Talk:Ramil Safarov

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability[edit]

Despite the 1994 cease-fire, soldiers, officers, and civilians continue to die due to the constant low-intensity war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over NK and other occupied regions. Every year dozens of people die in sniper fire and mines on the Line Contact, by now their numbers being at least one thousand. So why should Ramil Safarov have a page in Wikipeda -- he is just one of the victims, who has killed himself and saw killings all around himself coming from a refugee family -- and not Armenian Army Lt-Colonel Pargev Abrahamyan, who also used an axe, but to kill his wife, not enemy combatant?

The story of Ramil Safarov is somewhat complicated, as, like many other refugees, being another victim of the Karabakh occupation by Armenia -- which made hundreds of thousands of people poor and desperate, and turned some of them, like Safarov, to desperate measures, multiplied due to post-war stress and experience as a refugee child. Today’s condition of Ramil’s birthplace, the region of Jebrail in south-western Azerbaijan, near Karabakh region: the village was destroyed by Armenians, several relatives of Ramil who were killed by Armenians, and the region still under Armenian occupation.

The President and government of Azerbaijan have condemned such actions and expressed condolences to the family of Lt. Markarian. Meanwhile, both individuals were military men, able bodied, strong, young yet inexperienced, with hot-heads. Same cannot be said about a senior Armenian army representative, Lt-Colonel Pargev Abrahamyan, who killed his sleeping wife with an axe.

By Gayane Abrahamyan ArmeniaNow reporter

Published in: “ArmeniaNow” (http://www.armenianow.com), 11 April 2006 (Official translation)

Two Years Of Imprisonment For A Murderer

Contributed by Eduard Grigoryan, Women's Rights Center

The Malatia-Sebastia community Court of the first instance (judge – Tigran Petrosyan) sentenced Lieutenant-Colonel Pargev Abrahamyan, officer of the Headquarters of the RA Defense Ministry, to two years of imprisonment for killing his wife, Marine Maloyan, with an axe. Successors of the victim intend to file an appeal against this verdict of the court.

(from: http://www.stopvaw.org/Domestic_Violence4.html)

Placed the BBC source for the citation tag.
Removed the Geocities link and the Sumgait.info which are both extreme Armenian nationalist webpages. --adil 00:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's just a host. It's not the source.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 00:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
same can be said of any POV website. Armenian sources are not acceptable, no way to POV. --adil 07:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted some unsourced text added by an IP. discuss first pls. Andranikpasha (talk) 21:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

As it is obvious this article is related to both Azeri’s and armenians and references supporting either of them are not reliable. The references part merely includes links to pages supporting armenian ideas plus a link pointing to BBC, which concerns the condolences to the family of Gurgen Markaryan. This makes the article look biased towards armenians.Amir.azeri (talk) 19:41, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conviction[edit]

At present, Ramil Safarov is a convict. He needs to be listed as such. The sections of Hungarian criminal code he was held to have violated need to be listed as well as the legal rulings. All this is absent in the present presentation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.86.47.131 (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He was convicted for preparations for murder and for pre-planned murder committed for a nefarious reason with extreme cruelty (direct translation, I am not familiar with US legal expressions - original is "emberölés előkészülete" and "előre kitervelten, aljas indokból, különös kegyetlenséggel elkövetett emberölés"). The sentence was imprisonment for life, with at least 30 years before parole, plus expulsion from Hungary for 10 years. --Tgr (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Varoujan Garabedian[edit]

I believe this link must be provided, as these two people were clearly motivated by similar ideas and had similar life paths. The 'See also' section does not necessarily have to contain links pertaining specifically to the content of the article. Parishan (talk) 02:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree; the only thing the two share is that they were convicted of murder. Neither the ideology nor the way of murder seem to match. If we're going to have links to similar cases, I think there are cases which are way more similar, especially given the weapon of choice, such as the Afula axe attack and Bat Ayin axe attack. Chaojoker (talk) 03:15, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
De facto and de jure ASALA's activities, and Garabedian's particularly, have no connection with this case, therefore I see no reason why it should be added.--Yerevanci (talk) 03:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After being free Varoujan Garabedian greeted with ceremony. Later government was a gift a apartment and workplace for him. Similarity not? And of course he is a hero for many people. Esc2003 (talk) 16:50, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How many years did Garabedian spend in prison?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:12, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
17 years for killed 8 and injured 55(maybe some of them very injured. armless, legless, blind..). Why do you ask? --Esc2003 (talk) 17:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Garabedian, after serving 17 years in prison, was pardoned by the French president, not Armenian. And then he was deported from France, as a free person, while Safarov was exradited to Azerbajan to continue serving his life sentence. Can't you see the difference? --Daniel (talk) 04:20, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
^ Thank you.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 04:23, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Thank you" Hmm you have support :)
I already know there is differences. (For example, I said difference in to number of killed people.) I also show you some similarities. Aren't I right?
I say important similarities. Armenian Prime Minister expressed happiness. He was greeted as a hero in the ceremony. A home and work for him. -- Esc2003 (talk) 05:53, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there are some similarities, besides those that you have already mentioned, I could e.g. notice that both of them were males, both of them were from the Caucasus, etc. But there is a fundamental difference between these two cases: Garabedian was pardoned by the French president, not by the president of his home country. And he was deported from the country where he committed the crime, as a free person, not extradited, as Safarov, to continue to serve his sentence. I hope you finally agree that this two cases, although they share some common details, at the same time possess fundamental differences and thus could not be considered as similar. --Daniel (talk) 06:54, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did the same thing as you in september 2
You may be right about "see also" section. Esc2003 (talk) 07:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad that we've reached the consensus. --Daniel (talk) 07:56, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move rejected. De728631 (talk) 18:35, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ramil Safarov → Murder of Gurgen Margaryan – Per naming of articles of this nature as discussed at Talk:Murder of Yeardley Love#Move discussion, and as the only reason for Safarov's fame is his axing of an Armenian officer at Partnership for Peace. Chaojoker (talk) 02:51, 2 September 2012 (UTC) Keep. Most of the content is related to events happening either prior or long after the incident. Parishan (talk) 02:55, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And all those events have to do with his murder. Chaojoker (talk) 03:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The murder issue was dealt with when Safarov received his sentence back in 2006. The recent developments have to do with his extradition, rather than with the murder. Parishan (talk) 03:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neither would there be a single news article about him nor would there be an extradiction if it wasn't for his murder. The only reason this Wiki article exists is becuase he chose to axe someone to death in his sleep, so its the murder that brought him prominence, hence the choice for naming. Chaojoker (talk) 03:15, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move because that is widely acceptable on Wikipedia. --Yerevanci (talk) 03:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Sources describe Ramil Safarov directly enough to overcome WP:BLP1E. Content focusing on the murder belongs at Gurgen Margaryan. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:BLP1E. None of its three conditions are met...
  • Reliable sources covering his Ramil_Safarov#Extradition and pardon are beyond the single event of the murder. BIO1E/BLP1E are not about excluding cases where a running affair can be traced back to a single event, but where there was only the single event that was of any significance.
  • "If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. " Neither is the case. There are ramifications of the event of international significance, and this person is going to remain notorious indefinately.
  • "the individual's role within it[,the event] is substantial and well-documented". Yes, this individual is central to the event. Aspects of the event are uncertain (with the uncertainty well documented), but it is not that it is not certain that Ramil was centrally involved.
To the extent that this article can be chanelled into the "Murder of Gurgen Margaryan", it should be merged to Gurgen_Margaryan#Murder, but there is much here that doesn't belong there, with everythign else being centred on Ramil. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree, this guy is famous only because of this case. --Norden1990 (talk) 14:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Both individuals have gained fame and should have their own separate articles. George Spurlin (talk) 08:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, oppose - as repulsive as it is that someone should be so notable for a race-hate muder, the victim has his own article already and Ramil Safarov's story isn't over. I don't imagine anyone in Armenia will forget this for the next 40 years. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Axe photo[edit]

