Talk:Second Nagorno-Karabakh War

(Redirected from Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Cinderella157 in topic Dot-points under result parameter


The conflict was accompanied by coordinated attempts to spread misleading content and disinformation via social media and the internet.[166] edit

What is the point of the disputed remark? Why are you aiming your attack at freedom of information? 151.229.110.67 (talk) 23:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Iran edit

it is obvious that Iran supported Azerbaijan. Please include this. 2A00:23C7:5882:8201:60D4:D3A1:F3A9:22AB (talk) 09:10, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm sure if it is so obvious that you will be able to give us a reliable source for the claim. Such a source is needed for inclusion of content in this article. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 13:37, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Russian Arm supplies edit

Didnt Russia also supply Azerbaijan with weapons? NikolaosGeorgiosMichael (talk) 19:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

In general over the last 30 years, or directly related to this conflict/during it? --OuroborosCobra (talk) 20:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
To this conflict, the Second Karabakh War 2003:EA:4F25:F2BF:68ED:1DB7:D929:7231 (talk) 10:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
https://www.sipri.org/commentary/topical-backgrounder/2021/arms-transfers-conflict-zones-case-nagorno-karabakh 2003:EA:4F25:F2BF:68ED:1DB7:D929:7231 (talk) 10:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
https://jamestown.org/program/azerbaijan-is-drifting-away-from-russia-and-moscow-has-only-itself-to-blame/ 2003:EA:4F25:F2BF:68ED:1DB7:D929:7231 (talk) 10:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 January 2024 edit

Having Syrian mercenaries is just ridiculous considering Azerbaijan as one of the most irreligious countries in the world and also having 3 times more population than the opponent country and many more military advances. As a citizen, I am extremely offended by this and I find it wrong to add this kind of info without having reliable source and proof. 151.71.255.147 (talk) 19:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. FYI the blue numbers inside the brackets e.g. [4] are sources Cannolis (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pakistan support edit

Isn't it true that Pakistan provided diplomatic support to Azerbaijan throughout the conflict?

Even in the Armenia-Pakistan relations article, it mentions this. In 2015, they went as far as to say the recognition of Armenia is contingent on the Armenians leaving the disputed zone. And they openly celebrated and praised the cease-fire when it happened. OperativePhase33 (talk) 04:16, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Dot-points under result parameter edit

Vanezi Astghik, per MOS:MIL, which gives voice to the template documentation for the result parameter, additional dot points are not supported. The documentation is quite specific in how it is to be filled. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm confused, where does it say that in the documentation? And if it's reliably sourced content, why can't we make an exception even if true? Vanezi (talk) 06:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
It is quite specific as to what is permitted under the result parameter. It does not includes dot-points. WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE tells us not to write the article in the infobox and that less is better. This infobox is excessively bloated and such "detail" contributes to this. The infobox is unsuited to prose or prose like statements. That is what the lead is for. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Articles like Croatian War of Independence have been promoted to good article with the bullet points. I don't question the GA criteria and if it was good enough for a GA article, it should be here too. Vanezi (talk) 08:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
It was listed as a GA in 2011. Things change. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply