Content deleted Content added
Line 103: :The problem here is not just one article. You can see that this source is used in a large number of articles on ancient history of the South Caucasus, sometimes as the only source for particular claims. Therefore I would like to ask for the community assistance with evaluation of the general reliability of this source in the articles about the ancient history of the South Caucasus. I can cite examples, but it is not just one article, there are quite a few when this source is used to support the claims not found in any third party source about the same subject. [[User:Grandmaster|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#464646">'''''Grand'''''</span>]][[User talk:Grandmaster|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#808080">'''''master'''''</span>]] 19:10, 11 December 2012 (UTC) :: The community cannot issue an blanket ban on sources. For example, the official Chinese/South Korean history on the [[Korean War]] is deemed to be both censored, yet extremely valuable source among [[Cold War]] scholars. In such case, a blanket yes/no answer will not suffice. You have to bring out those examples one by one so that we can evaluate exactly what is going on according to the above three questions I raised. The current debate feels more like a shadow war among nationalist than a real RSN discussion. [[User:Jim101|Jim101]] ([[User talk:Jim101|talk]]) 19:18, 11 December 2012 (UTC) :::I'm not asking for a blanket ban. I understand that this source could be used in the articles about Soviet propaganda, or Soviet Armenia, etc. But this source received substantial criticism for promoting a nationalist narrative, and its counterpart [[Azerbaijani Soviet Encyclopedia]] is not much better. I just want to know if ASE could be used as a sole source to support a controversial or unusual claim, or a more recent and internationally acclaimed source is preferable. If you want examples, you can see for example in the article [[Barda, Azerbaijan]] ASE is the sole source for the following claim: :::''In 768, Catholicos of All Armenians Sion I Bavonats'i convoked an ecclesiastical council at Partav, which passed 24 canons largely concerning the administration of the Armenian Church and marriage practices''. :::In [[Utik]]: :::''During the reign of the Arshakuni kings of Armenia (66-428 A.D.), Gardman was the seat of the nakharars of Utik' (and for this, it was sometimes called "Gardmantsvots ishkhanutyun", or the principality of Gardman)''. :::I can continue. For a person who is not familiar with the region this may not seem important, but there's a parallel nationalist war between the academia of Armenia and Azerbaijan. So reliability of the sources from the region remains an issue, in particular of those published in Soviet times. [[User:Grandmaster|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#464646">'''''Grand'''''</span>]][[User talk:Grandmaster|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#808080">'''''master'''''</span>]] 19:40, 11 December 2012 (UTC) == Lulu-published sources == | |||