Jump to content

Talk:Seyran Ohanyan

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Off2riorob (talk | contribs) at 21:54, 1 March 2010 (→Comparable cases). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Primitive propaganda-like sources

Grandmaster, the Azerbaijani government is entitled to say whatever it wants but this is, after all, Wikipedia – we don't dignify and legitimize primitive propaganda-like sources which, to quote Meowy's remarks, talk

"about [the] 'Genocide of [the] Azerbaijanis' by Armenians, of Azerbaijanis being 'peaceful' and a 'sinless people', of the alleged massacre being 'one of the 20th century’s most serious crimes against all humanity – equal to Lidice' (Dinc əhalinin vəhşicəsinə kütləvi qırğını bütün insanlığa qarşı ən ağır cinayətlərdən biri olmaqla, XX əsrin Xatın, Lidiçe, Babi Yar kimi dəhşətli faciələri ilə bir sırada dayanır), and that 'lying Armenians' and 'Armenian nationalists' have 'invented' the 1915 Armenian Genocide to gain sympathy at an international level to justify their claims against the territory of Azerbaijan (Erməni millətçiləri qonşu dövlətlərə, o cümlədən Azərbaycan Respublikasına qarşı ərazi iddialarına haqq qazandırmaq, bunun vasitəsi kimi seçdikləri işğalçılıq, soyqırımı və dövlət terrorizmi siyasətini pərdələmək üçün hər vasitədən istifadə edərək, guya 1915-ci ildə ermənilərin soyqırımına məruz qaldıqları barədə uydurmaların beynəlxalq səviyyədə qəbul olunmasına cəhdlər göstərirlər).

This is racism in its ugliest form and you are violating WP:BLP. There is no way to word their accusations in a neutral point of view because they themselves are not neutral; the Azerbaijanis have their own agenda to advance. If an international court has indicted Ohanyan for such crimes, then it is far better to cite them than some fringe Azerbaijani source.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed war crime paragraph

Military personnel of the 366th Motorized Rifle Regiment, stationed in Stepanakert, was directly involved in the attack on Azerbaijani town of Khojali on 25-26 February 1992, in the course of which hundreds of Azerbaijani civilians were killed by Armenian forces.[1][2] The National Assembly of Azerbaijan (Milli Məclis) of the Republic of Azerbaijan stated in its declaration that Ohanyan was one of the officers of 366th regiment who led the attack on Khojali (city).[3]

  1. ^ Bloodshed in the Caucasus: escalation of the armed conflict in Nagorno Karabakh. Human Rights Watch, 1992. ISBN 1564320812, 9781564320810, p. 21
  2. ^ Thomas De Waal, Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War, NYU Press, 2004, ISBN 0-8147-1945-7, p. 173
  3. ^ Declaration of Milli Mejlis of Azerbaijan with regard to the 15th anniversary of the Khojaly genocide

This is about the person, whom Azerbaijani parliamentary commission accuses of being involved in war crimes. The opinion of the parliament should be included as an opinion. Grandmaster 08:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please explain why you consider the declaration an opinion.
  • I don't understand what "its declaration" is. Surely it has a title.
  • I'm not sure how we are going to get past the translation problem. The declaration is a critical citation for this paragraph and I can't read it.
Here is an English copy of the cite: http://www.khojaly.net/docs.html. I don't know how reliable it is.Jarhed (talk) 08:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is another editor on this article that considers the declaration "racist propaganda". That is a pretty harsh criticism, and I would like to know what basis he or she has for saying that.
  • The Armenian Army should probably be mentioned in here somewhere, but since I don't have the references, I'm not sure how to word it
  • It might be helpful to briefly explain this action in the larger context of the war. Wikipedia articles don't shed much light and I don't want to recreate it here, but some mention is probably appropriate.
  • There should probably be a wiki link to an appropriate Armenian article, but I'm not sure which one.

Jarhed (talk) 19:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source is not acceptable for a BLP. I'm surprised you think "racist propaganda" is harsh criticism since I had given quotes from it. What language would you use to describe a declaration that, for example, stated that the Holocaust didn't happen and that it is all a Jewish fabrication and part of their plotting to deceive the entire world? Meowy 21:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are seeing POV where there is none, please calm down. "Racist propaganda" is a harsh criticim whether true or not. Also, please let's avoid bringing discussions of other atrocities into this discussion, thanks.Jarhed (talk) 21:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you denying that that Azerbaijani "declaration" states that the Armenian Genocide was invented by Armenians as part of their plots against the world community? Or are you denying that making such a statement is equivalent to making a statement that the Holocaust was invented by Jews as part their plotting to deceive the entire world? Or are you saying that a source which denys the Holocaust is of course OTT and invalid, but it is acceptable to deny the Armenian Genocide because they weren't Jews and such denial shouldn't attract harsh criticism because it isn't directed against Jews. Or are you saying that it is acceptable to use both the claims of a Holocaust denialist source and an Armenian Genocide denialist source? Or would you just like to apologise and start again, treading more carefully? It was you who asked what basis there was for that "racist propaganda" wording - I was explaining the basis. And I'm not discussing other atrocities - I was trying to convey the low quality of the Azerbaijani source by comparing it to how a similar source (but on another subject) would be treated. Meowy 22:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first two source state that the 366th Regiment participated in the assault against Khojaly but they make no direct mention of Ohanyan. Ohanyan, furthermore, was a commander of the 366th's 2nd Battalion, and according to Helsinki Watch, the unit itself was not acting upon the orders of its commanders [1]. The above section is grasping for straws. It stiches one incident to one individual without adducing any direct evidence. We can take the Azerbaijani commission's findings with a grain of salt, given the disrespectful and (outright racist) language it employs all throughout the website.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 03:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What does Armenian genocide have to do with Ohanyan? Nothing. So let's stick to the topic. The text of declaration in English is available here, [2] but the quality is not good, and some parts of text are missing, specifically the one that mentions Ohanyan. Somehow they lost a text fragment, and it does not make much sense in that section.
The following text:
Xocalı şəhərinə hücum əməliyyatına 366-cı alayın zabitləri Seyran Ohanyan (hazırda – işğal edilmiş Dağlıq Qarabağ bölgəsində Ermənistan Respublikasının yaratdığı oyuncaq qurumun “müdafiə naziri”), Yevgeni Nabokix, Valeri Çitçyan rəhbərlik etmişlər.
should be translated as follows:
The attack on the town of Khojaly was led by the officers of 366th regiment Seyran Ohanyan (at present - "minister of defense" of puppet regime created by Armenian republic in the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region), Yevgeni Nabokikh and Valery Chitchyan.
While the Azerbaijani parliament is not a neutral source, it is an important information that Ohanyan is accused in Azerbaijan to be one of the perpetrators of the Khojaly massacre. Azerbaijani POV must be reflected too. As for Ohanyan himself, he took part in fighting on the Armenian side while serving in 366th regiment, and later defected to the Armenian side, after the regiment was evacuated to Georgia. By commanders the sources mean not the commanders of the regiment, but commanders of Soviet Transcaucasus military district, which formally ordered the regiment to observe neutrality. Krasnaya Zvezda, the official newspaper of the Soviet and later Russian Ministry of Defense, makes it clear:

despite categorical orders of the command of the military district, some military personnel of the 366th regiment took part in military operations near Khodjaly on Karabakhi side on the 20s of February. Красная звезда, 11.03.92. Карабах: война до победного конца?

Grandmaster 10:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is not a platform for POV material. No court or international body or neutral source has accused Ohanyan of "war crimes", no evidence has even been presented that indicates Ohanyan was in Khojali, far less being amongst those firing on the retreating civilians. The sole source is unacceptable as a source: its content indicates that it is a propagandistic text that shows disregard for the truth. The most obvious example of that disregard is its false claim that the Armenian Genocide is an Armenian invention, but there are many more examples - not a sentence in it is free from lies or distortions. Though, interestingly, even it at no point says "Ohanyan committed war crimes". Meowy 02:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the version that I proposed. It only repeats what the source actually says, i.e. Ohanyan was one of those in charge of the attack on the city. The parliament of Azerbaijan is a notable organization, and their opinion deserves mention. For instance, in the article about Thomas de Waal the opinion of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is presented, even though it is not even a recognized state. Why we should not quote the parliament of a country? It is important info that this person is accused of certain things in another country. Grandmaster 07:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That sort of loose content isn't allowed on a BLP entry. Your version is weasily worded, avoiding saying outright an unsupported claim like "Z is alleged to have committed war crimes" but wording the text to imply exactly that by saying "some members of group X were at location Y, at location Y war crimes were committed, and Z was a member of group X". What the source says is irrelevent - the source is not a usable source for Wikipedia. Meowy 17:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Such sources are used in the article about de Waal. How come it is Ok to use POV sources in one article, and not Ok in another one? It is an important info that this person is accused of taking part in the attack on Khojaly. We are not saying whether he did actually take part or not, we are just reporting the opinion of Azerbaijani parliament with proper attribution. That is quite in line with the rules. No one can deny that Azerbaijani parliament is accusing Ohanyan of being involved in the attack on the city, you can read the declaration on the website of the parliament. And it is a notable organization. Grandmaster 12:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BLP noticeboard

Usually when people post on the noticeboard, they believe that they need an editor to help with the dispute. I will be glad to help if I can. Unfortunately, there are editors on this article who want to engage in some sort of partisan fight that I don't care about. I refuse to participate. So, let me know what you want me to do.Jarhed (talk) 20:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would really appreciate you participation in this discussion. We need a third party input to resolve the dispute. Grandmaster 10:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think if at least one reliable third-party source explains the criminal war charges or simply lists them, that would suffice for inclusion. Brand[t] 12:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you present that citation for people to look at? Off2riorob (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will be glad to participate. I think that we should put your proposed warcrimes paragraph in its own talk paragraph and move personal attacks against editors to another paragraph. I tried to make it that way and was reverted. I am not going to get in a shouting match with a psychopath.Jarhed (talk) 00:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One more outburst like that and I will make a formal complaint. If you want to contribute then start to behave responsibly. Meowy 00:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree, that is uncivil and he should strike that comment. Off2riorob (talk) 00:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support. I don't respond well to threats and I don't give a fig about wikipedia proceedings or formal complaints.Jarhed (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't give a fig about wikipedia proceedings or formal complaints then why were you frequenting the BLP discussion page? Even before that "psychopath" comment you had disrupted this page by moving legitimate posts and placing them under a derrogatory "Partisan ranting" section. Meowy 01:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comparable cases

Let us look at comparable articles. E.g. Ante Gotovina. The mentioned general is also not convicted yet. But there is a lenghty information about the accusation.

An article is not necessarily a sentence. It simply stipulates a fact - that Azerbaijani side incriminates a person, a member of foreign government.

Besides, we should mention a fact that Major Ohanyan participated in Khojaly operation. It is an important part of his military career.

Zod1981 (talk) 21:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from the second sentence of the cited wikipedia article: "He was indicted in 2001 by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia". There is no comparison with the propaganda you are trying to insert into this article. Meowy 21:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have left editor Zod1981 a message on his talkpage also, please do not reinsert this disputed material without support and consensus on the WP:BLPN thanks Off2riorob (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Seyran_Ohanyan&oldid=347173021"