Jump to content

Talk:Karabakh horse

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

Can somebody unlock this page?

[edit]

It is a stub and should be further improved. Moreover, it contains biased edits by Rovoam, whose vandalism was the reason for this page to be locked. Just read the first sentence: "The Karabakh horse was developed in Artsakh region of Armenia (?!), in the upland area between the Araks and Kura Rivers." --Tabib 13:23, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Done. If you need an article unblocked, the place to ask is on WP:RFPP (requests for page protection) where requests to apply or remove protection from articles are monitored by admins. I only happened to see this because I was looking at the article for a different reason. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 22:22, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is wikipedia a heaven for propaganda?

[edit]

Dear readers,


All topics in Wikipedia encyclopedia regarding Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh are bombarded with Azeri propaganda. If you would like to learn anything about Armeian history or Armenians, please use other sources, not Wikipedia. The reason for this is simple, there is an anti-Armenian hysteria in present day Azerbaijan and Wikipedia is a heaven for them to try to change anything Armenian to reflect their hateful point of view.

this guy has been spamming troughout all Azerbaijan related articles, can somebody ban him or do anything to stop the spamming? Baku87 21:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Baku87[reply]
He’s already been banned, it’s User:Rovoam. Grandmaster 05:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention / diambiguation

[edit]

Why is the horse's page the one that comes up when you search for Karabakh? I would have thought that the region should have its own page and this page should be a link off of that one, or at the least there should be a disambiguation page. Certainly when I searched for Karabakh I meant the region, not the horse (which I'd never heard of) and I suspect that most of the time people search for Karabakh they mean the region. Besides which, the horse is named after the region, so shouldn't the region be the main article on that basis alone?

I'm not trying to get into the extraordinarily contentious debate on the political status of Karabakh, I just think the current organization doesn't make sense. I may well be missing something, though, so I didn't want to change it without checking. Fasrad 22:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think we should move this one to Karabakh horse. Grandmaster 07:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV sources

[edit]

Article is filled with POV statements, supported by POV sources. Lida Vorig (talk) 04:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If people can find English language, neutral sources, that is always preferable. However, we try to avoid nationalist debates in these horse breed articles. Montanabw(talk) 17:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You cant just add a POV tag without even properly discussing it. Which sentences are POV according to your opinion? Neftchi (talk) 11:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one example of POV statement

  • "Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, part of which is under Armenian control."

--Lida Vorig (talk) 21:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a lot more than a POV statement, it is an insane statement! The horse has been around for several centuries, so it cannot have been named after "the Karabakh region of Azerbaijan". Meowy 00:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK folks. Please calm down. The edits that toned down the POV and just listed the geographical facts appear to work. Please just solve the problem once it is clarified what the problem is, and no need to go on endlessly. As just a horse person from the 'states, I'll nominate myself as the neutral arbiter of this thing, OK with you all? Montanabw(talk) 04:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, part of which is under Armenian control." please explain in what way that is POV. Neftchi (talk) 21:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Karabakh region is disputed between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Statements claiming it being part of one or the other are POV and are best left out of the article. Lida Vorig (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Armenian term is liberated territories and the Azerbaijani term is occupied territories, therefore Armenian controlled territories is the most neutral term. Neftchi (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but you just reinserted the pov "Karabakh is Azerbaijani" term back on. Why can't you let the neutral term of "south coucasus" remain? Or should I find an Armenian user that will change it to "Karabakh region of Armenia" and you two can fight for it? Lida Vorig (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

People. Just use the geography. If you must identify a nation, maybe say something like "in an area currently disputed between Armenia and Azerbaijan." How's that sound??? I'm trying to stay out of this until you reach a consensus, but if you cannot, I'll just wade in and do the best I can because I think it's fair to say that I am completely outside the dispute. I just like nice horse breed articles. Montanabw(talk) 22:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think not mentioning any of the countries is much better then adding gibberish that readers won't understand. I'm guessing majority of the readers of this article are more interested in the horse rather than the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Lida Vorig (talk) 00:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are you questioning the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan? You question the entire map of Azerbaijan aswell as Armenia. Its just a horse, there is no need to make this a big deal. It is common knowledge that Karabakh is in Azerbaijan, perhaps you should check the main article of Karabakh itself and see what it says before chaning anything here. Also you have to reach consensus before changing anything. I added thats the region is under Armenian control. Neftchi (talk) 07:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will you both just cool it? Yes, it's a horse. People reading this article are probably mostly interested about the horse. But I favor precision, whatever precision may be. In that light, and trying to mediate this, I took another run at trying to clarify the issue and phrase things in a more neutral manner that reflects geographic, historic and current political reality. Feel free to use more correct phrasing to clarify my edit if needed. The article is about a breed of horse. The breed of horse originated in a region of the world that politically is currently claimed by Armenia, but "ethnically" the animal breed itself is credited to the Azerbaijani people, and that is where most representatives of the breed live today, is within the undisputed territory controlled by Azerbaijan. Am I correct? By the way, we have similar problems with horse breeds in other war-torn areas, Timor pony being just one example. Montanabw(talk) 18:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Again the breed was developed hundreds of years before the establishment of Azerbaijan, so the flag and claim of origin can't be Azerbaijan. Who was ruling the Karabakh in the 18-19th centuries? Persians? Russians? Armenians? Turks? its all a confusing mess. So leaving it just "Karabakh region" solves all of the problems of confusion. And if the readers want to read more about the Karabakh region and who controlled it at what point in time and who controls it now they can read it at Karabakh article. There is no need to clutter this article with claims to Karabakh. Lida Vorig (talk) 22:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your reasoning has a certain logic to it. That said, Neftchi may disagree, and if we can't get to a consensus, we may need to ask for another "third opinion." There is a similar minor ongoing spat at Lipizzan between those who claim Austria or Slovenia as the origin of the breed, as both nations were controlled by the Austria-Hungarian empire at the time of the breed's founding and the foundation studs are now in both nations (and also some in Italy). Similar spat at Kladruber. I'll tweak to indicate the historical origins at time of breed founding. Montanabw(talk) 03:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the way it is right now. I have a feeling that Neftchi is not gonna agree to anything less than "Karabakh belongs to Azerbaijan forever and ever", but that's his problem not ours. I'm also fine with another "third opinion", although I think you're doing just fine. Lida Vorig (talk) 02:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Im sure you would love to add that Azerbaijanis are just guests from Central Asia who settled in glorious eternal Armenian homeland in 1918, yeah that makes alot sense. The infobox cleary asks for country of orign, I would ask you to open any map and see in which country Karabakh is located. Please also take a look in the Karabakh article itself, it clearly says Karabakh is a geographic region in present-day southwestern Azerbaijan and eastern Armenia and since the horse isnt present in Armenia, it would only make sense to say the horse is in Azerbaijan. Now I removed this POV statement that Azerbaijan claims Karabakh, and added de-jure part of Azerbaijan. This is how all Karabakh-related-articles are defined.Neftchi (talk) 11:58, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Current phrasing in article as of today (when I signed this comment) is working for me if it settles this matter. If it does not, we certainly can discuss further, but maybe leave the article to "cool" for a couple days? FYI, the WPEQ horse breeds task force infobox says "country" in the hidden parameters, but "country of origin" on the page. Montanabw(talk) 23:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The current status is fine altough I find it without good faith. Like I said since the region is official part of Azerbaijan and the horses are mainly bred by Azerbaijanis in the region Shaki (also note that the coat of arms of the city of Shaki shows the Karabakh horse as its symbol, see here) what other country except Azerbaijan could we insert as country of origin. Neftchi (talk) 15:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. I moved it on the page a bit for better layout flow. Montanabw(talk) 21:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Azerbaijan is not its "country of origin" - Azerbaijan did not exist when the breed was developed. Tamamtamamtamam (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"This is how all Karabakh-related-articles are defined" writes Neftchi. Says who? Tamamtamamtamam (talk) 21:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coats-of-arms

