Share to: share facebook share twitter share wa share telegram print page

 

Template talk:Armenian churches and monasteries

About this template

All churches and monasteries built after 1700 should not be in this template and instead in the Template:Contemporary Armenian Churches template. Serouj (talk) 01:30, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Raffi

Narekavank and Jugha cemetery are both totally destroyed without a trace. Do we want to list them here anyways? Just curious, I could go either way. --RaffiKojian (talk) 19:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that major Armenian churches that have been totally destroyed without a trace should certainly be kept on this list. With regard to the Jugha and Noraduz cemeteries, I think they should be kept for now until either of two developments occur:
  1. We find a broader title for the template that incorporates cemeteries, too. (as a rough example, "Armenian Religious Sites")
  2. We find enough cemeteries or locations of Khatchkars to warrant its own template (at least two sites in Turkey although many have been completely obliterated: THE KHATCHKAR MONUMENTS AT POR at around 38°25′38.72″N 42°10′39.78″E / 38.4274222°N 42.1777167°E / 38.4274222; 42.1777167, and SAINT DAVID'S MONASTERY, probable precise location is 39°39′40.59″N 40°17′19.72″E / 39.6612750°N 40.2888111°E / 39.6612750; 40.2888111)
Serouj (talk) 20:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other templates

With a growing number of monasteries catalogued, we'll probably need to create additional templates. Three categorizations come to mind:

  1. By time period: initially may have "Historical Armenian Churches" (e.g. upto & including 17th century, sub-categorized by century?) and "Contemporary Armenian Churches" (includes historical ones still in use -- e.g. Vank Cathedral and Etchmiadzin Cathedral)
  2. By geography: For example: "Armenian Churches of the Armenian Highland" (would include all churches in historical Armenia); "Armenian Churches of the Armenian Diaspora" (which could be expanded, depending on number by continent, country, etc.)
  3. By state: (historical and/or contemporary) "Armenian Churches of Vaspurakan", "Armenian Churches of Tayk", "...of Turkey", "...of Nakhichevan", etc.
  4. By architecture: as classified by Garbis Armen (13 categories?) or by Toros Toramanian (6 categories?) (e.g. domed basilica, "lobe-supported conical", etc.)

Of course, the categories would exist depending on the verge of extinction. Serouj (talk) 20:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like by age best, with those up to the 8th century in one category, those from 8th to 13th in a second, and those newer in a third (year of construction would go on when most of the complex was built). Most churches will fit neatly into these categories, as our big building binges were in the 5th-7th then the 10th-13th centuries, followed by mostly urban churches/cathedrals being built since then. So I guess that pretty much splits them in three, with most falling into the second category. Hmm, maybe that doesn't help much. Actually, upon looking at it, I think the template is fine for the time being. I don't think we need to add anything for the now, and can work on filling in the pages themselves. I would even suggest taking out a few (Bgheno, Lmbat, Shoghagat, Tegh), depending on the intention of the list. I like the list as a way to highlight some of the most important sites either architecturally or historically, not as a complete list. --RaffiKojian (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might be better if we comment out the red linked articles (articles that don't yet exist) in the source code, because first of all there are too many of them. And second if the list is large we can start to create subcategories; but it won't look nice if we have sub categories with many red links. What do you think? Serouj (talk) 20:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm torn. If they're red, it might attract attention to the need to work on them, but if they're not, the list looks nicer. It's up to you... --RaffiKojian (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey

Which to include? http://virtualani.org/beyondani.htm --RaffiKojian (talk) 00:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...And which to include of these? http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/cultural_genocide.php Serouj (talk) 03:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the key ones (other than Akhtamar) are:
  1. Varagavank (Catholicossate of Van) [fate: almost completely destroyed] Done. Serouj (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Narekavank (for its history) [fate: completely destroyed] Done. Serouj (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Holy Apostles (Mush; stored important relics) [fate: destroyed with explosives]
    More info: http://www.raa.am/Jard/Turkey/Arakelots/Arakelots_Galery.htm Serouj (talk) 04:03, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I have two reliable sources (one is in English) on it, I will try to write the article on wk:fr this week. Sardur (talk) 21:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. I don't have the coordinates though. Sardur (talk) 20:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Wonderful work Sardur. Really amazing... I added coordinates. I also found a recently uploaded Panoramio photo that shows the current condition. Serouj (talk) 21:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Surp Garabed (30km N of Mush) [fate: completely destroyed almost without a trace by Turkish army].
    More info: http://www.raa.am/Jard/Turkey/S_Karapet/Karapet_Galery.htm Serouj (talk) 04:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. Serouj (talk) 19:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Khtzkonk [fate: 4 of 5 churches blown up by Turkish army] (couple of churches notable for Zvartnots-style architecture) Done. Serouj (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Tekor (in present day Digor, Turkey, near Armenian border; close to Khtzkonk) notable for being the first known domed Armenian church (domed basilica from the 5th century) [fate: defaced and nearly completely destroyed by local government] Done. Serouj (talk) 19:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Aprank (for its location, preservation, and khatchkars) (recent photos here)
  8. Holy Apostles Cathedral of Kars (fate: converted to Mosque) Done. Serouj (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Serouj (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More:
  1. St Mary's Church of Ainteb, the largest Armenian church in the Middle East, built in 1892 [fate: converted to Mosque].
  2. Holy Trinity Armenia Church (Malatya) -- little info about it. But can have an article with GPS coords just to verify its existence in 2009.
Serouj (talk) 17:25, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Information requested

There is a lack of information on the web on the following two important churches in the area east of Lake Van, the cradle of Armenian civilization (e.g. location of "Hayots Dzor" where Hayk defeated Bel). These are in the Başkale district of Turkey:

  1. St. Bartholomeus church (near Albayrak, reportedly in a Turkish army base)
    "The monastery of St. Bartholomew, erected in the site of the apostle's martyrdom, Aghbak District, Vaspurakan Province, Metz Hayk, and considered one of the most important pilgrimage sites of the Armenian people and the Christian world, was blasted." - http://www.raa.am/Jard/FR_set_E_Cond_Turkey.htm Serouj (talk) 04:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    This monastery is on par with Saint Thaddeus Monastery in Iran, which is about 110 km north-northeast of St Bartholomew cathedral. Serouj (talk) 04:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Some pictures of St Bartholomew at: http://digitool.rpi.edu:8881/R/FGVL4G33DTDHQB7T5883X1TVN83YDAHGQS4XNQTNQHPRA5XVLQ-00035?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=8138&local_base=GEN01&pds_handle=GUEST Serouj (talk) 03:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Before-and-after pics of St Bartholomew (which was bombed): http://anc.org.au/in_turkey.htm Serouj (talk) 03:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Soradir church (near Yanal)
    Serouj (talk) 03:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Some pictures of Soradir at: http://www.thais.it/architettura/Armena/Indici/Indice4a.htm#033 Serouj (talk) 03:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grouping

I decided to offer a compromise version and to group the sites in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia as those in the South Caucasus, for a number of reasons, mainly having to do with Nagorno-Karabakh:

  1. Azerbaijan has no administrative unit named "Northern Artsakh", so listing that particular name under Azerbaijan is illogical.
  2. Dadivank and Tzitzernavank are geographically located either outside Nagorno-Karabakh, or outside the historical region of Artsakh, or both, so listing them under Nagorno-Karabakh is controversial. Parishan (talk) 01:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. "Northern Artsakh" refers to the mountainous area of historical Artsakh that lies in Azerbaijan today. The sections in this template do not necessarily need to be actual official subdivisions of Azerbaijan. Rather, they can be historical divisions or any other reasonable subdivision. Northern Artsakh is the mountainous region east of Lake Sevan and north of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic, including Shahumian. So from a historical point of view, it is reasonable to include a Northern Artsakh subdivision to denote that part of modern-day Azerbaijan.
  2. Dadivank and Tsitsernavank are both in Artsakh as well as the Nagorno Karabakh Republic. To clarify, Artsakh is the entire mountainous region west of the Kura river. Serouj (talk) 02:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. We must then make up our mind on whether the sites are going to be groupped by historical regions or by states. Because what is called "Northern Artsakh" by Armenians is called "Ganjabasar" by Azeris, and it is only logical that listing something under Azerbaijan, even if its an unofficial subdivision, would require its Azeri name. If you believe that historical region names are in complementary distribution, would you personally call the historical area around Lake Sevan Gokcha, as suggested by this map, or Gegharkunik, as Armenians refer to it?
  2. In 1991, the so-called Nagorno-Karabakh Republic was proclaimed within the boundaries of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast and the Shahumian rayon; therefore the territory referred to by that name cannot include Kalbajar and Lachin where those two monasteries are located. The historical region of Artsakh does not include the Hakari River valley either, as seen in this map (you can even see Tzitzernavank in it).
These administrative-political overlaps create a great deal of confusion and POV. This is why I believe the best way to represent them is by merging them into one general category, such as South Caucasus. Parishan (talk) 03:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since this template is about historical Armenian churches, it would make sense to refer to historical regions in order to differentiate between an existing state and a previous region. When we refer to NKR, we refer to the entire area which it controls. It makes no sense to differentiate between Kelbajar/Lachin and the rest of the area. The entire region is mountains. Whatever are mountains is NKR and all of the mountains of Artsakh are de facto a part of NKR except for Northern Artsakh. The reason for a "Northern Artsakh" grouping would be to place that area of Azerbaijan in its historical context, and to differentiate those churches/monasteries from areas which have not been historically a part of Armenia.
Merging the entire region under "South Caucasus" is unreasonable as it unnecessarily reduces the resolution with which these churches and monasteries can be grouped. I plan to remove some of these churches and place them under a Contemporary Armenian Churches and Monasteries template. I don't see any POV issue. For an article on historical Azerbaijani architecture, I see no reason not to refer to a particular area in the context of an Azerbaijani name. Serouj (talk) 03:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New template: "Contemporary Armenian Churches"

I've created a new template to help manage the growth of this list. The new template is limited to churches, monasteries, and seminaries that have actively functioned after 1700. Therefore, even churches built before 1700 but in use afterwards can make it to this list:

Serouj (talk) 18:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Julfa cemetery

Where it "has been discussed before"? How khachkar destruction under the title of Julfa cemetery match Armenian Churches? Even khachkars alone do not fit much, the recent revert is clearly point-pushing. Stay on topic. As if the Kish Church of ambiguous religious affiliation is not enough... Brandt 17:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See the very first item in this Talk page (search for "cemetery"). It is not worth creating a separate template for Armenian cemeteries, and as their are only two major ones: Noraduz and Jugha (which was shamelessly destroyed by the government of Azerbaijan), it is reasonable to include them in this list, especially since both have (or had in the case of Jugha) a church on site. No cheers. Serouj (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you notice that Brandt didn't remove Noraduz? Amazing he? I think the right link he should have read was WP:NPOV. Sardur (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where do you see Noraduz there? I know the reason you push it, but really this is not the place. Martyrology should have the bounds. Brandt 21:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it seems you should have glasses. Sardur (talk) 22:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't need them: just type 'Noraduz' in the browser's search when viewing the template. Besides, neither Khachkar destruction in Nakhchivan nor Julfa has this template with Julfa cemetery, so I suggest restraining from tricky coatrack. Leaving Kish church instead of Julfa cemetery could be a good consensus though. Brandt 22:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is consensus that we keep Julfa cemetery. There is no dispute here. As mentioned, both cemeteries have/had a church on site. Serouj (talk) 01:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Brandt, perhaps you also need a new keyboard because Noraduz is there (under Armenia, among the "N").
Serouj is completely right, a church being or having been on site is enough. Sardur (talk) 05:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Under Armenia, among the "N"? Nothing such in NKR or Armenia itself, unless you are misspelling. Anyway, which church(es)? The article deals only with khachkars and the claim of Armenian archaeologists is obscure to me. Besides, I saw no photos or account on any sanctuary, allegedly existing in Julfa. I don't think this is the best venue for irredentism: I may remind you this, when Armenian name from Ganja had departed for good. Brandt 09:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not mispelling "Noraduz", as in "Noraduz cemetery".
Irredentism? Is that your only analytical perpsective? What's dealt with here is Armenian religious architecture. Sardur (talk) 11:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow :) I thought just churches and monasteries... Brandt 12:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't see any photos of the church because it was DESTROYED by the government of Azerbaijan in front of the eyes of the world while film was rolling from the opposite side of the Arax. Not only a shameless and disrespectful act toward human culture, but also not exactly smart either. In any case, see this gallery of pictures of the Julfa cemetery by Research on Armenian Architecture. Search for "Pobloz Church". There is a church still standing at Noraduz. It is too bad that the government of Azerbaijan sows so much hate towards their neighboring country, Armenia, and wages such acts of physical and academic revisionism of history that leads to ordinary soldiers picking up sledgehammers and beating away at 400 year old works of art. I can only imagine their mindset... It is very reminiscent of the mid 19th - early 20th century Ottoman Empire, leading up to the Armenian Genocide. Serouj (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian churches in Istanbul