The restored photo, as indicated in the file description, is not the actual axe used in the murder. Putting an ordinary, unrelated axe does not confer any encyclopedical value. Brandmeistertalk 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no specification of the axe used by Safarov. During the trial Safarov described it as "The handle of the axe was around 1 meter long and the iron part was red, color of the light tree." Carpenter's axe, which is pictured on the photo, is the most common type of axe. --Yerevanci (talk) 18:08, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The axe on the image does not even look similar to what Safarov described. So it's better to remove, especially given that there is no specification of the axe used. Brandmeistertalk 18:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the murder weapon; I doubt a free image exists. --Tgr (talk) 20:15, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this image similar to that? --Yerevanci (talk) 21:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The one actually used in the murder is almost twice as long, more an axe than a hatchet. Why are we so insistent on belittling the intelligence of the reader here? There's a Wikilink for the axe so they can just click on it just in case they don't know what one looks like.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 22:10, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about showing the reader how an axe looks like. Putting up a picture of the instrument of murder is a common on Wikipedia. Plus, there is no image in this article and a photo of it wouldn't harm.--Yerevanci (talk) 22:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian Government reaction[edit]

This official reaction might be useful http://www.kormany.hu/en/ministry-of-foreign-affairs/news/press-release — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.149.121 (talk) 20:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, just added to the article.

The press release is archived here - This is the Hungarian version, which is archived here WhisperToMe (talk) 22:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motive of the murder[edit]

Let me know what kind of facts are needed to prove that the motive of this murder was Ethnic hatred?--Yerevanci (talk) 22:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A conviction that states that it was racially aggravated murder. Anything else is supposition. It might be well founded supposition, but we do not post our assumptions as facts. Kevin McE (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are you kidding me? He was convicted in a murder and sentenced to life in prison. Also, Safarov confessed that he killed Margaryan because of his ethnicity.--Yerevanci (talk) 22:52, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
More exactly: he said he killed the Armenian because Margaryan "mocked him and desecrated his country's (Azerbaijan) symbols." --Norden1990 (talk) 23:17, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That was asserted in court and never proven. Balázs Kuti, Margaryan's roommate, said that Margaryan and Safarov, and generally the rest of the officers, had never had any conflict. Safarov also told the police that he was revengeful against the entire Armenian nation. I think his actions speak for themselves. Chaojoker (talk) 23:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hero[edit]

I would suggest refraining from the word "hero" - in this case it is a personal impression of the news authors and the presence of that word in the article is non-neutral, making it look like an essay. Also the word is in the Words to watch area. Brandmeistertalk 01:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree if the context was that the article stated him to be a hero, or stated that he was officially designated as a hero. However, the article states that "he was greeted as a national hero", and "is considered by many in Azerbaijan to be a hero", both of which are confirmed by multiple neutral sources as mentioned in the article. Taking those away without reliable sources to prove their inaccuracy leaves the impression of trying to subdue the reality of the occurances. Chaojoker (talk) 03:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

budapest.sumgait.info is a pro-Armenian website. Should not be seen as a reliable source. Esc2003 (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's against Wikipedia rules to discriminate against websites because their Armenian or Azerbaijani. If you have specific reason to belive it's not reliable, lets discuss it. George Spurlin (talk) 13:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't need to be told. Please examine. Esc2003 (talk) 13:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the original source of this information? If the original source is unknown. this information can not count correctly. Esc2003 (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
budapest.sumgait.info is used to provide the full text of the murdrer's interrogation. Nothing is intepreted in there. Chaojoker (talk) 15:16, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How can a translation of protocol be pro- or con-? --Aleksey Chalabyan a.k.a. Xelgen (talk) 20:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I said a simple thing: The original source? Esc2003 (talk) 23:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure the original is Hungarian. What do you have against the host? Again you can't discriminate against a website because its Armenian, Azerbaijani or Chinese. George Spurlin (talk) 09:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yet no Azerbaijani citizen outside the area of the conflict has ever became a target of revenge from those Armenians who lost their family members, relatives and friends in pogroms and ethnic cleansing.**

This is a violation of neutrality. Reality is not that. budapest.sumgait.info clearly contains elements of propaganda. Esc2003 (talk) 17:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic hatred new source from Washington Post OK. Where is the source of this news? This vicious cycle will continue? Esc2003 (talk) 13:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic hatred[edit]

[Safarov:] After I finished I lit a cigarette. I was smoking, smoking and then I threw it. First it fell on the chest of the Armenian, then from there onto the bedclothes.
[Interrogator:] Why did you throw the cigarette onto the body?
[Safarov:] Since I hate them so much and I was prepared for the revenge for so long it was a relieve for me. As long as I didn’t care about him it didn’t mean whether I threw the cigarette onto the ground, or on his bed or into his eyes.

