Talk:Carpet/Archives/2015
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Freeanthony in topic Pazyrlyk Carpet
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Armenian Carpet
Dear users, the provided sources are very dubious because they are clearly promoting one point of view. Not any published book can be of academic authoritative source. WP:SCHOLARSHIP where it clearly states the problem of having an for example armenian publshing which obviouslt is omnivious to all other ideas and perceptions.
- 1)Pazyrlyk carpet origin is contested- see Hermitage for that
- 2) Artsakh is not commonly used term for Nargono Karabkh at that times it was either christian melikdoms of Karabakh or current term of Nargono Karabakh. Artsakh is also armenized form of Orchistine of probably Albanian origin.
- 3)I went over and over book of al Masudi which is "Medows of Golds and Mines" on arhcive.org it has no mention of Artaskh this is POV violation as you are using a source to gravitate the point or make assumption
Pazyrlyk Carpet
while i believe its of Proto-Turkic origin since its in Altai, However i was fairly amused to see Armenian? I don't understand how Armenian carpet can be found in Altai mountains? Like it doesn't make any sense to even suggest this kind of things, Please keep Wikipedia as neutral as you can i understand a lot of Armenians here like to claim half of the worlds "first things" the Wikipedia is not an arena to prove right or wrong its to share knowledge not myth or disinformation. Agulani (talk) 11:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- I have updated my claims with source from Hermitage museum which i believe here should be the only authoritative source while a lot of experts do think it is of Persian origin only one thinks of Urartian origin. I believe there is no point of discussion from here, putting Armenia where it clearly does not have a major historical backing is against WP:NPOV and is of course WP:NOR Agulani (talk) 09:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've reverted text copied from The Real Azerbaijan with A Traveler's Eyes by Anar Hummatov (seen here). See WP:CV for policy on copyright violation. Ewulp (talk) 13:00, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- The sources you have added to support your removal of any reference to Armenia from the description of the Pazyryk Carpet in the "History" section say this: "This carpet was probably manufactured in Armenia or Persia around 400 B.C." [1] "The Pazyryk Carpet most likely came from Central Asia, though it is really a tossup between Persia or Armenia."[2] Shouldn't our article accurately report what the sources say? Ewulp (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- Exactly but it doesn't say it is Armenian as sources before said. The Hermitage sources state clearly the origin is unknown it might have come from any of the regions. Before this sources the only mention was "Pazyrluk is Armenian" How? When? One expert says that, others say its persian, some say it might be both, There is no need to Armenize the carpet. The source of Hermitage says that the origin is unknown. The way i see it that Hermiatge is First source or the most authoritative. Secondary sources is the Urartian vs Persian origin. If you notice none of the Iranian sources even mention Urartu. I believe to go within the line WP:NPOV of either Hermitage official source of no exact origin or we include that it might be of Urartian or Persian origin. The reason why i removed Armenia is because first of all the date when the carpet was found Urartu existed but not as Armenia, it is like saying Asterix was french not gaul? Second of all the exact region is contested so why should Armenia be mentioned as only origin or the main? I believe we have reached consensus, Regarding Azerbaijan i do agree and i will proceed with the changes but the picture was made by me so no copyright issues on that Agulani (talk) 14:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- Actually by the 5th c. BCE there was no Urartu but Armenia. Armenia was even mentioned in the 6th century BCE on royal Persian Behistun inscriptions. At the same time Greek historians like Hecataeus of Miletus called the country Armenia. To call the rug "Urartian" is nonsense as no expert calls it Urartian, but rather Armenian. To add to that Urartu and Armenia are merely synonyms just as Ararat is in Hebrew and Harminuia in Elamite. In any case by the 5th century BCE from where the Pazyrlyk Carpet dates there was most definitely an Armenia and the country was called exactly with that name as opposed to the Babylonian exonym "Urartu". Moreover the unambiguously Armenian dynasty of the Orontids was established in the 6th century BCE, well before the Pazyrlyk Carpet is dated Freeanthony (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- Exactly but it doesn't say it is Armenian as sources before said. The Hermitage sources state clearly the origin is unknown it might have come from any of the regions. Before this sources the only mention was "Pazyrluk is Armenian" How? When? One expert says that, others say its persian, some say it might be both, There is no need to Armenize the carpet. The source of Hermitage says that the origin is unknown. The way i see it that Hermiatge is First source or the most authoritative. Secondary sources is the Urartian vs Persian origin. If you notice none of the Iranian sources even mention Urartu. I believe to go within the line WP:NPOV of either Hermitage official source of no exact origin or we include that it might be of Urartian or Persian origin. The reason why i removed Armenia is because first of all the date when the carpet was found Urartu existed but not as Armenia, it is like saying Asterix was french not gaul? Second of all the exact region is contested so why should Armenia be mentioned as only origin or the main? I believe we have reached consensus, Regarding Azerbaijan i do agree and i will proceed with the changes but the picture was made by me so no copyright issues on that Agulani (talk) 14:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)