Some work is needed to identify the prominent historical & contemporary Armenian churches in Istanbul, the center of Western Armenian culture during the 18th to early 20th centuries. There are about 32 Armenian churches in Istanbul. Serouj (talk) 19:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You probably saw http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Armenian_churches_in_Turkey with 3 or 4 of these churches.
Other area: I created (after downloading a third pic of it) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:St._Sarkis,_Tehran
Sardur (talk) 21:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! How'd you find that (St Sarkis)! :-) Serouj (talk) 21:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I need to hit the books for info on the Istanbul churches, as there isn't much on the web... Serouj (talk) 21:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Categories of course ^^
I will check my books for Istanbul, just in case. Sardur (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Cathedral of Tbilisi

Besides the 23 other Armenian churches and monasteries in Tbilisi, there was an 18th century Armenian Cathedral in Old Tbilisi along the banks of the Kura River. This was the main Armenian cathedral of Tbilisi in the early twentieth century and the seat of the Diocese. It was destroyed during Soviet times. Does anyone have any more info about this church that they can share? Thanks. Serouj (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found more information about this cathedral in: Thierry, Jean-Michel (1989). Armenian Art. New York: Harry N. Abrams. p. 317. ISBN 0-8109-0625-2. and here is a picture of it from 1900 (it's the church with 3 cupolas, to the left of the center of the image). It is known as the Church of the Holy Mother of God of Mens Monastery. It was destroyed in 1930 during Soviet times. Serouj (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the full list of Tbilisi Armenian churches I had. Also there are several pages already created under "Armeian Churches in Tbilisi" category, which I links to. As much as I find time to arrange data I have, I'll add other pages too. But what I'm worried about is the huge number of Nakhichevan churches, which were not destroyed till Soviet collapse. I didn't add the full list of Armenian churches of Nakhichevan with churches which stood before Soviet times, otherwise the number of Nakhichevan churches would become more than all Armenian churches we have here around the world. But even here we got huge RED cloud of links with no pages behind. I have info on all the churches I put here, generally it is concluded to a couple of rows of text and a photo, but I have no time to arrange it all. Who can help me?

Moreover, what to do with the huge list of churches of Nakhichevan, which I have no info about, but have got names, and the list is huge. Is it appropriate to create a separate box for it may be?

And we have a bigger problem: Artsakh churches, which number of bigger than of Nakhichevan? I put now only a part of Martakert region, while there are 4 more regions in former NKAO and Karvachar and Kashatagh? Is it possible to create a separate box for it too? I don't know how to do it, but I can send data on every church. And I need advice: whether to keep on adding Artsakh churches to this list? It's gonna become bigger than the whole list all together.517design (talk) 21:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we don't have any info on those churches OR if the church / monastery is not of any particular significance, I don't think it belongs in the list. This list only is for churches built before 1700. Many of these churches might have been built afterward. Maybe the list of Artsakh churches belongs to the Artsakh article or a separate article titled something like List of Armenian churches in Artsakh and then that list can be linked to from this template. We should reserve the links in this template only to (1) monasteries/churches that are notable, and (2) monasteries/churches that we have a good deal of info on. Serouj (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to churches in Nakhichevan, there is a wealth of info in Argam Ayvazian's "The Historical Monuments of Nakhichevan" (1990) Wayne State University Press, Detroit. With regard to the churches of Northern Artsakh, Research on Armenian Architecture has a book of several hundred pages devoted to it (same with Artsakh proper). Serouj (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of info on Armenian churches I have, including Argam Ayvazyan works, Samvel Karapetyan, Shahen Mkrtchyan and many more refering both Nakhichevan and Artsakh. I agree it's better have some page like List of Armenian churches and place all the churches there, but here the box needs to contain a link to that page to show that the template doesn't show all ones. I'll work over it as soon as I find some time.517design (talk) 07:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can create an article like List of Armenian churches in Azerbaijan. And write a list of Armenian churches in Baku, Northern Artsakh, Nakhichevan, and other places. Probably about the Armenian churches of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh Republic) we can create an article List of Armenian churches in Nagorno-Karabakh separate from the List of Armenian churches in Azerbaijan. So, what do you think about this idea?--Hovik95 (talk) 17:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I created a page List of Armenian Apostolic Churches in Nakhichevan and added SVG vector file, which I myself created according to Argam Ayvazyan illustrated map book, the ISBN given in the article. I put it under Public Domain so that it gets spread as much as possible. And the list of the churches include 284 churches, some of which I have photos of, but it needs scanning. I'll do it one of these days, I just need help under what license such photos need to be published. 517design (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nice SVG 517! Very well done! It will be best if you can upload your media work directly to Wikimedia Commons for sharing across all Wikipedia projects. With regard to scanning photos, it's best to ask for written permission from the author to release under a CC-Attributions license. (The Research on Armenian Architecture organization has agreed to these conditions, so you may find a tens of thousands of photos by them in Yerevan, already ready to be used...) Serouj (talk) 20:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded it to: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nakhichevan_Cultural_Heritage_full_map.svg What should be done now?517design (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Split three ways

