Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seljuq Armenia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Seljuk Empire. Many delete votes shared the opinion that any sourceable content should be merged to this article. Sam Walton (talk) 12:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seljuq Armenia[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. The term Seljuq Armenia does not appear in reliable sources dealing with the history of Armenia. The tiny amount of information contained here should be merged into the Seljuq Empire article. Copied from rbedrosian.com and mixed up together, just like an article that was recently deleted. 92slim (talk) 18:38, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As nominator. --92slim (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I can't support the article's existence with its current title - as I said on the other recent AfD, the Seljuks ruled almost nothing in Armenia since whatever they had captured they very quickly either gave away to local allies, sold, lost, or just walked away from. The Saltukids, Shah-Armens, Shaddadids, etc., that are mentioned in this article were not Seljuks, nor did they even hold territory that abutted proper Seljuk territory. But there are gaps in the history of Armenia that needs to be covered (Armenia did not disappear after the 1070s), so maybe this AfD can initiate discussion about how to address that history. Maybe have articles with just a time periods as their title. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is such little information in the Seljuq Armenia article that it could be safely merged into the Seljuq Empire article and deleted. What do you think? --92slim (talk) 20:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Keep but change the title to "Armenia after the Seljuq conquests" (keep the old one as a redirect) and do a ground-up rewrite of the current content. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, after further thought, I withdraw my suggestion to use just a series of neutral time-based titles (something like Armenia 1075-1200, and so on). The often divergent histories of the various parts of Armenia would not easily fit into such titles. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed my opinion to delete - there is no emerging consensus on a title change to my proposed title, so it would be better to delete the article given that the current title is claiming something that in reality did not exist and thus presents a false image of the history of Armenia during this period. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:43, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete State articles should be named with their official name. Since a state or region with those names never existed it warrants deletion and merger into the main articles that deal with periods of Armenian and Turkic history. Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - change title to Armenia under the Seljuq Empire if you prefer. This is a notable topic in Armenian history. The Armenian version of the article is lengthy and referenced, Persian version is even longer. —Мандичка^YO 😜 20:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's the point of the AfD, there was no Armenia under the Seljuk Empire. That's WP:OR. --92slim (talk) 22:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Armenia has been around for thousands of years, even if ruled by different empires/invaders. Thus, Mongol Armenia, Russian Armenia, Ottoman Armenia, etc. I see no reason why Seljuq Armenia is any different or less notable. —Мандичка^YO 😜 04:55, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's factually incorrect - historical Armenia ceased to exist after 1071, and was only survived by expat rulers who created the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, which is not located in the region of Armenia proper. Russian and Ottoman Armenia are debatable names, since at various points of time in history the area may have been called Armenia and called so by its rulers. The reason I nominated the article for deletion was because in this case, Seljuqs and Mongols didn't call it Armenia by its name, and neither were those places governed by Seljuqs or Mongols, or known by such names until someone created these articles, so both Seljuq and Armenia shouldn't go together as there are no reliable sources that corroborate such states. I understand the concept in the abstract in terms of historical periods, but it's a bit like saying Turkish Greece, or British USA, Spanish Mexico or Japanese China. Those states and places didn't exist as such at the time and were not known by those names either by anyone. --92slim (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the main issue is that NONE of the article's content deals with any parts of Armenia under the rule of the Seljuk Empire. So the title is seriously wrong. Whether some parts of the western ends of historical Armenia were within Seljuk domains, or under rulers who were directly subject to the Seljuks, I honestly don't know (but even if there were, it would still be undue weight to have an article titled thus, given that most of Armenia was NOT under Seljuk rule. It would be like calling 19th-century Spain "Victorian Spain" because, in the 19th century, Victorian-era Britain was at that time the most powerful and influential country in Europe, militarily and culturally. There seems to be problems with the terminology used in other Armenian-history articles too - Mongol Armenia's content is actually mostly about the relations with and alliances with Cilician Armenia and the Mongols. There is negligible content there about the parts of Armenia that were under direct Mongol rule and I do not see any sources that directly call Cilician Armenia "Mongol Armenia". I have to disagree with a sweeping statement like "historical Armenia ceased to exist after 1071" because that is an oversimplification inappropriate for this era; we are not talking about modern nation states with fixed borders and modern-era concepts of a government signifying the existence of a nations. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But you do agree, that Mongol Armenia didn't refer to Cilicia, which is what the Mongol Armenia article refers to in its current form. That's my point. The articles don't refer to what they're supposed to, if anything at all. I'm not saying the territory isn't called Armenia, I'm saying it wasn't called Armenia then, and it wasn't controlled by the Seljuqs, and even if it was, they wouldn't have called it Armenia because there are no RS sources corroborating that. In any case, Armenian rulers stopped controlling Armenia and Armenia didn't become a client state of neither the Seljuqs or the Mongols, but entirely different entities. I think we agree that both articles are WP:OR and have no basis in secondary sources. --92slim (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So far, the articles Seljuq Empire, Timurid Empire, Mongol Empire (section is Ilkhanate), Kara Koyunlu and Aq Qoyunlu represent the states that were in existence at the time, with no particular attention to small details. I suggest deleting WP:OR articles such as Seljuq Armenia and including the sections in each of the individual articles in the main empire parts, or in the case of Mongol Armenia, creating an Armeno-Mongol relations article and redirecting the Seljuq section to the main Mongol Empire article with a new section. Turkmen Armenia was deleted also for being a mish mash of unsourced content with random sources that fail RS, and has to be included in the main articles in the same way now. --92slim (talk) 17:23, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do agree that Mongol Armenia isn't Cilicia - I'm pointing out that the Mongol Armenia article would suggest it does, since almost all its content is about Cilician Armenia not Mongol Armenia. I am thinking that it would be better to rename the article under AfD here to "Armenia after the Seljuq conquests", keep it as an almost stub article to be expanded in the future, and that the "Seljuq rule 1071–1201" in the History of Armenia infobox be likewise changed to "Armenia after the Seljuq conquests 1071-1201". Also I think "Mongol Armenia" should be changed to "Armenia under Ilkhanid domination" and most of the Cilicia stuff in it deleted and either moved to Kingdom of Cilicia or, as you suggest, a separate new article on Mongol-Cilicia relations. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:35, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Basically per 92slim. Sourced content should be merged into the relevant articles (if its not already present there). - LouisAragon (talk) 00:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and merge Rajmaan (talk) 08:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Երևանցի ^talk 10:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please no bare "votes"; support your opinions with arguments. Sandstein 18:22, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:22, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SYNTH...Rameshnta909 (talk) 19:44, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.