I belive this is called ethnic hatred. George Spurlin (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is about throwing the cigarette onto the body, as you see, not killing. Brandmeistertalk 16:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is not ethnic hatred. It described moment of murder. Please add valid, unbiased and relevant source for adding the article this thing. Thank you.--Reality 16:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is exactly what motive for murder means. It is in murderer's own words. Please stop removing the source. Chaojoker (talk) 17:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No original research please. The question above is "why did you throw the cigarette onto the body", not "why did you kill Margaryan". Brandmeistertalk 17:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is a murder interrogation and it is his own words, no interpretation thereof. Chaojoker (talk) 17:34, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hah? Original research?
  • "In addition I feel sorry that I haven’t killed any Armenian."
  • "If there would have been more Armenians at school and if I would have the possibility I would not only try to kill two persons, but rather I would commit the crime on all."
  • "My job is to kill all, because until they live we will suffer.".
IMHO, this is simply rephrasing in proper English, I don't see any kind of research, or even an assumption. No one is needed.
During whole Interrogation, he constantly refers to his victims (one he killed, and one he failed to kill) as Armenians. No other way of calling them, but their ethnicity. If you don't like "Ehtnic heatred" phrasing use "because they were Armenians" instead, but that would be simply poor English. Stating that he killed because "they mocked them" which was never prooved, or because Gurgen was disrepctful to imaginery flag no one seen, etc and other versions which advocates tried to use but _failed_ to proove in the court IS Original research, on the other hand and POV pushing. DIXI. --Aleksey Chalabyan a.k.a. Xelgen (talk) 19:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NOR, there should be a reference which must directly support the material being presented. Find a court ruling or similar reliable source, that writes about the motive of the murder before inserting it. Brandmeistertalk 20:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming the records are not grossly mistranslated, Safarov himself says that the reason for the murder (and the subsequent murder attempt) was that the victim was Armenian. E.g. My willingness was that since he is an Armenian his mother would cry as much as our mother cried when they lost their child. The whole was just revenge. --Tgr (talk) 20:54, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is an answer to another question. But, first of all, as the source says, Safarov rejected his own evidence given during the first interrogation claiming, so that source cannot be used. Brandmeistertalk 23:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So we take his word for it? What if he said that he didn't do it? George Spurlin (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Péter Erdő[edit]

Can we add the opinion of the Archbishop of Esztergom? I know it is not an official statement from the government but he is the head of the Hungarian Catholic Church. --Norden1990 (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It could be added under the Reactions -> Hungary section. I don't think it has to be only from a government source. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 19:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two more sources of use for someone to add: the OSCE's (as well as Russia's) reaction and condemnation of Azerbaijan: [1] and inter alia the payment of eight years' worth of backpay to Safarov by the Azerbaijan government [2].--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will add both! --Yerevanci (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An idea to consider: In Russian wikipedia they created a separate section called "Other countries and organizations" and placed Archbishop's response in it, which may also make sense. Currenlty there are some responses from political and or religious organizations, which don't perfectly suite under state responses. --Aleksey Chalabyan a.k.a. Xelgen (talk) 20:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds great! I'll add a section Non-government organizations which will include all statements by non-official sources. --Yerevanci (talk) 20:33, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Minsk group or CSTO can't be considered "Non-government" or "non-official". Plus there are cases, like post in Twitter from MFA of Sweden, which is not exactly "official", but still noteworthy. --Aleksey Chalabyan a.k.a. Xelgen (talk) 20:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the article. I think it looks good.--Yerevanci (talk) 21:27, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality[edit]

I see the page is being heavily edited by users of Armenian origin. I understand you hate Ramil Safarov, however, I suggest you respect other editors and do not oppose to providing opinions and claims of both sides, especially when they are cited. Otherwise, the neutrality of the article becomes questionable. Thanks Angel670 talk 23:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you're of Azerbaijani origin and I understand you love Safarov?? How does that feel?!? If you have problem distinguishing between reality and sugarcoating, then Wikipedia isn't for you. --Yerevanci (talk) 01:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid racist comments like that, or you will be reported, thanks for understanding, my dear friend! --Yerevanci (talk) 01:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't hurry up with conclusions, mind WP:AGF and WP:NOTBATTLE. If I loved him, I would add lots of sources calling him a hero. As you can see, I haven't done so. Instead, I tried to add a balanced info referring to media of both sides, however, you shortly removed all my edits, and related references gone. Its not good approach that you are trying to block any view not matching your POV. The selective provision of sources and information undermines the neutrality of the article.Angel670 talk 12:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you call "heavily edited by users of Armenian origin" and "I understand you hate Ramil Safarov" assuming good faith, then I have nothing to add. Prejudice at its finest.
Don't hurry up with conclusions? Where did you gain the rights of judging others? You started your sentence with "I see the page is being heavily edited by users of Armenian origin." and you suggest others not to hurry with their conclusions? Are you kidding me?
The sources calling him a "hero" were added by me mostly to show how Azerbaijani authorities praise the axe murderer in his homeland. You added this news article which says the following:

During his trial in Budapest, Safarov claimed that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was at the root of his actions and that he killed Markarian while the victim was sleeping after the Armenian repeatedly provoked and ridiculed him.

And you indicated as a source for "Revenge for repeated provocation and humiliation". And you keep telling me you "tried to add a balanced info". This isn't balanced. This is sugarcoating. --Yerevanci (talk) 16:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"claim" is not a final judgment. Esc2003 (talk) 17:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A more sensible thing would have been to call for both sides to act with restraint. "Hey guys, I know this is a heated topic but let's try to discuss controversial content before we actually add it, that way, the article's quality and a neutral point of view are assured," or something like that. Instead, you lunge at one group of people and make absurd assumptions like "I know you hate Ramil Safarov" and so calls to mind AGF ring hollow in light of such comments. The pardoning of a convicted murderer is bad enough in its essence and I don't think any amount of editing can make it appear look worse than it already is. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for advise. Can I call Yerevanchi now to act with a restraint and restore my edits and references that he removed shortly after I added them? We may not agree on some aspects of information flow, therefore, I suggest we invite an uninvolved editor to help us with editing this article. How about that? Angel670 talk 16:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That was not an advice. That was to show your biased view on this topic. --Yerevanci (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No need to add a secondary source to explain his motive. In his first interrogation he explains in his own words what he means by "provocation" and "humliation", claims for which no witness was called in court:

In addition I feel sorry that I haven’t killed any Armenian. My army sent me to this training and being here I have to face the fact that two Armenian were learning with me and I have to say that because of personal effectiveness the feeling of animosity grow up in me. In the beginning we were greeting each other, rather to say they said hi to me, but I didn’t accept it and curiosity in the whole thing was that when they walked close to me they were mumbled something in Armenian and laughed at me. That was the time when I decided that I will kill these two persons, the Armenians, I will cut their head off.