Since the list for the Template:Contemporary Armenian Churches is growing, I think it now makes sense to re-visit the chronological divisions among the templates, namely to add a third. Following the Template:Human history, I propose the following three divisions:

  1. Middle Ages (500–1500)
  2. Early modern (1500–1800)
  3. Modern (1800 to present)

The templates will be renamed according: "Medieval Armenian churches and monasteries", "Early modern Armenian churches and monasteries", and "Modern Armenian churches and seminaries" (as there are no longer any active monasteries in the modern period as far as I know). Serouj (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What NOT to add to this list.

If the church was not build before 1700, please do not add it to this template. There is a separate template for that (see above). Serouj (talk) 20:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The current version of the template violates NPOV for the following reasons:

  1. The churches and monasteries in the 'Nagorno-Karabakh Republic / Artsakh' sections are located within the internationally-recognised borders of Azerbaijan, which means the fact of them being located in Azerbaijan is at least as actual and valid as the fact of them being located in the self-proclaimed "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic". In other words, no solid line can be drawn between the "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" and Azerbaijan with respect to jurisdiction when it comes to disputed territories.
  2. Some monasteries such as Dadivank and Tsitsernavank are located outside of the territories declared independent by the Armenians in 1991 (which disqualifies them as being located in the "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic") or outside of the historical region of Artsakh.
  3. The "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" is not a historical entity which is why it is not a desirable way to group those churches.
  4. The most reasonable way to list historical Armenian landmarks is by grouping them into sections according to the historical Armenian provinces they are located in and corresponding to the period when they were erected. Parishan (talk) 05:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to 1: Nagorno-Karabakh is a de facto republic, and as such is treated as the republic under which jurisdication the said monasteries belong to.
2 -- incorrect. The borders of the NKR are set by its CONSTITUTION and they certainly include the area of Lachin in which Tsitsernavank is located and the region south of the Murghuz mountains in which Dadivank is located.
3 -- NKR is a living entity today. This template is organized by existing countries -- the NKR being one of them. Historical Artsakh is the entire Mountainous area west of the Kura River, for your information.
4 -- I don't agree. In my opinion, the most reasonable way to group is by the existing republic that de facto controls the territories in which said monastery belongs. Serouj (talk) 08:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Once again, Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh only proclaimed independence within the borders of the former NKAO, which suggests that monasteries outside of NKAO do not fall under its claimed jurisdiction.
  2. Nowhere does the 'NKR Constitution' outline the borders of this so-called 'state' or otherwise suggest the inclusion of the said regions into its immediate jurisdiction.
  3. 'NKR' is not an existing country and certainly cannot rank equally among true and internationally recognised states such as Turkey, Azerbaijan, Iran or Georgia. This is out of question. And no, Artsakh is not anything that lies west of Kura, but only the vicinity of the Karabakh mountain range.
  4. A way cannot be called 'reasonable' if it causes so much controversy. This template needs to reflect a balanced opinion. So far it does a great job at reflecting the Armenian point of view, but is in total discordance with the Azerbaijani point of view, for which you must account when creating such templates. I am willing to compromise and if I have to deal with an uncompromising point of view here, there is not reason to waste time. This issue will be taken elsewhere. As of now, I am open to your suggestions as to how this template can be NPOV-ed. Parishan (talk) 12:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Incorrect. Independence is claimed in the buffer zones, too.
  2. Read the constitution and subsequent decisions by the government.
  3. NKR is an independent nation, with its own functioning government, schools, and defense army.
