Talk:Sharur District

Former names[edit]

The town was called Bash-Norashen according to Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary. Ayvazian is not a reliable source. Also, I'm not sure whether there was Norashen district. The district could have been created after it was renamed after Lenin. Grandmaster 12:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Argam Ayvazian is a reliable source. Ayvazian specifically says Norashen for the region's former name. On Ayvazian's detailed map for this region there are two Norashens. There is a Norashen on the plain, next to the railway, and there is another Norashen called "Ulia Norashen" that is further up the Arpa river valley (presumably this is Bash-Norashen, since "bash" normally means "upper" as in "further up the valey", though I don't know what "ulia" means). Ayvazian also refers to a Verin Norashen in his text, which is probably also Bash Norashen since "verin" means "upper". This info obviously also applies to the Sharur town entry. I might be able to get a scan of a large-scale Soviet-period map that might settle the question. Meowy 02:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meowy don't you get GM's reasoning? Any person whose last name ends with "ian" or "yan" or who identifies himself as Armenian is biased, and therefore unreliable. The Bunyadov-like excuses keep rolling into quash any mention of Armenians or Armenia in lands that are now part of Azerbaijan.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 07:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was assuming some good faith in assuming that Grandmaster was just thinking that it was a different Mr Ayvazian, since I also wouldn't support using that other Ayvazian as a source. Meowy 16:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources are maps published in Russia, or official Russian sources and cyclopedias such as Brockhaus. I see no reason why Ayvazian should be trusted. He is not a geographer, and has an obvious bias in this issue. Bash-Norashen means Main Norashen. Maybe there were other settlements with this name, but Sharur is the same place as Bash-Norashen. It was the center of Sharur-Daralagez uyezd, and has always been the largest settlement in the district. And is there any evidence that there was Norashen or Bash-Norashen district in the Soviet Union? We know that there was a settlement of that name, but when was the district created? Grandmaster 06:05, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet-period 1:100,000 map J38-18 from 1981: there is "Iluichevsk" on the plain, next to the railway, and there is "Ulia Norashen" that is further up the Arpa river valley, exactly as shown on Ayvazian's map. Bash in a place-name context almost always means "upper" rather than "main". I don't know what "ulia" means, is it perhaps a corruption or local pronounciation of the Turkish "ulu", meaning "main" or big"? If that were the case, then Iluichevsk is Norashen, not Bash Norashen. Meowy 17:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. Bash-Norashen was administrative center of the region. It is the only large settlement there. Grandmaster 06:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article about Sharur-Daralagez uyezd from Brockhaus, says: Центр уезда — селение Башнорашен, в Шаруре. The center of uyezd is the village of Bashnorashen in Sharur. It is unlikely that Soviets moved the center of the region to a different place. Grandmaster 07:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen no map with the words "Bash-Norashen" on it, and I haven't seen any evidence that Iluichevsk was called Bash-Norashen. But this isn't a big issue, things can wait as they are until proof is found. Meowy 16:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to names in other languages in the lead, I'm going to initiate a community discussion about this issue, because I think that locations in Armenia must have names in Azerbaijani too. It does not work only one way. So please refrain from edit wars until the issue is fully resolved. Grandmaster 07:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The region was part of the district of the ancient kingdom of Armenia and it's name was written in ancient Armenian literary sources. Azerbaijan did not come into existence for another two thousand years and yet you're going to use this "pending" excuse on whether or not to determine if the Armenian name is relevant? While issues certainly exist for naming on these articles, a uniform policy cannot be applied to all situations. It's breathtaking that, two, three years on, I'm still reminding you of this. This is certainly a new low.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 07:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to show you the diffs of Azerbaijani names being removed from articles about Zangezur, and many other locations in Armenia, despite third party opinions being that such names are relevant? I'm drafting my request, so please wait a few minutes and you can express your opinion there. It is better than another round of Armenian and Azerbaijani users adding and removing names from articles about locations in the two countries. --Grandmaster 07:41, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NB, there is an inconsistancy between here and the Khanate of Erevan article - it says what is now Sarur region was once part of the Khanate of Erevan, not the Nakhichevan Khanate. Meowy 16:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't write that it was - asides from the map on the Khanate of Yerevan page, perhaps this source by George Bournoutian will do, where it writes, "The khanate of Erevan has fifteen mahals: Kirk-Bulagh, Zangi-basar, Garni-basar, Vedi-basar, Sharur..." (p. 325). So it looks like it was a part of the Yerevan, and not the Nakhichevan, khanate.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But I did write that it was, based on the Ayvazian source. Meowy 21:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]