Reconstruction talk:Proto-Kartvelian/ɣwino-

RFC discussion: April 2015
I think the etymology section is all over the place; the sources need careful reevaluation and the formatting of the tags need to be cleaned up and carefully reordered. -Samarra11 (talk) 23:33, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it is fine now.--Dixtosa (talk) 23:45, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It is not fine. The etymology has been perverted. Statements like "shared predominantly by Armenian scholars" and "not universally accepted among modern western scholars" are tendentious and false. I will rewrite this when I return home. --Vahag (talk) 15:08, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Every word written there is true, and that is what's important for the reader. Armenians have long since established their biased views towards cultures of other people. Attributing other people's culture to themselves (such as winemaking, for that matter) is merely a vain attempt to cover up for the fact that their "culture" is virtually non-existent. Now, semantics aside, that theory is shared mostly by Armenians. If you look here and here, and perhaps be less prejudiced about the whole thing, you will see that the general consensus on the subject lies elsewhere. Samarra11 (talk) 18:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Starostin and Beekes are not Armenian. Furthermore, being an Armenian doesn't exclude you from being a "Western" scholar. In three days I am meeting Martirosyan in Vienna where he is working on the Armenian volume of the Iranisches Personennamenbuch series at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Doesn't get more Western than that. As for your cultural excursus, I will not dignify that with an answer. --Vahag (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2015 (UTC)