Talk:Armenia

Archives
Archive 1

Christianity in Independence section of infobox

I have removed the phrase "301 AD Official Adoption of Christianity" from the infobox. While the adoption of Christianity was undeniably an important moment in the history of Armenia, it has nothing to do with gaining independence or sovereignty: it was a decision by an already independent state. It deserves a lot of attention in History of Armenia, but the infobox is not meant for information like this. Aecis ^{Appleknocker Flophouse} 00:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

301 AD is one of the most important dates for all Armenians. In a sense, it helped to establish the Armenian nation in a significant way as it shaped the Armenian identification. For me, an Armenian, the year that Armenia adopted Christianity is just as important as those years when it was established or became independent. It should also be noted that Bulgaria has its Christianity adoption date included on its infobox. -- Clevelander 01:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

As I said, it was undeniably an important moment in the history of Armenia. That's why it should be mentioned at History of Armenia. But an important moment for a nation's identity is not automatically related to the independence of that nation. Adopting a religion is not a declaration of independence, or acquiring that independence. Aecis ^{Appleknocker Flophouse} 01:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The infobox IS meant for information like this! Who exactly are you to decide that it isn't? ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 01:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all I wanna urge you to calm down. Words like "who are you to decide" here or "utter crap" in a previous edit summary do not contribute anything to wikipedia. I would also like you to assume good faith on my part: like you, I don't have an agenda to follow (of which you accused me in your edit summary on Bulgaria).

We can both read. We can both see that the bold text heading that section says "independence". In every other country article, it simply says: independence declared: then-and-then; independence recognized: then-and-then. And that's what it should say in a section titled independence. Adopting a religion has barely anything to do with declaring or acquiring independence. It may be one of the factors in starting a process that can eventually lead to independence, but that's not enough to make mention of in the infobox. Aecis ^{Appleknocker Flophouse} 01:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I am trying to figure out where you are coming from with this, when such significant historical events have been tolerated for many country articles infoboxes, and I urge you to tolerate it for Armenia and Bulgaria. I see now those were the only countries you removed it on, but they both happened to come up on my list so I wrongly guessed you were doing it to several other countries as well - sorry if I overreacted. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 01:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Could you point me to some of the "many country article infoboxes" on which "such significant historical events have been tolerated"? I've now been through all of the European countries and much of Africa and Asia, and I've only come across Georgia, Armenia and Bulgaria. In Georgia, the reference to christianization has been removed, so only Armenia and Bulgaria remain. Why should these two be any different from the other countries? Yes, the christianization has played an important role in the national history of these two countries, but it has played an important role in the history of other countries as well. Could you explain to me how adopting a religion equals declaring or acquiring independence? Aecis ^{Appleknocker Flophouse} 16:46, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine either way, but one can make the argument that it's more important on the Eastern periphery of Europe than say in Central, Western or Nothern Europe. --Eupator 16:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

At the risk of going off-topic: That's indeed an argument one could make, and as a historian I find it feasible to some extent. However, western European countries were largely responsible for the spread of christianity in other continents. Christianization has been important in different ways in Eastern, Western, Central, Northern and Southern Europe. It's very hard to attach comparative importance to those differing historical trajectories of christianity. Aecis ^{Appleknocker Flophouse} 17:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

To Calgvla

My suggestion is by no means "racist", but just an attempt to make a compromise. Here are some points:

1. You said that "this texts keeps it consistent with the armenians arcile". However, the Armenians page says that Armenians originated in the Middle East. Please do not play with words.
2. Also, if you want to prove that Armenia is in the Middle East, please cite reliable sources. If you ask me, Armenia is in the Caucasus.
3. What do you mean the citation Eupator added is "fictional"?

—Khoikhoi 07:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

"# ^ The Geographic Web Site World Atlas places Armenia in Europe as do most European governments and sources, such as the BBC. The UN classification of world regions places Armenia in Western Asia as does the CIA World Factbook."

What European Govts and Sources think Armenian is in Europe? This is contradictory to the European Unions official position on Armenian and any Atlas produced by a respected publisher.

When did the BBC say Armenia was part of Europe, please state your source.--Calgvla 08:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

• 1.) Armenian is in the Middle East (http://www.geographyiq.com/countries/am/Armenia_map_flag_geography.htm) and also to according to every Atlas produced by a major publisher, so lets keep this consistent and take out the Eurasia refernce, it's so broad that it becomes meaningless

• 2.) The Contries of Europe entry should be below the Asia sections, it will mislead the reader into think Armenia may actually be in Europe

• 3.) I don't understand why this is an issue of debate, buy a map!

Armenia is Non-European, Proposed Changes

It is an offensive Point of View to include Armenia on the European continent, Armenia is located in Asia. How would you feel if some stranger stuck their picture in your family photo book? This is the case of a small group here trying to force Armenia into the European family.

I propose the following changes to remove the subjective point of view that Armenia is in Europe. The following changes will create a more truthful and accurate article that will cease to offend Europeans.

1.) Replace "Eurasia" with Middle East or Asia Minor, "Eurasia" is far to broad of a geographic area and replacing it with an accurate and more narrow geographic location will better serve Wikipedia readers.

