Talk:Aşağı Ağcakənd

Artsakh Low‑importance

	Aşağı Ağcakənd is within the scope of WikiProject Artsakh, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Artsakh and Artsakhians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArtsakhWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsakhTemplate:WikiProject ArtsakhArtsakh articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Azerbaijan Low‑importance

	Azerbaijan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Azerbaijan-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politization of history edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I couldn't care less if you have Azerbaijani or Armenian ancestry, but in Wikipedia you can't just remove information for no reason. In these kind of mildly controversial articles, it's better if you find the real Azerbaijani history of the town, and add it, rather than removing a whole chunk of information without a correct explanation. --92slim (talk) 06:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Dear USER92slim, thanks for you Care which you clearly side with armenian side here, took it directly from WP:NRSNVNA.

Wikipedia. Indeed, this may be the case, but an article completely lacking of reliable sources is likely a crock-pot of original research, none of which would remain if the article ever ascended to Featured Article status. This doesn't mean that no article on the topic should ever exist! However, just because someday someone might write a valid, credible, verifiable article that meets Wikipedia policy does not mean that the inferior, invalid article should remain as a placeholder. Reliable sources are a requirement for an article, not an objective. So delete the article now and wait for someone to write a credible, sourced, verifiable article. Or, better yet, do it yourself! As Wikipedia shifts its focus from growth to quality, it is important that we encyclopedists do not tolerate the presence of low-quality, unsourced material in our encyclopedia.

From The Original Research and Verifiability

Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it

Any more questions to ask? I will add history of Azerbaijan to the town when i do a quality research not some political mythological gibberish without ANY SOURCE! if you are not armenian and you do not care then follow wikipedia rules instead of engaging in WP:WAR. Being a more or less mature here i wont delete the information within the week if no original source is added. Did we reach consensus? Agulani (talk) 06:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

That's a WP:WPESSAY, not WP:POLICY. I don't "side" with anyone, otherwise I wouldn't be editing in this encyclopedia. It is very possible that the "historic" information is completely false. But to change this, it's necessary to find the actual history of the town; for example, the second half of the paragraph is about the war, so I don't think it's wise to remove that part. --92slim (talk) 06:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Add topic