Jump to content

Talk:Turkey: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Sonerin (talk | contribs)
2 edits
Line 182: Line 182:
== Edit request from Sonerin, 25 January 2011 ==
== Edit request from Sonerin, 25 January 2011 ==


{{edit semi-protected}}
{{edit semi-protected}}
<!-- Begin request -->
<!-- Begin request -->
The religion part is wrongly made. 90 percent of the Turkey believes in Islam, not 97.
The religion part is wrongly made. 90 percent of the Turkey believes in Islam, not 97.
Line 188: Line 188:
<!-- End request -->
<!-- End request -->
[[User:Sonerin|Sonerin]] ([[User talk:Sonerin|talk]]) 13:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
[[User:Sonerin|Sonerin]] ([[User talk:Sonerin|talk]]) 13:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
:The CIA gives 99.8%, so I'm actually in doubt of the current 97. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|Chipmunkdavis]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 14:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:00, 25 January 2011

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Guidelines for editing the Turkey article
  • Units in metric Manual of Style.
  • Only external links pertaining to Turkey as a whole, or official government of Turkey links are solicited on this page. Please add other links in their respective articles. For further information, please see Wikipedia guidelines on External links and Conflict of interest.
  • All sections are a summary of more detailed articles. If you find any points missing, please add it in the section's main article rather than on this page to keep this page size within reasonable limits.
  • Please provide references when adding new information.
  • Please use the correct citation format when adding references. If you are not sure which one is appropriate, please see WP:CITE for a list of available citation templates.
Featured articleTurkey is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 4, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 18, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 21, 2006Good article nomineeListed
January 9, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Where is the map?

Where is the Turkey's map in this article??Please add it.User:Uber-Star005 04:32 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Geographic location 8 way template

This template was not designed for countries, it was made to be placed onto cities or towns articles, the use here is not recommended

"showing both sides"

I have undone this edit [1] on the grounds that, while well-intentioned, is not neutral, but rather consists of weasel wording. Language such as "these claims have been questioned" is precisely WP:WEASEL, which we should avoid. The Armenian Genocide is an incontrovertible fact. It happened. Any historian worth his salt agrees. The only ones who have questioned it are the Government of the Republic of Turkey, the legal successor state to the state that orchestrated it, and historians in its pay. However, the wording I removed, by omitting to say exactly who has questioned the occurence of the Genocide, lends legitimacy to Genocide denial. The only wording that would be correct would be "The Government of the Republic of Turkey, the successor state to the Ottoman Empire, denies that these events constituted Genocide.". Even so however, it is not the place of the History section of this article to go into who denies and who accepts what. In this section, we present historical facts in WP:SS fashion. The Genocide is a fact, while the denials of the Turkish government are moreover not even history, as they continue to the present day. Perhaps inserting this wording somewhere else in the article might work. In the history section, however, a link to Armenian Genocide, whose lede includes the denial efforts by Turkey, is sufficient. Athenean (talk) 05:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I should say that I also don't like weasel language, altough as an unnative speaker I might use it too, so thank you for bringing that up. However you called your section showing both sides but my problem is the fact that so-said Armenian Genocide is one sided biased issue. That's why if you check my section you would see that my references bring up well reasonable doubts about the Armenian Genocide. Though they don't have the most formal language they provide advanced academic research about the issue unlike the references "supporting" the Armenian Genocide. So I would say think again! Best regards--Lonewolf94 (talk) 08:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The Genocide is a fact" (Athenean (talk) 05:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)) According to what solid proof ? There are only articles around which doesn't prove anything and by reverting that edit you are making Wikipedia is a biased source for information. I'm not asking for complete removal of Armenian genocide and all the talk that's been around but a user has the right to know that there has been a debate going on. The sentence on the page is strictly biased. Please read Wikipedia:POV before editing and stay unbiased. Best regards, --Orcunbaslak (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on who you ask, there's also a "debate" about the validity of the Holocaust. Of course, those who deny the existence and scope of the Holocaust are racist, delusional morons, since they are denying a well-known fact in order to promote their loathsome, bigoted beliefs. Similarly, the Armenian Genocide is a well-established fact. Those who deny it typically have an ugly, ethno-nationalist agenda that has no place in what purports to be a factual article. Therefore, there is no need to equivocate on the Armenian Genocide; it was a factual event that merits being mentioned in an article on Turkey. Dousis (talk) 16:14, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well Dousis mate. If your way of thinking of an objective article is to source only one point of view, than you have no right to criticize other people of being biased. To you, Wikipedia may seem like a tool through which you think you can dictate other people what to believe, yet what it is, is a free encyclopedia that "has to" stay objective and not propagate on highly sensitive matters such as accusing a whole nation or making suggestions that may put a group or organization under unnecessary bias or prejudice, without a definitive scholarly work supported by hard unquestionable evidence, that neither party can deny. After all this is where people come to read about things they may have no idea about and they deserve and need to hear both sides, without prejudice. So next time you decide to edit something off, either first read about the issue and don't write something you blindly think is to be true or better still try to rid yourself of your bias and prejudice.

