Talk:We Are Our Mountains

Image copyright problem with Image:Nagorno-Karabakh Coat of Arms.png

The image Image:Nagorno-Karabakh Coat of Arms.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Spanked by Sirusho

To Azeris, who keep adding that Nagorno Karabakh Republic is de jure part of Azerbaijan. I suggest you read up on your own history, according to which Nagorno Karabakh Republic does not exist, therefore it can not be part of Azerbaijan. Besides don't you guys have better things to do, like writing about how great Geydar Aliyev is, than claiming everything as you own. Hope you enjoyed the spanking by Sirusho. 76.93.86.242 (talk) 04:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The reasaon is that Nagorno Karabakh Republic isn't a recognized country worldwide and it would be rather misleading to not inform readers about the dispute. chandler ··· 05:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Tiko310 (talk)Where is the "fainting Azeri" part? I read it a couple days ago, Nagorno Karabagh is not De jure part of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan says it does not exist! Delete de-jure in order to maintain validity.

Not only did that monument appear because of Sirusho lifeting up her clipboard. It was also behind her on the screen. And it was also part of the montage of Armenian symbols during the postacrd video before their song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.194.184.144 (talk) 03:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Sign your comments..And no it was not part of the clip, they removed it.Tiko310 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC).

De facto / de jure

So I'm confused about this thing: if it's not officially recognized, I don't see how it can be "de jure". Peccafly's edit comments when (s)he changed it back to "de jure" didn't say why this is correct.

On the other hand, Peccafly has the point that there is a decision in using [part of / ruled by], as in, implying consent.

As a disclaimer, I have no idea what politics or nationalistic colors are flying here, and was only watching the article because I was asked to help with info about the rock. Awickert (talk) 09:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Read the edit comment again: seems that I get it now - the region is de facto ruled by the N-K Republic, but it is by law a part of Azerbaijan. If this is the case, then all it needs is clarification. Awickert (talk) 10:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

(ec)Well it's de jure part of Azerbaijan isnt it? And I think that "currently" is a bit of a weasel word, almost crystalballing. We're not writing "Pristina is currently the capital of Kosovo" as if "But soon Serbia will take it back!" were to follow. chandler • 10:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

AFAI understand, there was an argument of "the region is de jure part of it" but "the country can't be because it doesn't exist". I agree, currently is a weasel-word; I just couldn't think of anything better to put there that was somewhat neutral. Awickert (talk) 10:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Azeri name

This is not an Azeri monument. So an "Azeri name" for it is irrelevant and misleading. --Vacio (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)