2.) Replace this quote with the following, Current Quote

"Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe, however the official geographic classification of the country varies according to different sources. As a result, Armenia is sometimes seen as a transcontinental nation."

Proposed Quote "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is unique among it's Middle Eastern neighbors."

discussion of geography should be limited to the geography section.

3.) At the end of the Article the "Countries of Europe" section should be removed to avoid confusion and only leave Countries of Asia and West Asia.

Armenia is in Asia therefore it is an Asian culture and people, it may have had some European influences like the US, Canada, Australia, etc. but this does not make them European nations, nor should Armenia be considered European.

Please let's put a stop to these offensive and dishonest European connections and stick with the factual truth. It is very hurtful to the European community to force this inclusion upon us.--Calgvla 18:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• I support the proposed changes, they are fair and accurate.

I honestly don’t think it matters whether or not Armenia is considered a European or Asian nation. It is, of course, technically in the continent of Asia, but then again, so is most of Russia, a certainly “European” nation. And it would be inappropriate to deny the enormous cultural influence of the Greeks, Byzantines, and Romans on our people. Why Europeans would find the inclusion of Armenians among European peoples to be ‘offensive’ is hard to fathom. Would it offend central Europeans to have Cyprus, Crete, Sicily, or the Ukraine, or people in the Ural Mountains classified as European? East Kazakhstan falls within the boundaries of geographic Europe; would you consider eastern Kazakhs Europeans? ), and while the modern Armenian Homeland is located north of Anatolia, Diaspora communities have existed through the Middle East and southeast Europe for thousands of years. Besides, there is not strict guideline of what is ‘European’. Europe as both a cultural and genetic entity, has invaded (and, in turn, been invaded by) countless nations, both neighboring and afar. Many long-term inhabitants of the European mainland have closer connections, both cultural and genetic, to south and central Asia than they do to their neighbors. Europe is not a family; it is a thousand families who happen to share a chunk of history and a chunk of land. Geographical classification is no reason to disconnect Armenia, who has been a part of European history since before the birth of Christ, from being a ‘culturally European’ nation.

The Myotis 02:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

As an afterthough, give me your exact definition of 'European'. Do you define it geographically (in wich case it is debatable, but the polls favor Europe) or culturally (in wich case it is is almost certaintly part of Europe)?

Also, why does it make any differce to you where Armenians come from? It's not as though you will suffer from having Armenia as part of the same Continent. And I dont think most inhabitants of Europe feel otherwise.

The Myotis 07:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• • • • • • It matters to Europeans that their borders are not distorted. It’s best to serve the truth.

      Armenia is completely contained within Asia, therefore it is an Asian Culture.
      
      To say “Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of 
      Europe…” is wrong.
     
      Using this same logic, The US, Canada, Australia, New Zeland, etc. would also be 
      considered part of Europe. This would be an absurd conclusion. 
      Culturally Armenia has a predominate language, alphabet, traditions and customs 
      that originated outside of Europe, whereas the other aforementioned nations do not. 
      So they would have even a greater claim based on this logic.

      As for Armenia being a Christian nation, somehow qualifying it for inclusion in 
      Europe, this is also a fallacious criterion. By this logic Albania would be considered 
      part of Asia. More importantly the boundaries of Europe were clearly defined long 
      before Christianity was introduced.

     As for the Counsel of Europe, this is a non EU private organization. Being within the 
     Borders of Europe is not a requirement for membership. Any nation with significant 
     trade activities with Europe could join.

     In the larger picture even the EU does not require a nation be in the boundaries of 
     Europe to accept membership, e.g. Cypress. The EU is an organization with 
     expansionist Economic and Political goals.

     In a spirit of compromise and concession, I propose the following changes.

     1.) Replace "Eurasia" with Asia Minor, "Eurasia" is far to broad of a geographic area 
         and replacing it with an accurate and more narrow geographic location will better 
         serve Wikipedia readers.

     2.) Replace this quote with the following, 
         Current Quote
         "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe, however                 
         the official geographic classification of the country varies according to different 
         sources. As a result, Armenia is sometimes seen as a transcontinental nation."

         Proposed Quote 
         "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is unique among it's Asian neighbors.  
         Armenia has been highly influenced by European culture, trade, and politics, while 
         maintaining a rich indigenous culture, language and traditions"

     3.) At the end of the Article the "Countries of Europe" section should be removed to avoid 
         confusion and only leave Countries of Asia and West Asia.

         This is fair and accurate and we agree and move on?
         Peace to all--Caligvla 17:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Not going to happen.--Eupator 17:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to see a source supporting that claim about the Council of Europe's entry criteria.--Tekleni 17:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the objections here. Armenia is in the Council of Europe (and the UEFA). As far as I am aware, Armenians themselves consider that they have cultural links to Europe, and, indeed, there has always been a large Armenian diaspora in Europe proper. Armenia is of course geographically in Asia, but that's not the be all and end all. john k 17:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Look at this. The BBC's country profiles lists Armenia in the European countries and not in the Asian countries. See the drop-down tables at the right of the page [1]. Azerbaijan OTOH has both Europe and Asia [2].--Tekleni 18:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

To conclude, we would like to emphasize that the Armenian people – both in Armenia and in the European Diaspora – regards itself as a European people. This people was separated from the main European stream by unfortunate historical circumstances and is now resolutely committing to an in-depth reunification with the European family.

