I updated this topic about Szolt Simon citing Dönmez "paper" about Triangle ware. It seems Dönmez made unscientific claims, which are quite sadly referenced by Simon.
To understand why it is an illogical argument I propose to read this paper from Summers.
He speaks about Triangle and Festoon ware, also about a special type of painted pottery. Notice painted potteries existed since Early Bronze Age. Here one type if it is discussed. The one related to Achemenids.
+ Triangle Ware, and that painted pottery are all linked to Achemenid period. They come from Iran. No single case in Urartu or even Hasanlu before Achemenids. The previous attribution of Triangle ware to Urartians was erroneous.
+Apadana architecture in Achemenid empire is borrowed from Urartu. That is why it is hard to distinguish Urartian period architecture from the Persian period.
+ Virtually no Medes period sites or artefacts in East Turkey Iron Age. Except one in west of Euphrates that can be tentatively linked to Medes. But even that needs a detailed examinations.
In sum we see what was already known from history. With the formation of Armenian Satrapy (547-331bc) the Tosp city in Van region became administrative center of Satrapy and hence we see there apparition of Persian pottery. It must be noted that in modern RoA Triangle ware is less frequent than in Van region. Erebuni was used as administrative center in RoA. If the Strabo's term Basorapeda is about Vaspurakan as some proposed then this could mean that a new name for East of Van was introduced during this Satrapy period. Vaspurakan means "nobility, high nobility" in Iranian languages. Consistent with it's role in the past. After the 331 when Achemenid empire collapsed the new capital was transfered to Armavir.
UPDATE: It seems Dönmez indeed used Triangle Ware as a Armenian presence marker. Well simply called this is a pseudo-science and it is quite sad that Simon relies on such references to promote his case. Dönmez pseudo-scientifuc theory was criticized by Mikael Badalyan also.