A fact from Visa policy of Azerbaijan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 June 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken 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.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia articles
Hello,
I've noticed an edit removing the mention of Nagorno-Karabakh from the entry restrictions. No matter what your political view, the government of Azerbaijan does not restrict access to any place called the Republic of Artsakh, only what they call Nagorno-Karabakh. I'm going to re-add a mention of Nagorno-Karabakh, as to ensure a neutral point of view. If anyone has an issue with this, please discuss!
Kind regards, ~ Asheiou (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
As far as I can see most of the information is cited though sometimes travel websites and magazines were used as source material (as opposed to government websites) However the information is verifibly correct
Here is an article that is netural, comprehensive and is well illustrated. Anyone who is not familar with the topic will have a well flushed breakdown on Azerbarjini visa policies after reading the article.
(Criteria marked are unassessed)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Technically some MOS:RELTIME that should have been picked up as part of the GA review ("All air travellers can apply for a visa on arrival between 1 April and 15 May 2023" for example) but nothing that breaks DYK rules. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya AirshipJungleman29, I fixed the tensing on that "can apply for a visa on arrival". It was correct at time of the GA review and I forgot to change it now the time has passed. You mentioned "for example". Are there any other issues you can spot? Feel free to WP:FIXIT or let me know so I can fix it! Thanks for bringing this to my attention. -Asheiou (they/them • talk) 21:42, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
are unassessed)
Technically some MOS:RELTIME that should have been picked up as part of the GA review ("All air travellers can apply for a visa on arrival between 1 April and 15 May 2023" for example) but nothing that breaks DYK rules. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)