Chaojoker (talk) 17:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming anyone is biased based on their ethnic origin is pure racism. I am so glad you brought up the subject of neutrality though, in the light of the article appearing in the Azerbaijani news website day.az, where it has directly incites its readers to edit in the mentioned article in Wikipedia. The news page is in Russian; here's an excerpt from the page translated by Google:

Day.Az encourages its readers to participate in the editing of this page. We appeal to those who care about the image of our country, our officer - go to "Wikipedia" and actively fix any inaccurate information on Ramil Safarov.
Make changes to the materials "Wikipedia" is technically possible. However, this process requires the user's experience of the resource is above average. This is easiest to do the people have edited this "Wikipedia." Recall that, thanks to our joint efforts have repeatedly been able to seek to fix the errors and distortions related to Azerbaijan, who were admitted to a particular Internet resource.

The quotation says it all. Chaojoker (talk) 17:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I brought up this subject on the administrators' noticeboard yesterday and asked for the article to be protected and watched, but as far as I know, nothing has been done about it yet. Chaojoker (talk) 17:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yerevanchi, I haven't provided any view of mine. I briefly referred to the sources containing balancing information so that we provide a reader a view from both Azeri and Armenian media. I also provided reference to the opinion of the Armenian MP in the media. You could modify the sentences the way you feel it relevant, however, removing all my edits was too harsh. Angel670 talk 17:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Opinions are irrelevant and should not be included when contradicting official documents; read the above post with direct quote from court document, the most reliable source in this case. Chaojoker (talk) 17:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Chaojoker, the user above has already presented his point of view. Why are you trying explaining him something he's not willing to understand? --Yerevanci (talk) 17:18, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He did not say his point view. He talk about Seferov's claim. Do not be accusatory. Esc2003 (talk) 17:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reread his first two opening sentences. That's what I call presenting point of view. --Yerevanci (talk) 17:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Extradition vs repatriation[edit]

Extradited *is* the more common term used in this case based on a Google search 13.900 for Safarov repatriation, 14.000 for Safarov repatriated, 167.000 for Safarov extradition and 167.000 for Safarov extradited.

Even though the Google results prove the same thing, they need not be taken into account as in an official statement by Hungary's Ministry of Public Administration and Justice it was stated that Safarov was extradited. Chaojoker (talk) 17:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protected[edit]

Since there's a veritable edit war going on at this page with a handfull of people involved, I have now fully protected the article for one week per WP:BLP. That should give you time to discuss pending changes and controversial parts in the article. De728631 (talk) 18:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reacting promptly. Chaojoker (talk) 19:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Translated several novels[edit]

but that's not the only thing he did in prison. According to this he also attacked a prison guard and for this he got a 2 1/2 years in a separate trial. There is also a bit of information here, a condemnation of Azerbaijan's decision from both the Council of Europe and the President of the European Parliament. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.149.121 (talk) 19:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "several" seems to be two (The Door by Magda Szabó and The Paul Street Boys). --Tgr (talk) 22:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Russian news agency Regnum confirmed that Ramil Safarov received in Hungary an additional sentence in a separate trial for attacking a prison guard. Should this information be included into this article to provide a more balanced account of his behaviour, while in prison? --Daniel (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 5 September 2012[edit]

Please change the link at the end of the section ==Budapest murder and trial== (section 2) from [[Azeri language|Azeri]] to [[Azerbaijani language|Azeri]]. This will bypass a redirect. Hgrosser (talk) 04:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Yunshui 雲‍水 09:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2 edit requests[edit]

Could you please add the official statement of France to the article under Ramil_Safarov#Other_countries_and_international_organizations? I think it should be placed between Russia and Sweden.

  •  France: Foreign Ministry said that "France expresses her concern following the announcement of the pardon granted to Safarov by the Azerbaijani authorities". As one of the Minsk Group countries, France is "strongly committed to a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, believes that this decision risks seriously damaging the negotiation efforts and the establishment of a climate of trust between the parties."[1]

Second request is to replace "A demonstration is planned in Budapest's Kossuth Square on September 4. More than 2 thousand people have joined the event on Facebook.[59]" with "On September 4 a demonstration took place in front of the Hungarian Parliament Building in Kossuth Square. It was reported that about two thousand Hungarians protested against their government actions.[2]"

Thanks.--Երևանցի talk 15:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done De728631 (talk) 19:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible fork[edit]

Extradition of Ramil Safarov. I'm not sure if a separate page is needed for the extradition at this moment and it doesn't seem to me appropriate that a new article has cropped up which can be edited, while this one can't. Perhaps a merge is in order.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 06:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that as well. I support the merger, there is really no need for another article. George Spurlin (talk) 07:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support merging too. I've put a merge tag there. Brandmeistertalk 17:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Extradition article has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extradition of Ramil Safarov. De728631 (talk) 17:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Extradition of Ramil Safarov is created/written based on different sources and provides references to every content. The article about Ramil Safarov contains general information and biography about this officer, while the other article includes information about extradition and some other relevant information. The article Extradition of Ramil Safarov is going to be improved with different aspects and views. The content will be completely different than the article about officer. Any contribution is welcomed. Konullu September 6, 2012. —Preceding undated comment added 20:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not supported - the article Ramil Safarov includes information about his life (biography, trial, prison life, popularity resons, etc.), while the article Extradition and pardon of Ramil Safarov includes information that happened and continues to happen after his extradition (August 31, 2012). Therefore the brief information about extradition and pardon in this article is enough, we can give the link to the extradition article in this page and to avoid duplication of information in two articles to avoid possible fork. Sincerely, Konullu (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
— Note to closing admin: Konullu (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. Daniel (talk) 00:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 6 September 2012[edit]

Could you please add the following information to the Extradition and pardon section?