European Armenian Convention Declaration 19 October 2004, Brussels--Eupator 18:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, we must respect their self-identification, and make it compatible with other views. Therefore, Eurasia is true NPOV as it doesn't take sides.--Tekleni 18:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The entire foreign policy of the Republic of Armenia, likewise that of neighbouring Georgia is based on European integration or call it reintegration to be precise with the immediate goal of EU membership by 2020. The MFA has a European integration department for crying out loud.--Eupator 18:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• • • the BBC is not an unbaised source, and this is not the place to discuss it. There are many European and Armenian organizations trying to strengthen trade in the region, this does not change the geography of the region.

please keep things directed to unbaised academic sources that are non-political in nature. 1) The American Heritage Dictionary, places Armenia in Asia Minor 2) The CIA World Fact Book, places Armenia in Southwestern Asia, east of Turkey 3) Easton's Dictionary, places Armenia in western Asia 4) Encyclopedia Britannica, places Armenia in Transcaucasia, lying just south of the great mountain range of the Caucasus and fronting the northwestern extremity of Asia. 5) Rand McNally Atlas, places Armenia in Asia

the preponderance of credible academic non-political sources clearly establish Armenia in Asia, not Europe. Can we please agree to the changes and move on.--Caligvla 19:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The geographic ambiguity is already addressed here and everywhere else. Footnotes are abundant in the templates for Europe and Asia. Culturally, ethnically and historically Armenia is an extension of Europe. Due to the ambiguity of the region the term Eurasian is applicable for geographic purposes. Armenian self-definition and identification as Europeans counts for something as well. The EU also considers Armenia as well as Georgia long-term entry candidates for EU membership. We also have Cyprus as precedent. If you want to attempt to change Wiki consensus attempt an RFC, just try it :) You will need to do it for Cyprus, Georgia and Armenia. Note that this is the last time i'm directly responding to you. --Eupator 20:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hayastan is culturally in Asia, not in Europe. Its language is closely related to Persian and is not a member of European linguistic unity (which is based on Latin and Greek borrowings). Long history of Armenia is closely related to the great kingdoms of the ancient East and Mesopotamia. Menthality of Armenia is surely not European and racially they are close to the other nations of the Near and Middle East.--Nixer 22:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• • • They should be corrected as well, but I only have ability to take on one at a time, Again the EU is a political organization that does not require a nation to be IN Europe for membership.--Caligvla 20:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

See Copenhagen criteria.--Tekleni 20:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

See European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument Armenian is not IN Europe but an economic partner.--Calgvla 23:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

They do not say that Armenia is not in Europe... you made that up.--Tekleni 23:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Armenian in Wikipedia

A guideline on whether or not to italicize Armenian (and all scripts other than Latin) is being debated at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Italics in Cyrillic and Greek characters. - - Evv 16:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Request for Comment:Armenia not located in Europe

I propose the following changes.

     1.) Replace "Eurasia" with Asia Minor, "Eurasia" is far too broad of a geographic area 
         and replacing it with an accurate and more narrow geographic location will better 
         serve Wikipedia readers.

     2.) Replace this quote with the following, 
         Current Quote
         "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe, however                 
         the official geographic classification of the country varies according to different 
         sources. As a result, Armenia is sometimes seen as a transcontinental nation."

         Proposed Quote 
         "Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is unique among it's Asian neighbors.  
         Armenia has been highly influenced by European culture, trade, and politics, while 
         maintaining a rich indigenous culture, language and traditions"

     3.) At the end of the Article the "Countries of Europe" section should be removed to avoid 
         confusion and only leave Countries of Asia and West Asia.

Motives For: Serve the objective truth, Europeans are sensitive to the inclusion of Asian nations on the European continent. 22:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

No: Eurasia is accurate and is used for other countries as well; maybe that passage is negotiable, however your version is biased as it implicitly says Armenia is no European in all aspects; Armenia has officially stated that they consider themselves European, they are a prospective member of the EU, and a full member of the Council of Europe (which required the consent of all existing members and Armenia), therefore the European template stays.--Tekleni 22:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• Please keep things directed to unbaised academic sources that are non-political in nature.

1) The American Heritage Dictionary, places Armenia in Asia Minor 2) The CIA World Fact Book, places Armenia in Southwestern Asia, east of Turkey 3) Easton's Dictionary, places Armenia in western Asia 4) Encyclopedia Britannica, places Armenia in Transcaucasia, lying just south of the great mountain range of the Caucasus and fronting the northwestern extremity of Asia. 5) Rand McNally Atlas, places Armenia in Asia

the preponderance of credible academic non-political sources clearly establish Armenia in Asia, not Europe. --Calgvla 23:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't understand why this is up for debate, hardly anyone in Europe would consider Armenia part of Europe --66.233.115.220 23:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)