Talk:Azerbaijan

EthnicityDemography

The pie graph in Ethnicity is still wrong, it shows around a quarter of population made by Ukrainians. That's absurd and anyway different from data in the text. A second error is that the graph title should be "Ethnicity" instead of "Demography". --Ab1 (talk) 13:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Not calling it a dictatorship is ridiculous

The previous discussion about listing it as a dictatorship lists a point about Russia not being listed as a dictatorship. Well now that has changed, and Wikipedia has agreed Russia is under an authoritarian dictatorship. I guess the war changed their minds. So why not Azerbaijan, who itself is committing an aggressive conflict which amounts to ethnic genocide against Armenians? You can find sources clearly agreeing it is a dictatorship. Here are a few: https://www.aei.org/op-eds/azerbaijans-aliyev-is-a-strategic-liability-not-an-asset/, https://hyperallergic.com/615519/artwashing-a-dictatorship/, https://evnreport.com/politics/the-dictator-has-no-clothes-aliyevs-regime-and-its-declining-oil-revenues/. Freedom House basically defines it as a dictatorship without strictly saying the dirty word: https://freedomhouse.org/country/azerbaijan. We must put the truth on here. Evil Narwhal (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The article's lead already mentions "authoritarian leadership under the leadership of both Heydar Aliyev and his son Ilham Aliyev". While a strong case for the authoritarian nature of current Azerbaijani government can be made, going into further details would violate WP:NPOV and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Brandmeister^talk 22:02, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Golden: The concern in the discussion you cited appears to be that news articles were used which didn't call it a dictatorship. Thus I cited an academic source, a journal article in Global Politics and Strategy, which directly calls it a hereditary dictatorship akin to the Kim dynasty. 25stargeneral (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Lack of sources isn't a concern. Infoboxes reflect the official form of government, not what outside observers (no matter whether rightly or wrongly) think it is, as stated by a participant in that discussion. For further clarification on the usage of the parameter, please refer to the the template's documentation. — Golden ^talk 16:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with that editor and the template documentation makes no such claim. Large-scale discussions on pages like Talk:Russia and Talk:North Korea have supported my interpretation of the purpose of the infobox. Wikipedia articles follow reliable, secondary sources in all cases. This infobox, as with all others, summarizes the body content that is sourced to reliable, independent, secondary sources. Sources are the only concern on Wikipedia. Semi-presidential republic is the official line, but it is false as considered by academics due to election fraud, suppression of the opposition, and hereditary succession. I have referred to the template documentation; all it says for that parameter is |government_type = <!--Wikilinked if link exists-->, so it does not support your assertion. You are required by Wikipedia policy to make your argument based on reliable, secondary sources. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

There should be consistency throughout all articles. If nations like Russia and North Korea are listed as dictatorships, then this article needs to be included in the same category. After all, it's simple to find sources that characterize Azerbaijan as a dictatorship. I stress again, though, that consistency is essential, and all other nation articles whose constitutional systems of governance are inconsistent with de jure should also receive the necessary adjustments. And there are many of such. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

When it comes to the infobox, the government should be as it is, "Unitary semi-presidential republic". The authoritarian nature is already included in the government and politics section. Sham elections are there, but in North Korea even sham elections are not conducted, as its leader is unelected by principle. Brandmeister^talk 08:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

North Korea conducts elections a couple of times each decade, and North Korea is led by the elected leader of its ruling political party. CMD (talk) 09:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The NK elections are internal rather than direct, by popular vote, as pretended in some post-Soviet pseudodemocracies. Also, if I'm not mistaken, both Kim Jong Il and Kim Jong Un became leaders by hereditary proclamation rather than internal party elections. Brandmeister^talk 09:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The elections are by direct popular vote for the legislature. Kim Jong Un won an internal party election in 2012, a few months after his father's death. CMD (talk) 11:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The point is that NK's most important office, the General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea (equivalent to president in post-Soviet states), is not elected through direct popular vote in principle. Changing that is much less likely and harder than transforming sham elections of a president elsewhere into fair and transparent. Brandmeister^talk 12:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Neither is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, that's not a point of inconsistency regarding the treatment of one pseudodemocracy or another. CMD (talk) 12:56, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

That's a red herring. Anyway, for the purpose of infobox there are WP:NPOV issues when adding "dictatorship" to certain countries. The country infobox template had a related discussion earlier and it appears that in some cases it's better to stick just to country's constitution, leaving details to article's body. Brandmeister^talk 13:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

We as editors cannot cite a primary source like a country's constitution or our own interpretations of one. We are bound by our policies to follow what political scientists say. NPOV means neutral with respect to what the political scientists say, it does not mean including the regime's point of view. I would check out Talk:Russia#Constitutional form of government or de facto system of government and the many similar conversations in the archives. 25stargeneral (talk) 13:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Major reference works, such as The World Factbook, Oxford Guide to Countries of the World or Britannica, list constitutionally defined government models in country profiles (which are equivalents of our country infoboxes). I'm not a fan of current power abuse in Azerbaijan or Russia, but per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE a country infobox should be succinct. Brandmeister^talk 16:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

It is a direct address to the point that was made, the opposite of a red herring. LouisAragon brought up an important point about consistency, and the apparent difference about sham elections applies to both examples LouisAragon raised, as well as this article. CMD (talk) 13:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

When it comes to infobox, I oppose per my rationale above, elsewhere in the article I'm ok with LouisAragon's proposal. Brandmeister^talk 16:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

LouisAragon has not proposed anything for unstated other parts of the article, they referred directly to the infoboxes at Russland and North Korea. CMD (talk) 16:59, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok, my oppose for Azerbaijan stands then. Brandmeister^talk 17:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree that there are sufficient citations to use dictatorship, especially compared to other country articles that are currently named as dictatorships. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I have not reached EC status, and I agree that other countries under similar conditions have been classified as authoritarian dictatorships. TheRichCapitalist (talk) 04:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

This article is about a country. Before imposing your personal view to this article, please proove that your sources are independent and reliable organisations. I recall international NGOs reporting Armenia's ethnic-cleansing activities in Karabakh in 1990s when Russian forces cooperated with Armenian proxies in Khojaly operation. But Armenia is still enjoying the white list. Iron Archer (talk) 18:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Aq Qoyunlu Qara Qoyunlu

According to the German Turkologist Gerhard Doerfer, it is very strange that the word "Turkman" still confuses Ag Goyunlu and Gara Goyunlu Turkmens. The word Turkman actually means "nomadic Oghuz"Aggoyunlu and Karagoyunlu "Turkmen" are Azerbaijanis anyway. 5.191.113.222 (talk) 15:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Some scientists call them Turkoman while others Turkmen. No difference, as both phrases refer to post-islamic Oghuz peoples, like modern Turkish, Azerbaijani, Turkmen.

Ak-koyunlu, Kara-koyunlu, Kayi, Kinik, Bayandur and many other names refer to Turkic tribes. Iron Archer (talk) 18:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Typo

"reintigration" should be "reintegration" (the final sentence of the section titled "Aliyev family rule, 1993–present" 185.33.186.243 (talk) 14:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

 Erledigt Beshogur (talk) 17:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 August 2024

Description: This page contains a spelling mistake, where it writes "... UAV'S/unmanned aerial vehicle..". Point of Error: UAV'S/unmanned aerial vehicle Correction Suggestion: UAVs / unmanned aerial vehicles Farial Mahmod (talk) 20:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

 Erledigt ⸺(Random)staplers 02:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)