According to some reports, a week before Safarov's release, there were talks over a loan of 2-3bn euros from Azerbaijan to Hungary.[3] However, Hungary's prime minister has denied any secret deal with Azerbaijan.[3]

  1. ^ "Azerbaijan - Pardon granted to M.Safarov – Statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman (September 3, 2012)". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of France. September 3, 2012. Retrieved September 4, 2012.
  2. ^ "Hungarians protest against release of Azeri officer". Reuters. September 4, 2012. Retrieved September 4, 2012.
  3. ^ a b "Azeri killer Ramil Safarov: Nato chief 'concerned'". BBC News. 6 September 2012. Retrieved 6 September 2012.

Daniel (talk) 17:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks more like a dismantled rumour, not worthy of inclusion in my opinion. Brandmeistertalk 17:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yet enough news agencies and respectable analysts have made a connection with this "rumor" as the true motive for Hungary's otherwise inexplicable release of a convicted murder. You ever notice that not everything here is contingent on one's own personal beliefs? If it quacks like a duck...--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Safarov requested the transfer himself, I added it to the article some time ago. The rest seems to be Aliyev's decision as it's only up to president to pardon according to Constitution. I remember Safarov's interview, where he said that the decision to pardon was unexpected for him. Brandmeistertalk 21:31, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The transfer has been requested earlier (2008 I think?) but refused, exactly on the grounds that it is not guaranteed that he would serve his punishment. The Strasbourg agreement does not require countries to do the transfer, it only allows them. --Tgr (talk) 07:05, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Some reports" was this article of Hungarian economic newspaper Figyelő, which claimed the information came from an unnamed government source. (Note this was days before the extradition, when this information didn't seem politically significant.) Some member of the government denied this the next day.

At any rate, the extradition being part of some business deal between Hungary and Azerbaijan is treated as a fact by the Hungarian press (including most of the pro-government press, who defend the action saying this is the normal order of things in politics that moral regards are overriden by economic ones, and cite international parallels such as the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi or Varoujan Garabedian, but do not dispute that the extradition was done in the hope of economic advantages). So it is not a majority POV, at least in Hungary. --Tgr (talk) 22:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean that in Hungary the link between this loan and the Safarov's release is treated not as a "dismantled rumour", but as a "fact" by most of the Hungarian press (including the pro-government press)?--Daniel (talk) 22:43, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes (including the moderate pro-government press, anyway - the really biased ones would never question a direct denial by government officials). Some suggest that the government didn't realize he would be let free, or let free this quickly and this obviously (and point out that the recent dealings were made over the head of the foreign ministry, by some high-level government members who are not too savvy diplomatically), but the transfer itself is generally treated as part of a secret deal. What exactly the other side of the deal is is usually seen as an open question (e.g. there have been guesses about Azerbaijan making business with Hungarian oil company MOL). --Tgr (talk) 07:01, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget that The Economist suggested that "Azerbaijan had promised to buy state bonds from Hungary in exchange for Safarov’s release." [3]--Երևանցի talk 00:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Economist didn't suggested that: "Many scent a dirty deal behind the scenes, as this post on Hungarian Spectrum, a liberal blog, outlines. The main theory is that Azerbaijan had promised to buy state bonds from Hungary in exchange for Safarov’s release." A blog post suggested that and Economist simply reference to the suggestion. The fact that their reference is a blog and not a reliable source tells what kind of suggestion it is. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 02:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, let's have the entire quotation from the Economist:

The Hungarian media has reported that Azerbaijan has been pressing Hungary to release Safarov since his conviction. Many scent a dirty deal behind the scenes, as this post on Hungarian Spectrum, a liberal blog, outlines. The main theory is that Azerbaijan had promised to buy state bonds from Hungary in exchange for Safarov’s release.
Hungary needs the money. It has been in protracted and so far fruitless negotiations with the IMF and the European Union for a stand-by credit arrangement. The Hungarian government is actively seeking other potential investment partners in Asia and the Middle East. Mr Orbán visited Azerbaijan in June.
Hungarian and Azeri officials dismissed such claims.

The facts are:
a) Azerbaijan has been pressing Hungary to release Safarov since his conviction.
b) Mr Orbán has visited Azerbaijan in June.
c) Hungary, which depends on Russia for most of its energy imports, has been seeking to expand its economic relations with oil-rich Azerbaijan.
Laszlo Borbely, the deputy director of Hungary’s Government Debt Management Agency last week told daily newspaper Magyar Nemzet that talks between the two countries about a possible purchase by Azerbaijan of up to 3 billion euros ($3.77 billion) in Hungarian bonds were only at an “exploratory phase” for now. (quote from Washington Post)
Reliable news sources have continuously referenced these transaction in articles relating to Safarov, however, the Hungarian and Azerbaijani officials have denied any connection between the two. Therefore, it will be accurate to include both that such negotiations have taken place, and that the two country officials have denied any connection between the two. Chaojoker (talk) 02:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not gonna be accurate if you use the Economist article to reference the bond claims as if the claims belong to the Economist. As far as I can see reliable news sources report on the bond claims in the context that the claims belongs to blogs and such sources just like the Economist does. So, the bond claim can be added but the proper context should also be given not to mislead readers. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 03:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, according to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty the accusations came not from the blogs but from the "Hungarian business newspaper". As Tgr has mentioned above it was a Hungarian economic newspaper Figyelő, which is a reliable source. Later these accusations were repeated by other media in Hungary and also appeared in the blogs, one of them happened to be a liberal blog Hungarian Spectrum, which was mentioned by The Economist: "Many scent a dirty deal behind the scenes, as this post on Hungarian Spectrum, a liberal blog, outlines". --Daniel (talk) 03:53, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then that article from that newspaper should be referenced but the point that the source of the newspaper is not disclosed should be mentioned. Though I'm not sure about using a non-English source. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the Deep Throat identity was not revealed for over 30 years, so I'm not surprised that this "unnamed government source" (as the newspaper described it) prefers not to be disclosed. Would you like to provide the exact wording of this edit, which you would be happy with? --Daniel (talk) 16:01, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is a place where you can write about things that you can source directly to. The current version is clearly a disruptive edit as it abuses the reference. The sentence I would suggest: "Various Hungarian blogs and a Hungarian newspaper have suggested that "Azerbaijan had promised to buy state bonds from Hungary in exchange for Safarov’s release."" Then you reference the blog article, Economist article and other third degree sources. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can use the Reuters and the Economist articles. The BBC and France Diplomatie links don't really talk about the bond issue. At least I don't see it when I search for it. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 21:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the template to point to the correct template. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 18:12, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Removed the edit request template to reflect said changes. Auto-confirmed editors may go ahead but I don't see a consensus yet about the proposed change. De728631 (talk) 18:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motive: Double standards?[edit]

This article: The person (Azeri) has killed one Armenian. Motive: "Ethnic hatred" (Massacres of Azerbaijanis by Armenians.)

