Talk:Republic of Artsakh

While not as old as the other articles above, this article's been a stub for over a year now and likely has no chance of further expansion. Content is poorly sourced and article fails WP:GNG as-is. Personally, I think it makes more sense to merge this content into the main Artsakh article given the museums are affiliated with Artsakh but I would also support merging to List of museums in Azerbaijan, which would benefit from the additional sourced content and also would improve the shared content imo. Would like to gain a consensus on this though since this isn't as straightforward as my other mergers to this article. Cheers, Dan the Animator 22:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis, Francis Tyers, Gog the Mild, SamuelRiv, Harut111, Parishan, Revolution Saga, Werldwayd, Arminden, Ліонкінг, Archives908, MirkoS18, SGGH, Alpha-Alpha 1890, and Akrasia25: pinging involved users. Feel free to participate in the other merge discussions I started above as well! Thanks everyone and sorry for the bother, Dan the Animator 23:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merging the Republic of Artsakh article with the main Artsakh article would be beneficiary to safeguard the few actually sourcable content there is, and try to create a more content-rich article. I don't see why we should merge it with the museums article. Alpha-Alpha 1890 (talk) 23:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation. I'm not sure what the best option is. I'm inclined to merge it all with general lists related to Azerbaijan but many affected institutions may stop their operations or/and move to Armenia. All of them could be mentioned in the main article about the historic republic as well (in case some of them moved to Armenia then in Armenian general lists as well, probably stating date of the move), but I think that main merge/redirect should go to corresponding articles on Azerbaijan. You may need to update general Azerbaijani articles correspondingly. Probably including sections with former institutions and institutions which were never formally recognised under Azerbaijan law but operated in the region (e.g. Artsakh University shall definitely be a part of the List of universities in Azerbaijan list irrespective of the fact that it was probably never formally recognised by Azerbaijani authorities).--MirkoS18 (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Similar to topics above:

A) You forgot to add the link: List of museums in the Republic of Artsakh.

B) Merger with Artsakh - yes, I can agree with that. We already have the National Museum as a subset to "Culture".

C) Merger with Azeri museums - no. As I wrote about the universities and even more so regarding the museums, Azerbaijan will decide what to do with anything connected to Artsakh. With no ethnically Armenian population left, the Az. authorities will close down most, or rename everything and replace the content. So rather no, keep it as part of the Artsakh article, may the whole Artsakh project RIP. If the Az. authorities will use the buildings for their own museums, then THOSE new museums should be added to the Az. list, with a mention of the Artsakh interlude (which the Az. Wiki-patriots will instantly remove). I don't expect any cultural continuity in any domain. See that pep talk by Monte Melkonian at the end of the "Monuments" section. Arminden (talk) 23:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't merge lists into this article, that's overloading the article with too many items. Hard to say what to do with this, they are probably defunct. I would not be opposed to a merge into an Azerbaijan list, it already includes museums older than Azerbaijan. If it must me merged into an Artsakh specific article, the obvious choice is the more dedicated Culture of Artsakh rather than jumping all the way up to this page. CMD (talk) 02:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Related to @Chipmunkdavis:, it seems reasonable to include the content from each list into multiple articles (for example Culture of Artsakh, Armenians in Azerbaijan, List of Museums in Azerbaijan...). The lists themselves may in fact be just deleted without any redirect or merge once content is moved. What I would say that it is very important to try our best to include content into general Azerbaijani lists by expanding them with "unrecognised" and/or former institutions which operated in the region. This is general English language Wikipedia so all of us should determine what belongs into those articles, they clearly and obviously don't belong to a certain group of editors alone. If there is some (probably quite justified) fear of biased or even xenophobic approach or editing conflict, it may be a constructive step (just an idea) if editors from local communities opt out from consensus building, particularly from mere vote accumulation without argument? Smart approach here would certainly show maturity and may challenge any unjustified negative preconception about local communities' capacities.--MirkoS18 (talk) 09:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per CMD, I also think Culture of Artsakh might be a good merge-destination page. Even if the content is merged there, parts of the museums list can still be included on the Azerbaijan article or other locations per MirkoS18. I'll leave the discussion open a bit longer to get a better consensus but the culture article makes a lot of sense to me.

Also MirkoS18, to reply to your comment on who's contributing to the consensus, I don't there should be any restrictions. We're not vote counting so there can't be votestacking and consensus is usually based on the strength of an argument, not its support. Also, editors with ties to the region could bring in very helpful & perfectly valid points imo. Cheers, Dan the Animator 18:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also should've posted this here earlier but I started another merge discussion yesterday at Talk:Economy_of_the_Republic_of_Artsakh#Merge_discussion. Feel free to take part in that discussion too if you can. Dan the Animator 18:55, 30 December 2023 (UTC) That merge discussion was closed & merge completed. Cheers, Dan the Animator 18:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if it sounded as if I am proposing any formal restrictions. Reflecting on our experiences in Balkans, it is sometimes good to take a step back and show certain restraint. No question that as a rule local editors will have comprehensively better understanding of the entire context and better knowledge of even basic factual evidence. I still believe that at least some of them may be more inclined to have certain level of (sometimes unconscious) bias towards one or the other side and it may be useful to keep it in mind to avoid disruptive arguing. Yet I am certainly not proposing any formal limitations, just maybe mistakenly assuming some of our regional experiences may be useful in this case. Apologies for somewhat long digression/clarification.--MirkoS18 (talk) 19:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is better to add this in the List of museums in Azerbaijan article as this land is in the Azerbaijan.

Oppose merge to List of museums in Azerbaijan - these were museums in the Republic of Artsakh and there is no evidence if any or all will operate under Azerbaijani control, they might be even closed and never operate again, we can't tell what will happen. So I don't agree with a merger. Vanezi (talk) 13:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanezi Astghik: what's your thoughts on merging to Culture of Artsakh? Dan the Animator 17:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This country does not exist anymore, but the museums are still there. I reckon we should change the article title from List of museums in the Republic of Artsakh to List of museums in Nagorno-Karabakh instead. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:340F:C609:235A:EFE8 (talk) 09:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

seems like this discussion has been dead for almost 2 months but the ugly merge banner remains; i figure i might as well put my 2 cents in. support merging with Culture of Artsakh as that's more directly relevant & practical. this article is bloated as it is & i don't see a neat way to fit that information in. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 05:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]