Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Massacre of Muslims in Shamakhi

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. bibliomaniac 1 5 04:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre of Muslims in Shamakhi

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is largely derived from two sources: the unpublished PHD thesis of Michael A. Reynolds, an Armenian genocide denier,[1] and Jorg Baberwoski, who is also known as a WP:FRINGE falsifier of history.[2] A massacre of 30K people would have a large amount of reliable sources, but instead the subject is only mentioned among small genocide denialist circles. The article is WP:UNDUE and should be deleted. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:26, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Discrimination, Events, History, and Azerbaijan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It has nothing to do with the Armenian Genocide or related issues, so the claim of denial is unfounded and the article Massacre of Muslims in Shamakhi is a separate topic. There are also archival documents about this (I have seen some of them myself), and reliable sources are also cited in the mentioned works.

Meanwhile, Christoph Vandreier, who criticizes Jörg Baberowski himself, should not be considered a reliable source, and his problem with Jörg is not related to this topic, but rather to the left. Therefore, it is irrelevant in this case.--Qızılbaş (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has everything to do with this, because if an author like Reynolds publishes fringe narratives, they are not a reliable source. WP:PRIMARY sources are not preferable; if want they claim was true then it would've likely been repeated by many other sources a century later. Vandreier is not the only critic of Baberowski, Baberowski been faced many charges by German courts in the past which have ruled students have the right to call him a "right-wing radcial".[3] This is not the kind of source that an article can stand solely on. --KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge into March Days: This article is the subject of a very controversial event under the AA3 sanctions. It is essentially entirely based on two sources. The first is an unpublished PHD thesis of an Armenian genocide denier, why is this relevant? Because this particular thesis is directly about the Armenian genocide and twists information in a denialist way that violates WP:FRINGE and is almost exclusively cited by Armenian genocide deniers. It is inappropriate to use an unpublished source with such fringe claims contained within it as a primary source for this article. Next, we have Baberwoski’s work, published in Russia by ROSSPEN, this particular source has been criticized by editors at the reliable sources notice board for being published in an authoritarian regime that is known for falsifying history and has poor academic standards[4], the author as mentioned above also has a history of being called out for misusing sources and outright falsifications. In such a controversial area, these being the only sources are unacceptable, especially when other more reliable sources contradict them, these events are already covered in the March Days article; I don’t see any reason to WP:POVFORK that article into this one when these events are exclusively mentioned within the context of March Days. TagaworShah (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete extraordinary claims require extraordinary sources. The sources cited in this article are simply too fringy to support the claims. Unfortunately, it remains the case that massacres of Azerbaijanis during WWI and its immediate aftermath are under-researched in sources that I would consider reliable. (t · c) buidhe 06:06, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per TagaworShah's reasoning and research. Having this article in mainspace is clearly WP:UNDUE for what is clearly a fringe view. Cheers, Last1in (talk)

Keep the first link about Reynolds refers his interview. I watched that part and saw Reynolds doesn't even say anything that supports genocide denial. All he says is that the term genocide is not a term for historicians, but for lawmakers. The second source about Baberowski is not a reliable source. You can read more about it's talk page. There's a potential WP:BLP violation. About the argument that this article is being derived from 2 sources, I just googled and found lot's of sources(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). We just need to extend the article rather than deleting. Thanks. Aredoros87 (talk) 10:32, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of the source you brought forward are WP:RS, they’re all published in Azerbaijan and call this event the “Şamaxı soyqırımı” which means the “Shamakhi Genocide.” That is a WP:EXTRAORDINARY and WP:FRINGE claim to label this as a genocide, none of these sources are internationally recognized as reliable. The fact that the only sources that exist are these fringe sources making extraordinary claims is even more grounds for deletion. TagaworShah (talk) 12:51, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"they’re all published in Azerbaijan": To be honest I didn't expect an editor with 2.7k edit count would make such a weak&racist comment. So do we dismiss all the books because of the locations they were printed or because of the authors' ethnicity? According to WP:RS no. I'm sure that you're aware of the books printed in Armenia and are being used on Wikipedia. Should we delete all of them now?!

call this event the “Şamaxı soyqırımı”: Neither me, nor you can give a juridistical value. The authors can not to agree with each other. But we – the editors are not subject to this. There're some sources are being used on Wikipedia calls 2023 Nagorno Karabakh clashes as a "genocide". Despite UN said that we didn't see mistreatment to the civilians and despite there was about 10 civilian casualties.

PS: I just googled for "Shamakhi massacre" Google Books. And it took a few seconds. If we would search we can find a lot of materials there.

PSS: I made my statement earlier and felt urgency to reply that groundless racist comment. I'm not willing to turn this thread into forum (see WP:NOTFORUM). Ending the conversation here. Good luck to everyone! Aredoros87 (talk) 15:26, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan is an authoritarian regime known to falsify its history, various historians with expertise in this area such as Victor Schnirelmann, Robert H. Hewsen, George Bournoutian, and many others have issued warnings about using sources published in Azerbaijan due to their misuse of primary sources and state-sponsored falsification of history (see Falsification of history in Azerbaijan). There are plenty of independent Azerbaijani researchers published in the west that constitute reliable sources, such as Arsene Saparov or Mikail Mammedov but these authors you presented do not belong in that category and are making Wikipedia:EXTRAORDINARY claims, it’s not about ethnicity, it’s about the reliability of the sources, something any editor editing under the Armenia-Azerbaijan contentious topics should understand and not cast personal attacks. I would recommend striking through those attacks. TagaworShah (talk) 16:01, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.