  4. I think this template organizes the subject of this template -- Armenian monasteries and churches -- quite well. Serouj (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is the point of adding a ridiculous number of links to non-existent articles? --Երևանցի talk 00:19, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yerevanci, I understand that you would like to clean up the template from these links to non-existent articles. I have been working on articles related to a number of Armenian religious structures over the years and it has helped to fill in the missing gaps. I apologize for reverting the edit, I just felt that it is necessary to keep. Liveon001 (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that does not help Wikipedia in any way. It is widely accepted in Wikipedia that lists (which this template basically is) do not include red links. See Wikipedia:Write the article first. It is better to keep the red links away for now. If you want to fill the gaps, you can always make a to-do list for yourself like I did. --Երևանցի talk 00:43, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I am in agreement with you, I will start a to-do list for those articles and rollback the template edits to your last edit. Liveon001 (talk) 00:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. By the way, I'd like to thank you for your interest in Armenia and the great work you have done. Shnorhakalutyun --Երևանցի talk 01:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Խնդրեմ: Also, thank you for the compliments. I will work on creating new pages for the other churches soon. Hopefully I can return to Armenia next year. I love the country. Liveon001 (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, there's a lot to see in that small piece of land. Too bad our government is shit and as you can see, many valuable monuments are in ruins. --Երևանցի talk 01:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I noticed while adding a new link that there's a huge number of interlanguage links in this navbox; to the point where I'm not sure that the majority of links are even for English articles. This seems to be against the spirit and maybe the letter of WP:NAV (specifically WP:EXISTING). This relevant talk page discussion there seems to confirm a general consensus from experienced editors on not adding such links in navboxes. Or just from a general practical perspective, as someone who may want to browse articles on Armenian churches, the usefulness of this navbox is severely undermined if the majority (or a very prominent proportion) of links are in Armenian (or other languages). The average reader on the English Wikipedia doesn't read Armenian (and if they do, they can consult the Armenian Wikipedia separately) and there's no easy way to even see which links are in English and which aren't, so for the majority of readers this navbox doesn't really help them find the articles they may want to read. Even if we mark out the interlanguage links more explicitly, it would still be visually difficult to find the English links in such a large navbox.

Therefore, I strongly recommend we remove all interlanguage links, but given the number of links to remove I think it would be good to give a chance for more involved editors to comment. If new English articles are created for the missing topics after removal, they can always be added later. If helpful, we can also copy any deleted links on the talk page (in a dedicated section), or at least include a link here to the last version before the links are removed, so that there's still a handy list of potential new articles to create that editors can consult afterwards.

It may also be preferable to create a list page instead if you want to have a full list that isn't limited to existing English articles only. I haven't read through all of the guidelines for list pages (see MOS:LIST), but I don't think there's a requirement that items in a list all be links to articles, so there's also no restriction against redlinks and interlanguage links either. Whereas a navbox is for navigation between existing articles, a list can just be any list with a clear criteria for inclusion (e.g. Armenian churches built before 1700), and the information to be included is up to editors to decide. (Note: there's currently a Lists of Armenian churches article, but not a general "List of Armenian churches".) Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 07:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a year and a half or so since I made the comment above and there's no other response, so I've gone ahead and removed all the non-English links (as best I could; [1]). Easily the (large) majority of links were to non-English Wikipedias and I found links to not only Armenian, but also Russian, German, Azerbaijani, Italian, and French articles.
As a reminder: Lists of Armenian churches exists and a list article of all Armenian churches/monasteries is also possible. If editors really want a comprehensive list of all possible church articles, including those not yet created in English, that format would be much more efficient than a navbox.
Note: some minor clean-up of the layout may be needed after my edit, now that many links have been removed and some of the lists are much shorter. R Prazeres (talk) 20:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kembali kehalaman sebelumnya