Article Gourgen Yanikian: The person (Armenian) has killed two Turks. Motive: "Revenge". (Massacres of Ottoman Armenians.)

Both persons have killed for "revenge" of massacres against their people or both have killed for "ethnic hatred". Why do we have motive "revenge" in one article and "ethnic hatred" in the other? Do we have double standards in Wikipedia? I request serious comments, please... --E4024 (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should I copy my reply from Yanikyan page? Are you going to spam anymore articles? George Spurlin (talk) 15:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am asking the WP community. (And not spamming anything. I only wish to have an objective WP.) --E4024 (talk) 15:48, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is true. Unfortunately, there is a double standarts in English Wikipedia. If killer is Armenian, he is hero. If killer is Turkish or Azeri, he is terrorist. I'm trying to fix it but some users prevent me.--Reality 14:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It proves double standards.--Reality 17:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The two murders don't seem that similar: Yanikian made careful plans to kill high-ranking members of the state, while Safarov just killed some random Armenian who was placed in the same class. In other words, Safarov killed his victim for being Armenian, Yanikyan killed his for being member of a government guilty in genocide. The first can be fairly characterized as ethnic hatred, the second not. (That said, I wouldn't call it revenge, either - that only make sense if you accept collective responsibility of all members of the government. For the lack of a better term, maybe it could be called terrorism.) --Tgr (talk) 18:57, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you on Gourgen Yanikiyan. But not for Safarov. Because only source of "ethnic hatred" budapest.sumgait.info. This is a doubtful situation. You can try to talk about Varoujan Garabedian(received a life sentence. after gets pardoned. welcomed like a hero with ceremony. given apartment). --Esc2003 (talk) 16:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am talking about all "ians" or "ovs" or whomever. WP has to have one standard for all these cases: Look at the violence not the violent... --E4024 (talk) 17:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does Wikipedia have rules for determining the motive of a crime? TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 12:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Killers made heros[edit]

Read the section "Legacy" in Article Gourgen Yanikian. As long as there are people who make heros out of assassins, there will be more and more assassins. Here in WP we should treat all the assassins with the same approach. (See above talk.) --E4024 (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:SOAP. George Spurlin (talk) 08:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian diaspora[edit]

Please add at the Armenian diaspora section the movilizations that the Armenian community in Argentina effected at the Hungary embassy at Buenos Aires, Argentina. --Liepaja1941 (talk) 22:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Télam link: http://www.telam.com.ar/nota/37138/ (in Spanish)

Telam presents Safarov as Hungarian. It does not look very much like an RS really. --E4024 (talk) 22:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That was a Télem error. Here is another link about the protest in Buenos Aires: http://noticias.terra.com.ar/internacionales/protesta-armenia-en-buenos-aires-frente-a-embajada-hungara,40a70d8ad7b99310VgnVCM5000009ccceb0aRCRD.html (in Spanish).--Liepaja1941 (talk) 02:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They (Terra) only quote the Télam text and I can't find any reliable sources that cover these protests. Please try to find betters news coverage. De728631 (talk) 11:13, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another sourse (Reporter): http://www.reporter.am/go/article/2012-08-31-outrage-as-hungary-releases-azeri-axe-murderer--Liepaja1941 (talk) 16:37, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That link seems to be broken. All I get is a large table full of markup code and web templates from their site. De728631 (talk) 15:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.reporter.am/go/article/2012-08-31-outrage-as-hungary-releases-azeri-axe-murderer <<<this one works--Երևանցի talk 17:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Yerevanci for the link correction. Muchas gracias. --Liepaja1941 (talk) 01:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Thanks for the correct link but unfortunately it's not very useful. I thought this was about an in-depth report of protests in Buenos Aires, but the city is merely mentioned in a figurative comparison for "across the world": "from Ottawa to Calcutta and Buenos Aires to Oslo." Nothing to see here and nothing that hasn't been told before in the article. De728631 (talk) 17:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Extradition and pardon section[edit]

Extradition and pardon section needs to provide link to the main article:

Main article: Extradition and pardon of Ramil Safarov

Konullu (talk) 06:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure where the deletion discussion for this one is heading but I've still added the link. De728631 (talk) 17:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The shifting, twisting narrative of Safarov's motives[edit]

I think everyone would be well advised to consult this article published by RFE/RL, which analyzes the many twists and turns Safarov's motives took in the Azerbaijani narrative from almost the day of the murder until today. The "insult" meme, as the author shows, has seen itself morph from Margaryan and/or the other Armenian officer doing any one of the following things: urinating on the Azerbaijani flag, using it to clean and wipe their shoes, making insulting remarks against the flag, and playing an audio recording of "voices of suffering Azerbaijani women and girls." It should be noted that none of these claims were or ever have been substantiated by witnesses. This information should somehow be incorporated into this page, I think. Mention might also be made of the variety of stories we hear about Safarov's earlier years and we should try to note the more outstanding discrepancies that pertain to the war years and the number of relatives he purportedly lost during that period.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Time for the "current" template to be removed.[edit]

The {{current}} template is intended for those rare occasions in which perhaps hundreds of different editors are attempting to edit an article over the course of a few hours.

That is not the case for this article.

