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 no consensus. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 17:18, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vrats dasht[edit]

Vrats dasht (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:GNG. The subject claims to be "a term used by Armenian chroniclers" yet all the sources for that are Georgian, and none of them seem to be noteworthy. The only Armenian source in the article is the Melkonyan one, which never uses the phrase. There also seems to be a music source for the etymology of Erebuni, which isn't mentioned at all in the source. A Google Books search brings up only two sources, both Georgian. It seems that this supposedly Armenian phrase is only used by a small amount of Georgian sources, and not nearly enough to be notable enough for an article. Even a normal Google search brings up a deviantart account as the fourth top result. Steverci (talk) 17:39, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: First of all, the sources aren't "Georgian" as you have noted them to be, these "Georgian" sources are build up on medieval Armenian ones. Also, you are being biased. Since you say "none of them seem to be trustworthy." So first of all:

1) one of the sources contains studies of [Javakhisvhili] Who was a Georgian historian and a linguist whose voluminous works heavily influenced the modern scholarship of the history and culture of Georgia. He was also one of the founding fathers of the Tbilisi State University (1918) and its rector from 1919 to 1926.

2)You making it seem that it's not "trustworthy" makes me feel very confused. people make such decisions for calling things "not noteworthy" only after READING the sources and judging them after. as I know you are not a Georgian speaker so how could you even judge it? There is no place of unwanted nationalism in the fields of modern history and the fact that you call every Georgian source "not noteworthy" is heavily biased and corrupted. SonofJacob (talk) 12:29, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Abdulhaseebatd (talk) 19:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Abdulhaseebatd (talk) 19:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. Abdulhaseebatd (talk) 19:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom, fails WP:GNG, WP:V and is undue. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I want to respond to Kevo327 regarding WP:V. It is represtenting Verifiability of the sources. Though, one of my source which claims that "Armenian scholars called the land vrats dasht" is from Ivane Javakhishvili Studies. who was a Georgian historian and a linguist whose voluminous works heavily influenced the modern scholarship of the history and culture of Georgia. He was also one of the founding fathers of the Tbilisi State University (1918) and its rector from 1919 to 1926. Who was a verified linguist/historian and very good of that time. SonofJacob (talk) 10:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

and a quick addition to that, WP:GNG is most likely regarding "unreliable" sources which I just proved you wrong about. SonofJacob (talk) 10:56, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• keep. Claiming that the term is false and undue just because it is covered mostly by Georgian sources is egregious and prejudicial. The article may need some serious rewrite and a more sharp focus on context, but Vrats Dasht is a real historical place name occurring in the medieval Armenian sources, first in the chronicle Ukhtanes of Sebastia, to the best of my knowledge. A quick search through academic sources using different transliterations of the name yields several results other than Georgian sources. It is mentioned as "Vrac' Dasht (Iberian Plain)" in Z. Arzoumanian's 1985 English-language edition of Ukthtanes's Chronicle (page 62). Also, "Vrac'dašt" (Plain of Iberia)" is mentioned in Robert H. Hewsen's oft-cited The geography of Ananias of Širak (Ašxarhacʻoycʻ) (1992, pages 203, n. 228, 206, n. 243); "vrac'-dašt (the land of the Georgians)" in Biro, Margit, "Shushanik's Georgian Vita", Acta Orientalia, XXXVIII, 1-2 (1984), page 196; "vrac'-dašt, plaine de Iberia" in Garsoïan, Nina G. (1998), L'Église arménienne et le grand schisme d'Orient. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, 574. ISBN 9789042906747, page 340. --Kober^Talk 17:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked the Hewsen and Garsoïan sources and they do not "refer to lands of modern Northern Armenia", nor do they make any mention of all the Armenians living in those lands actually being assimilated Georgian's, as SonofJacob claims. It seems that this was never an official name and is just Iberia translated from Armenian. It is no more deserving of it's own article than say Deutschland. At the most, it could be mentioned in an etymology section. But it never became a common name. A few historians using the term hundreds of years ago is not noteworthy enough to have its own article. --Steverci (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sterverci No. The "vrac dasht" is synonymous for the region of "Gugark" in Greater Armenia. The very region which, unfortunately, is being "Armenian-washed" even by the borders. According to Most Wikipedia articles Gugark's southernmost border is not really that deep but in reality, [village of Gugark] in middle of Lori region of Armenia proves that Gugark must've been around the area of what is now Gugark the village in Armenia. SonofJacob (talk) 19:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Potentially keep -- I know little of the subject, but it seems to me that the Nom is dismissing this on the basis of IDONOTLIKEIT. There is no reason, in principle, why a Georgian historian should not write about Armenia, and do so accurately. This may involve him expressing a Georgian bias, rather than an Armenian one. If there is such a bias, the solution is to keep the article but edit it to show where Armenian scholars believe the Georgian one was wrong. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I mean it's clear that the article fails WP:GNG, this is the main issue. Hence, should be deleted. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May I know which aspect of WP:GNG does this article fail, and where? I want a detailed answer. SonofJacob (talk) 14:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete it fails WP:GNG per nom, and it is Georgian propaganda. Monegasque100 (talk) 19:13, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • User blocked as sock. wikinights _talk 22:44, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep For the reasons stated above and for this google book test.--Van Gogia (talk) 23:14, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Per all above. There's enough evidence here to support GNG (i.e. multiple independent refs with significant coverage), and it's clear that the writers of the sources in question are respectable scholars attached to respected institutions. Arguments for discrediting them seem to be based on their nationality which is clearly a biased and specious argument.4meter4 (talk) 19:25, 20 September 2021 (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.