[edit]

I was looking at the Shusha article, which I was making an edit to, and noticed there was a horse depicted on the town's 19th century crest/coat-of-arms. [1] Would it be the Karabakh horse, I wonder? Tamamtamamtamam (talk) 21:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source for the "seal of Shaki, where the Karabakh is mainly bred, depicting the Karabakh horse" claim? There is nothing in the text saying that Shaki is where the horse is now mainly bred - it actually says they are bred "in the lowland Karabakh plains between Barda and Agjabadi provinces". Shaki is in a completely different part of Azerbaijan. And the horse on the seal is white! Tamamtamamtamam (talk) 21:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a "citation needed" message tag to the claim. There is nothing about horses mentioned in the Shaki article. Tamamtamamtamam (talk) 21:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

[edit]

This page has been founed to contain several instances of plagiarism, either on the page or of another website, namely a section of [(http://horsebreedslist.com/horse-breeds/71/karabakh)] (insertion of proper hyperlink would be useful), one of whom is copying off of the other. Read in the physical description of both "The breed is hardy, strong, tough, and sure-footed. They have small clean-cut heads, straight profile with broad foreheads and nostrils very capable of dilation. Their neck is set high, average in length, muscular and elegant. They have compact bodies with well defined and developed muscles. The shoulders are often quite upright. The horses have a deep chest, a sloping croup, and long, fine, but very strong legs.

The horses have a deep chest, a sloping croup, and long, fine, but very strong legs, although the joints are small. The horses are narrow, not very deep through the girth, due to the Akhal-Teke influence." Also, there is "The main colors of the breed are chestnut and bay, with characteristic golden tint of the breed. They can also be gray. White markings are allowed." Other lines may have been taken. A check on which was written first has of yet not been completed, though further action may be advised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Man of Israel (talk • contribs) 20:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that is a mirror site to this one. My suggestion is to go there and check other horse breed articles, if they all are very similar to our parallel WP articles, then we know it's a mirror. I suggest that you compare them especially to some of our FA and GA articles, which I know for sure were done here because I was tracking their process. For example Suffolk Punch or Appaloosa. The mirror may also have tracked some of the sources we sometimes use here, such as the Oklahoma State breeds of the world site or the International Museum of the Horse breeds of the world site. There is always room to improve material and cite, but you will note this article does have sources. Not sure where they came from, but I don't think we have a copyvio. Montanabw(talk) 03:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Karabakh horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:49, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Karabakh horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:18, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the Karabakh horses

[edit]

I found interesting reference for the origin of this horse breed and wanted to add to text but can't edit. So, I am adding here. It's from Vasily Vereshchagin (russian zoologist, traveller, paint) and traveled Shusha in 19th century (source in the end).

"Here, moreover, is the origin of the Karabach stud farm, as it was told to me. After the death of the famous Persian king Nadir-Schah, Pana-Khan, first khan of Karabach, had time to seize a large part of the horses from the king's stables and stud farms, magnificent horses, the main type of the Arab breed and the mixed Turcoman breed. He kept part of it for himself, and distributed the rest to his relatives: it was these thoroughbred racing horses that were used to form the first stud farms, and their number increased considerably over time"

VERESCHAGUINE Basile [Vasilij Vereshchagin], 1868-1869: “Voyage dans les provinces du Caucase,” trans. Ernest le Barbier and wife, Le Tour du Monde, vol. 17, pp. 162-208; vol. 19, pp. 241-336. Zülfü E.Fərəcli (talk) 21:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Karabakh_horse&oldid=1227287839"