Please cause the template to be removed, since the present activity on this article is not in accord with the guide for the use of template.
See: Template:Current#Guidelines.
--Yellowdesk (talk) 01:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done The template documentation states that Generally it is expected that this template and its closely related templates will appear on an article for less than a day; occasionally longer. De728631 (talk) 17:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions[edit]

The full protection of the article has now been changed to semi-protected. To avoid recurring nationisticl and NPOV edit wars, I am imposing the following sanction on this article for a period of six months, ending on 11 March 2013:

The sanction disclaimer will also be visible in the edit window. De728631 (talk) 18:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motive[edit]

Brandmeister, who are we really kidding here? Whatever excuse come up by Safarov or his apologists (and it appears that a new one is come up with everyday), it is clear that all mainstream sources (media outlets, organizations, scholars and analysts, etc.) speak in unison when they attribute Safarov's actions to enmity directed toward Margaryan's ethnic identity. You and several other editors have been prancing around this issue for quite some time but have been unable to deliver any reliable sources that indicate some other root cause to be the motivation. Please introduce some instead of constantly reverting others' edits.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 00:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brandmeister, at first you argument was that it was not a sourced, now that it is, you are still reverting. Can you please explain what it is that you want? George Spurlin (talk) 10:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is a job of the court, not of a news outlet, to determine what was the motive. The article is a BLP one and WP:BLPREMOVE suggests removing "immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced". See also Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_131#sumgait.info_in_Ramil_Safarov_and_related_articles. Brandmeistertalk 21:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A court does not determine motive. That usually falls upon the prosecutor. A court's job is to determine if someone is guilty of a crime and, if that is the case, what punishment the individual(s) deserves. Safarov is on record expressing dissatisfaction at not having killed more Armenians. Reputable news sources and analysts (outside of Azerbaijan) have all but concluded that Safarov's motives stemmed from bitter animosity toward Armenians and yet these simple facts are encountering stiff resistance and stonewalling from editors like you, who are abusing Wikipedia's rules and resorting to original research. Are you meaning to say that the Washington Post is an unreliable source?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In such claims as motives, I would refrain from using the Washington Post and other news sources, especially when they mention no reference. Normally such sources contain some references, like "according to the Ministry of Justice", "according to the Foo press office" etc, but in the case of the Washington Post this was not done. Brandmeistertalk 22:02, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous. You yourself are engaging in personal interpretation since you don't know what sources the newspaper is working with, even if they are not explicitly mentioned. I'm still waiting for those sources.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 22:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are three passages of interest in the 9/13 AP story (syndicated to WaPo and many other outlets):

  • The opening paragraph: "In a frenzy of ethnic hatred, Ramil Safarov hacked the sleeping Armenian to death with 26 ax blows — nearly decapitating him."
  • Towards the end: "Finding the door locked, Safarov started screaming: “Open up Armenian, open up, we’re going to cut the throats of all of you” — and started breaking down the door with his ax. ¶ Hayk Makuchyan, the intended victim, told The Associated Press that he wanted to open the door to see what was going on, but was stopped by his roommate."
  • And finally: "At trial, the Azerbaijani officer said he committed the murder to avenge the killing of his relatives by ethnic Armenian forces during the 1990s conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh."

Unless there's some other reliable source substantively contradicting this report, I think this reference is reliable enough for the infobox claim. Tijfo098 (talk) 22:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The last piece indicates that the motive was revenge, not ethnic hatred. Since it refers to Safarov's own words at trial, this phrase should be considered for the infobox. Brandmeistertalk 09:02, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I must agree with Tijfo098. Indeed, the majority of sources describe the motive of the murder as a response to killing his relatives by Armenians many years ago. "Revenge" usually means killing the offender. Blood revenge means killing relatives of the offender. But killing people simply for their ethnicity means something very different. My very best wishes (talk) 12:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We should not forget that both Safarov and Margaryan are militants. The motive is a revenge on the ground of unresolved war conflict, i.e. it is killing the offender. All sources refer to the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan as a background info. Calling it ethnic hatred is too much exaggeration and WP:OR. To explain it in a different way, how ordinary Armenian and Azeri civilians lived together in Karabakh before the war? How come that no one killed each other?
Meanwhile, I suggest we remove the reference #15- Full text of interrogation acc to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_131#sumgait.info_in_Ramil_Safarov_and_related_articles. We can not build an article upon non-verifiable WP:SELFSOURCE and WP:PRIMARY source until we have a verifiable version. Thanks Angel670 talk 15:54, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no, they were not militants, but military; and it does not matter if they were military or civilians. There was no war at the time of murder. They came to English language courses in Hungary. Most important, the quoted RS (Washington Post if I remember correctly) tells precisely "ethnic hatred". My very best wishes (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, it was the Washington Post. But its ethnic hatred claim looks more like an op-ed since it does not provide any reference to Hungarian court or other judicial source (as I wrote to Marshal above). Brandmeistertalk 21:58, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The same source says At trial, the Azerbaijani officer said he committed the murder to avenge the killing of his relatives by ethnic Armenian forces during the 1990s conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. This source also refers to the convict and says Safarov claimed that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was at the root of his actions and that he killed Markarian while the victim was sleeping after the Armenian repeatedly provoked and ridiculed him. Thanks Angel670 talk 22:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let me make one suggestion. Brandmeister and MarshallBagramyan are two most experienced and neutral editors from the "opposite sides" here. If they agree about something, I would support such changes. But they should agree on the talk page before making any significant changes to avoid edit warring. My very best wishes (talk) 06:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think Brandmeister's position as well as mine have been well drawn out and I welcome the views of others editors who would like to opine and share their thoughts based on their reading of the sources. We might have to wait for more expert analysis from scholars and analysts in order to give them some time to digest the circumstances, although to be fair 8 years have passed since the murder. But the way I see it is that greater credibility ought to be placed on the transcript from the initial interrogation. Safarov's answers and emotions seem to be reflected more genuinely here than when they were expressed later on. The narrative of how Margaryan "insulted" the flag or had played an audio tape of Azerbaijani girls crying or had something to do with killings at a time when he was a mere adolescent strikes me very suspicious. Doubtless many, the writer of the Washington Post article included, have not been swayed by such explanations and have connected Safarov's actions with the overtly antagonistic rhetoric aimed (and encouraged at a state level) at Armenians in Azerbaijan.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 07:13, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The facts and sources do not leave any doubt that Safarov killed Margaryan because Margaryan was Armenian. As about ref. 14, I think one must provide reference to the Hungarian court case (if there was no another publication), along with link to translation. Then the quote can definitely remain in the article. My very best wishes (talk) 14:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is better to find a third-party source to ref 14 (preferably to swap the sumgait.info to that source since sumgait.info admits that Safarov rejected his evidence), especially given that it is cited 9 times so far. Maybe someone who knows Hungarian would help to retrieve one. Brandmeistertalk 12:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ramil safarov.jpg[edit]

As this image might be deleted from Commons (likely a copyviolating derivative), I would recommend you to file it for fair-use in this article. --Túrelio (talk) 14:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the image. The juxtaposition with the flag is inappropriate, in my opnion. And I think the use here falls outside our non-free content criteria, with the photo being one of a living subject. wctaiwan (talk) 14:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. We can't use a non-free image where the person is still alive. De728631 (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving of the talk page[edit]

Hi, I noticed that this talk page is getting bigger and bigger and some of the information from this talk page could safely be archived by now.

