It is a tricky question because the definition of genocide is some what tricky.
The general definition is "systematic destruction of all or a significant part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group"
The problem here is "significant" and what is significant.
For example, 6 million Jews out of about 15 million world wide. That is not all, but it certainly meets the significant part by any logical standards, especially when we only count European Jews.
Another is the American Indian. Now the tricky part here is that we dont have numbers or even reliable estimates of the native American Indian population during the US expansion west. So the question is, was there enough Indians slaughtered in this expansion west to justify the genocide claim? Personally I would say yes, but US history books I learned history from never mentioned genocide of the American Indian. But we do know that quite a few Indian tribes were wiped out, which meets the "all" criteria.
The final example is the so called Bosnian Genocide. Now here we have portions of the population targeted because of their religious or ethnic build. Were all killed? Nope. Were a "significant" portion killed? not really, if we use the Jewish holocaust as a guide. Considering the population of Bosnia is in the millions and that "genocide" part was under 10000 people, then no this certainly does not meet the basic criteria. Of course politically the UN and west had to paint it as genocide or ethnic cleansing, but in reality it was just war and **** happens so to say. For example, in Iraq during the US occupation there was far more killed in an ethnic cleansing campaign by the various sides but that is not called a genocide or even ethnic cleansing by most.. so...
Now the Armenian question. Like in the American Indian example, accurate numbers are hard to come by. On top of that you have a hell of a lot of allied propaganda during a time of war to muddle through for truth and what is basic disinformation and propaganda. The estimates of deaths go from under 500k to 1.5 million. The problem comes to the estimation of the Armenian population at the time and frankly after. It is here it gets really strange.
According to the Armenian religious scholars, in 1912 there were just over 1 million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.. so considering that there were still Armenians after the so called genocide, then the 1.5 million deaths is impossible. Others state there was more likely 1.6 to 2 million, which makes the 1.5 million possible. The Ottoman census of 1914 stated there was 1.2 million, also making the 1.5 million deaths impossible. Other figures from the late 1800s stated around 1.2 million down to 800k.
Now lets say that it was the high number of 2 million, then killing off 500k to 1.5 million would be significant and it would trigger the genocide accusation.
Problem comes from a 1922 US State Department estimations, that state there was 817873 Armenian refugees. Other sources state there was 281k Armenians left in Anatolia, 150k in Constantinople and 131k in Asia Minor in 1921. Now that is 562k Armenians.. but the Armenians them selves stated that there was 1 million of them before the genocide, so how can there be 1.5 million killed which is what most pro-Armenian genocide people quote..
So the math simply does not add up, which is why the genocide claim is a bit iffy. Mass murder and ethnic cleansning.. sure, but out right genocide of a population of up to 2 million when the US states there are 817k refugees and 562k still in what was left of the Ottoman Empire?
So to the question.. no, not genocide since there is not enough factual information. But yes to mass organized murder and ethnic cleansing.