Jump to content

Talk:Stepanakert

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mass undoing of edits by AntonSamuel and revival of the "update" tag

[edit]

In this edit from 25 January, @AntonSamuel: engaged in a mass reversion of about a month's worth of edits, and brought back the tag about the article needing to be updated. Some of those edits in the past month had been by me with the intention of updating the article enough such that it does not need that tag any more, but the reversion to the older version included a large amount of re-inclusion of obviously outdated information such as "Artsakh athletes also take part with the representing teams and athletes in the Pan-Armenian Games", and stating that Stepanakert is twinned with a list of cities. It also removed the addition of cited information I had added about the rebuilding of the Stepanakert to Yevlakh railway following the Azerbaijani conquest.

I'd like to ask what, if anything, should be done to update the article, if there is an "update" tag but any actual removal+updating of outdated information is being reverted en masse. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 18:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed that he reverted a lot of discussed and agreed content with no discussion at talk. For example, the statement of Azerbaijan's president about return of Azerbaijani refugees that was extensively discussed above has disappeared. [1] I don't think it is acceptable. Grandmaster 09:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Information shouldn't be simply removed, it should be recontextualised or moved elsewhere as historical information. Are there other reverts as implied by en masse that should be looked at or just the one from three months ago? CMD (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see that a lot of information was lost between the two edits. I agree that any dated information should be provided in the historical context, but updates as mentioned above, such as restoration of the railway connection, or return of Azerbaijani refugees should be restored. Grandmaster 15:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
> it should be recontextualised or moved elsewhere as historical information.
This is precisely what happened– I moved Artsakh-era-specific information into Stepanakert in the Republic of Artsakh with the appropriate changes to past tense, to ensure that the information is retained from a historical perspective and not lost. Now that the information has been reinserted here, it is now duplicated. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 15:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That article was created on your own initiative then? What purpose does it serve to separate the history of Stepanakert? AntonSamuel (talk) 17:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Separate articles for different historical periods are not novel to this situation. Chessrat, a bit more information regarding the creation of Stepanakert in the Republic of Artsakh would be helpful for attribution purposes at its talkpage. Was the whole thing copied, were the modifications during copying, etc. Template:Copied on both pages would help too. CMD (talk) 01:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was largely a content fork with some modifications where needed (tense changes, etc). I had only been aware of the practice of noting the fork in the edit description and not of doing so on the talk page too, so thank you for letting me know. It
It felt necessary to do as some content had already been lost from the article since the Azerbaijani takeover and ethnic cleansing, and if the article I created didn't exist then more information would gradually be lost over time (for example, notice how little of Szczecin describes the German culture that was dominant for centuries). Chessrat (talk, contributions) 11:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having looked into it, Template:Copied might not be appropriate as I copied from several different revisions, both from the start of 2024 and from prior to September 2023. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 12:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can use it to note multiple revisions, it's a bit lower in the documentation. (I try to directly copy paste from only one page to another page with no modification in any single edit to ease attribution, and make any merging/modifications in subsequent edits.) CMD (talk) 02:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The recent changes that were reverted were not discussed thoroughly enough - they included large removals of information and completely changed the introduction of the article – tilting all focus away from the recent ethnic cleansing of the Armenian population of the city and resulted in a version that was content-wise far away from the long-term stable version of the article. I have no issue with balanced updates with regard to the facts on the ground. AntonSamuel (talk) 15:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 June 2024

[edit]

Five months have passed since the last move discussion and someone is trying to push Commons into changing the name to "Khankendi" because supposedly it's more widely adopted at this point. Although I doubt they are correct and I don't think Commons should adopt the new name until it's at least changed on Wikipedia's end. So is there a reason the articles title can't be changed to "Khankendi" or does the same justification for not changing it from 5 months ago still apply? Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 06:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing notable has happened in the city for the past five months (it’s essentially a ghost city) so it has not garnered any additional international news coverage that would suggest the common name has changed in international reliable sources. The past 2 move discussions were unsuccessful because Stepanakert was still the common name in majority of sources. There really hasn’t been any significant change in the past 5 months or even any significant amount of high quality sources covering the city since then to merit a move discussion. TagaworShah (talk) 14:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I figured. Thought I'd ask though. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that most of the wikis have updated the title to Khankendi (except for Armenian and English Wikipedias). Per sources, I can see some updates, inclucing Reuters, CTV where Khankendi was prioritized. A vast majority of the older sources (since September 2023) have called the city Khankendi with a note that it has ben known to Armenians as Stepanakert. Both politically and realistically, the article title should be changed. There's zero reason to keep it Stepanakert at this point. — Toghrul R (t) 10:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither "politically" nor "realistically" are valid reasons for the names of articles on Wikipedia. As TagaworShah pointed out, nothing has changed with regards to coverage of the city by reliable sources within the past several months to warrant a renaming of this page now. Lightspecs (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lightspecs They are valid reasons at this point. The city renamed Khankendi in 1991, and as it was under NKR control, the most-used title was chosen as the article title. Now the city is no longer under de-facto NKR control; there has been established multiple institutions in the city, even a university is operating in the city.
As I mentioned, several wikis (e.g. French, Spanish, Russian) changed the article titles just because of the recent updates. I don't know what you mean by reliable sources, but international resources are going to call the city with both titles for a long time, but the primary title has been Khankendi, per the links I mentioned — Toghrul R (t) 07:04, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Reuters link deliberately goes out of its way to avoid picking one title. The CTV link does not work. It has never been policy to name places by their control, nor do the words used in other languages directly relate to the words used on English Wikipedia. CMD (talk) 07:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Google Maps now does seem to use Khankendi instead of Stepanakert. Usage may be evolving slowly towards Khankendi, though the question is when is the moment for Wikipedia to switch. De wafelenbak (talk) 22:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say the switch should happen when it stops being a ghost town. Glide08 (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Glide08 the town has been populated densely since September 2024, with the inauguration of Garabagh University. So, it's not a ghost town — Toghrul R (t) 11:41, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite amusing to see that, when Allahabad was renamed to Prayagraj (despite the heavy Ngram bias towards Allahabad), the relevant article here was quickly renamed; same goes for Astana to Nur-Sultan and back to Astana. Even for people that changed to a new name, like say Elliot Page (then Ellen Page; though not for Kanye West). Yet this one drags on. Wonder what's with the seemingly double standards here -- or that it's a reflection of the same double standards in the "reliable sources" -- or perhaps political considerations trump all other style rules? 151.192.43.70 (talk) 09:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, perhaps that's because the renames you've mentioned didn't involve exiling or genociding the entire city's population by an invading force? 83.168.71.21 (talk) 18:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How is that relevant? We're evaluating name changes, not how they changed. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I will propose another page move to Khankendi come December. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do think we should update the article to better reflect Azeri control (e.g. by adding Template:Administrative divisions of Azerbaijan ), but this is an issue separate from the renaming issue. As long as Stepanakert remains the most common name used to refer to the city, there is no reason to rename the article. The fact that this is an Armenian name is irrelevant: after all, 200+ years after the end of the French occupation of Firenze, we still use the French name of the city, Florence. De wafelenbak (talk) 16:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@De wafelenbak: That comparison is very weak. "Florence" is the common name used in English. No one says Firenze in English. Same thing for cities like Dunkerque being Dunkirk or Roma being Rome, or Milano being Milan, or München being Munich, whatever. Stepanakert and Khankendi are both used in English, so there's really no comparison here, it's not the same situation. Paul Vaurie (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we are at the point where Khankendi is more common, need agencies, Google, current residents, the university, all use Khankendi now. At some point there has to be a critical mass. Who is left using Stepanakert? Jimjom (talk) 23:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advocating for the Correct Naming of Stepanakert to Khankendi on Wikipedia