For e.g., some sections of this talk page had no comments for years: Notability and References. Some of the topics are no relevant any longer: Axe photo (an image of a typical axe is no longer needed as a link to the actual murder weapon is now provided), Possible fork (the forked article was already merged into this article due to another discussion), Extradition and pardon section (Extradition and pardon of Ramil Safarov article has now been removed). There were also some minor requests when the article was under the full protection. They were implemented without a discussion and are no longer relevant as this article is not fully protected any more: Edit request on 5 September 2012 and 2 edit requests.

So I suggest to move these sections to the archive. My question is: do you prefer an automated archive to be set-up, which will archive any inactive section where the last comment was made more than 90 days ago, or would you prefer a manual archive which would allow archiving of both inactive and obsolete discussions? --Daniel (talk) 12:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sumgait.info[edit]

I suggest removing the information citing / referring sumgait.info (they are a lot) based on proof that it provides one-sided information, because it is owned by Armenian guy based in Yerevan. Here is a proof I would suggest to ban this link to be referred in Wikipedia, because this source doesn't meet requirements of Wikipedia for any purpose. Please also see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_131#sumgait.info_in_Ramil_Safarov_and_related_articles. Best, Konullu (talk) 19:17, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is not answered. I will add template of unreliable source for the source. --Esc2003 (talk) 06:17, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request[edit]

Reference no 5 at the moment (Washington Post news) is a dead link. Could someone kindly repair it please? On the other hand, I believe "Sumgait.info" (see above) is not a reliable source; we should not use it. --E4024 (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have now replaced the Washington Post link. Please note also that the page is no longer edit-protected, so feel free to replace the Sumgait.info reference with something reliable. With all the media attention this case got back in 2004 and recently during Safarov's release, there should be plenty of available sources. De728631 (talk) 22:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Malware Link Removal[edit]

--Gary Dee 15:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead rewrite[edit]

I'm not trying to whitewash what he did but the lead section in most articles are supposed to begin with the general and then progress to the specific. In fact, I think I was the one who wrote the first two lines of this article many months ago, until I recently realized it's a bit too detailed for a lead sentence. What Safarov did was gruesome, but the reader is first going to want to know who Safarov is before continuing on to read about his crime and how he went about committing it. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this way.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you just "realized" it. better late than never. but you realize that first-degree murder is too broad, right? and hopefully you realize that the axing part is the main reason why this case got so much attention. whitewashing is exactly what you are doing. with the same logic you can remove the mentions of him being welcomed as a hero, because its too specific and the reader "doesn't want to read" about it. --Երևանցի talk 17:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This case got so much attention, because an Azerbaijani officer murdered an Armenian one, and these two nations hate each other, deadly. Axe was only a tool which used by Safaroy, but he could easily have used a knife, gun, baseball bat or something else. --Norden1990 (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
no need to remind that these two nations "hate each other", because that'ts not my point. the axe part IS very, very, very important, because that's what shocked the people the most and not the killing per se. just go through the articles of major newspapers [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. if not in their headlines, they mention the axing in the first sentences. need I say more? this makes me wonder why Marshall started his sentence "I'm not trying to whitewash", because that is exactly what he's doing. and you don't seem to differ. --Երևանցի talk 18:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the current lead is neutral and limited to the facts. Yes, the axe as lethal weapon is also important information, however this case is under the spotlight, because Armenia and Azerbaijan had lot of conflicts and wars with each other. Nationalist sentiment heats both sides. The previous version contained Armenian POV. --Norden1990 (talk) 22:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have to be kidding. Not mentioning the circumstances of the murder is POV. How many times do I need to repeat that the axing in sleep is what made the murder so shocking and not the killing itself.

See WP:NPOV. It clearly states five principles

  • Avoid stating opinions as facts.
  • Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts.
  • Avoid stating facts as opinions.
  • Prefer nonjudgmental language.
  • Indicate the relative prominence of opposing views.

I'd like to ask you now. How is mentioning the circumstances of the murder (which are facts) Armenian POV? --Երևանցի talk 22:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The previous lead sentence was hardly tilted toward any particular POV. The most important aspect of this case has always been that a military officer from a country from an unresolved conflict, brought up in a vengeful environment where scorn is widely poured upon Armenians, snuck into the room and murder a fellow participant because he happened to be from a certain ethnic background. The weapon he used is also significant but that should go into the following sentence or perhaps even better second paragraph and not clutter the lead sentence. And a POV tag for the entire article simply because you disagree with the lead sentence? Well that's obviously not what the POV tag is for.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 06:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see response to any of the questions raised. I already stated why the axing should be in the lead. Come back with better arguments. --Երևանցի talk 17:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Ramil Safarov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:59, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Azeriphobia[edit]

This article should be completely revisited. Information in the article should be neutral. Moreover, not considering most important part of whole story - why case become a sensation and how effected whole story afterwards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abrvagl (talk • contribs) 00:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Killing an Armenian is bad" = Azerophobia. Says everything Adalalada (talk) 06:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Adalalada, My point is that there no mentions on the article explaining the reasons WHY. Why this happened, why this become a scandal, and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abrvagl (talk • contribs) 09:58, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion[edit]

{{BLP noticeboard}}

Cleaning up from unreliable sources[edit]

I cleaned up the article from unreliable Armenian Revolutionary Federation and Armenian National Committee of America owned sources. Please refrain from adding sources like Asbarez, ArmenianWeekly. Thanks! Aredoros87 (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of those sources are considered unreliable by Wikipedia, and since the BLP noticeboard discussion didn't generate any discussion, I'm going to restore those sources. --KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:05, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RSP is a list of sources that have been discussed many times at the reliable sources noticeboard. It is not a list of all reliable or unreliable sources, so a source not being on the list makes no comment on its reliablity. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 20:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ramil_Safarov&oldid=1204207467"