'd have to review the list and see which items fall under the scope of the article and are reliably sourced.
 * If the Giyasli mosque was plundered, damaged and made into a barn then this is what should be said in the article. Now it's just said that Kommersant reporter found hay in it. This is just an example of the content being all over the place. Alaexis¿question? 16:19, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * We obviously need better published sources. But there cannot be any reasonable doubt that Giyasly village Mosque is ruined. Photos taken by our fellow wikipedians speak for themselves. There is a video of it too: Iranian-French photographer Reza Deghati took the pictures of its condition when it passed to Azerbaijani control:  And I agree, we need to go through the list and see, which ones are reliably confirmed as destroyed or damaged, and keep those, and remove the ones that cannot be considered to be cultural heritage or confirmed as damaged/destroyed.  Grand  master  16:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably we see the desired state of the article similarly in terms of the scope of the article and the acceptable sources. The question is whether we can get there quicker by removing irrelevant things or by starting anew. My feeling is that the latter would be easier for everyone but I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Alaexis¿question? 20:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment. With all due respect, the article should be deleted, a new one should be created with an acceptable title and third party sources. Since the article also contains serious accusations that need to be confirmed in reliable sources, going through the WP:AFC will, in my opinion, be acceptable to all editors and is the best option for this issue. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 15:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep but improve. I believe there are more third-party sources regarding the subject. The subject itself is very notable, without any doubts.--Nicat49 (talk) 00:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * How so, can you elaborate? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 05:53, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Things like destruction of holy and culutral sites in Shusha can be added to Battle of Shusha (1992) (same for any other reliably sourced content to similarly related articles). Regardless, I'm not seeing how this list meet WP:LISTN as many of these entries occurred in diffetent conflicts several years apart. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 22:09, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a legitimate and well sourced list, with clear inclusion criteria. My very best wishes (talk) 01:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No reasoning for ad-sounding "legitimate", "well sourced", "clear inclusion criteria" provided at all. --Armatura (talk) 17:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does seem "pointy" as written. My very best wishes (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a hopelessly one-sided (inherently POV) and insufficiently sourced list. One could create a List of heritage sites destroyed during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict - by all sides of the conflict. My very best wishes (talk) 16:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.