[edit]

Dear members of the discussion, I write to address the ongoing debate surrounding the appropriate legal name of the city currently listed as "Stepanakert" on Wikipedia. It is crucial to acknowledge the historical, legal, and cultural foundations that support renaming this city to its rightful name, Khankendi. Below, I outline the core arguments in favor of this correction:

Historical Accuracy: The city's original name, Khankendi, dates back centuries, long before the Soviet era when the name was altered to "Stepanakert." Khankendi reflects the city's authentic roots, underscoring its significance as part of the cultural and historical heritage of the region. Recognizing Khankendi is a step towards respecting documented history rather than perpetuating Soviet-era impositions.

Legal Grounds: Internationally recognized legal frameworks uphold Azerbaijan's sovereignty over the region, as reaffirmed by multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions and numerous international organizations. As the city is an integral part of Azerbaijan, it is appropriate and legally consistent to reflect the name endorsed by the Azerbaijani government—Khankendi.

Neutrality and Credibility: Wikipedia aims to maintain a neutral point of view while reflecting accurate and verifiable information. Adopting Khankendi as the official name ensures that Wikipedia adheres to its commitment to reliability and impartiality, avoiding politically biased narratives. Respect for Sovereignty: The continued use of "Stepanakert" disregards the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan, a principle widely recognized by international law. It is essential to use names that align with the legal and geopolitical realities of the region.

Consensus Among Reliable Sources: Authoritative sources, including government records, maps, and international documentation, consistently use Khankendi to refer to the city. Reflecting this name on Wikipedia would align the platform with credible, up-to-date references.

Public Expectations: The citizens of Azerbaijan and many supporters of historical justice strongly advocate for the restoration of Khankendi as the city's name. Renaming the city in Wikipedia is not only legally and historically correct but also reflects the aspirations of those who seek to preserve the region's authentic identity.

In conclusion, renaming the city from "Stepanakert" to "Khankendi" on Wikipedia is not only a correction of historical and legal inaccuracies but also a necessary step to uphold the platform's credibility and impartiality. I urge all participants in this discussion to consider these points and support the rightful restoration of the city's name to Khankendi.

Thank you for your attention and thoughtful consideration.

And please, be neutral guys :) So, I do not want someone to do racism. Be neutral and fair! 37.61.112.22 (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think ultimately it comes down to what is now most commonly used in English language sources and conversation, and I think Khankendi has now probably overtaken Stepanakert. I'm not sure of many sources still using Stepanakert Jimjom (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Jimjom, I would like to add to your thoughts. These days, "stepanakert" is not and cannot be used in the world media or world politics. The use of this expression anywhere today is considered vandalism (you can only and MAYBE come across this expression in media that tend to use this expression). Khankendi is one of the cities of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Khankendi University operates there. I read the opinions of some people in this discussion board, they simply do not want the real name of this city to be restored in Wikipedia by any means. This is based on their personal interests. In short,! Today, only Khankendi is used in the international community, using any other expression leads to vandalism, disrespect for the Republic of Azerbaijan, and many other violations of law Jabeerdi (talk) 08:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 January 2025

[edit]

Change Stepanakert to Khankendi Jabeerdi (talk) 08:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Khankendi is one of the cities of the Republic of Azerbaijan. In the Republic of Azerbaijan "stepanakert" is not used as an official city name. The city`s name is Khankendi. There is a university called Khankendi University and is open since 2024 September.[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. Please see the above move discussion where the consensus was not to move. You can open another move request if you wish to make this change. Heart (talk) 08:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stepanakert&oldid=1270641594"