Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan

 * Editors involved in this dispute
 * 1) – filing party


 * Articles affected by this dispute


 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
 * Talk:Azerbaijan
 * Talk:Azerbaijan
 * Dispute resolution noticeboard

Issues to be mediated
I created the "Name of Azerbaijan" section in the article Azerbaijan, where the usage of the term "Azerbaijan" was described. Here we could see a lot of sources claiming that the term "Azerbaijan" was used also for the lands on the north side of Aras river. In the map "Russia at the Caucasus" we can see it very well. I think in this section we can use this map which illustrates this fact very well.
 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)

But user Divot claims that the map is wrong. I don't agree with him, because there are no any sources saying that "the map is wrong".

Hablabar and Roses&guns don't want to see this section in the article. They see there some WP:CHERRY and some propaganda. But I don't see here any cherry and propaganda. In my opinion the section is about the usage of the term "Azerbaijan" in the region in the different periods of history and is based on several reliable sources (e.g. Iranica). --Interfase (talk) 05:39, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional issues (added by other parties)
 * The map is wrong, Details on TP. Moreover, I asked a well-known historian Bournoutian, his answer: "The map is wrong. The word Azerbijan is written in another font and script--compare it to Georgia.  It is impossible to put Erevan and Lake Sevan in the so-called Azerbijan in 1847-- since it was until 1840 the Armenian Province and after that the Erevan Guberniia." Divot (talk) 21:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. Interfase (talk) 05:39, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Agree. Divot (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Interfase is not allowed to participate in any discussion within AA2 area because of his recent ban. His non-compliance will be reported. Hablabar (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * This is not so. According to HJ Mitchell topic ban was a little over the top and he vacated this topic ban. I recommend not to use such arguments to freeze the discussion on this issue. --Interfase (talk) 08:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * According to clarifications the topic ban doesn't cover Azerbaijan topics in general—just topics related to the conflict with Armenia and similar geopolitical/ethnic disputes. --Interfase (talk) 15:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Topic bans are not necessarily a reason to exclude someone from mediation. Exceptions to bans include engaging in legitimate and necessary dispute resolution. In vacating the ban, HJ Mitchell said that a sweeping topic ban would be disproportional to the offence. Having considered the discussion regarding the ban and the comments above, I would be willing to accept this mediation provided that a sufficient number of parties agree to mediate in good faith. Sunray (talk) 21:08, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Please signify your agreement, or not, to this mediation. Sunray (talk) 02:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * Reject. Not enough disputants agreed to mediation. For the Mediation Committee Sunray (talk) 06:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)