Nobody here is denying the fact that a matter of such importance should be left out from the article about Turkey. They merely suggest that it be given the benefit of the doubt and be objective. I suggest everybody who happens to read this know and/or research their subject and don't mix emotion into something what millions of people come to read expecting it to be a fair article.[1]

I also think this is no place to discuss such a matter even if you have the necessary qualifications. So please, if you want to discuss the legitimacy of the claims about the Genocide or any other subject for that matter, either create a new talk page dedicated to that or write on one that already exists. Also please read the talk page guidelines before you write anything on a talk page. Aerodil (talk) 22:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the section "After nearly a century of decline, the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the Central Powers and was ultimately defeated. During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated in the Armenian Genocide." is changed with the "After nearly a century of decline, the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the Central Powers and was ultimately defeated. Although some countries have politically accepted it as a genocide, the cause of an estimated 1.5 million Armenian deaths during the WWI is still an ongoing debate among historians. Some believing it to be a tragic catastrophe caused by one of the bloodiest wars in human history, others believing it was a systematic and planned extermination of the Armenian people." or with something else that is as objective as possible, and the reference changed to http://www.armeniangenocidedebate.com/ Aerodil (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my comment on this issue (since Seb az86556 would like to hear it): I understand what Dousis means, but it's not a matter of what people think... it's a matter of what individual nations think, what the United Nations think. Nations control what is being taught in educational institutes, therefore Dousis' claim starting with "Depending on who you ask, there's also a 'debate' about the validity of the Holocaust. [...]" is not valid at all. The Holocaust is not denied by any present nation. Currently, only the death of Armenians, not an extermination, is a fact! If it was a fact, his sentence, "During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated in the Armenian Genocide." would be acceptable, but it isn't! It is an ongoing debate. Here is my contribution I believe I've written in an objective matter: " After the defeat, the Ottoman Empire was being partitioned by the Allied Powers. On March 1918, the Democratic Republic of Armenia has been established, which is the present Republic of Armenia. The Armenians, who are now a nation, have recognized together with other nations that during this war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated in an Armenian Genocide[2][3][4][5]. Although the deaths of Armenians may have been confirmed by investigation, the Republic of Turkey defends that Turkish people have died during this time as well. The Republic of Turkey claims that the Armenian deaths were not caused by exterminations and denies the Armenian Genocide by strongly condemning the use of the word Genocide. The most common hypothesis for the high amount of deaths of Armenian people is the ones blaming either the Turkish authorities or the Armenians, however there is also the hypothesis that foreign powers have provoked and arranged a war between the Turkish People and Armenian People or even took part in this event. Nevertheless, not enough factual evidence has been provided to this time in order to support any of these propositions, which is why there is a huge controversy throughout the world. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12]". Please let me know what is wrong with my paragraph and why Dousis' sentence is preferred over mine. Thanks! -EthemD (talk) 11:26, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EthemD, I don't think anybody deliberately removed yours to put the other one in there. I think when the administrator did a reset, it automatically reverted to the latest accepted revision, which in this case was Dousis' auto-accepted entry. I don't think anything's wrong with your revision there, but I do think that it's too long and detailed to be put under a short "Turks and the Ottoman Empire" section. It may need it's own section to be put under, but I do not think it's the right page. You can consider putting that under Armenian Genocide page, since it needs more objectivity. Even the Germany and Israel doesn't mention the holocaust more than five lines int their own pages. I will quote the "Armenian Genocide" section from the "Armenia" page: "When World War I broke out leading to confrontation of the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire in the Caucasus and Persian Campaigns, the new government in Constantinople began to look on the Armenians with distrust and suspicion. This was due to the fact that the Russian army contained a contingent of Armenian volunteers. On April 24, 1915, Armenian intellectuals were arrested by Ottoman authorities and, with the Tehcir Law (29 May 1915), eventually a large proportion of Armenians living in Anatolia perished in what has become known as the Armenian Genocide.

There was local Armenian resistance in the region, developed against the activities of the Ottoman Empire. The events of 1915 to 1917 are regarded by Armenians and the vast majority of Western historians to have been state-sponsored mass killings, or genocide. Turkish authorities, however, maintain that the deaths were the result of a civil war coupled with disease and famine, with casualties incurred by both sides. According to the research conducted by Arnold J. Toynbee an estimated 600,000 Armenians died during the Armenian Genocide in 1915–16.

According to the International Association of Genocide Scholars, the death toll was "more than a million". Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have been campaigning for official recognition of the events as genocide for over 30 years. These events are traditionally commemorated yearly on April 24, the Armenian Martyr Day, or the Day of the Armenian Genocide."

Even the Armenia page is being as objective as it can and gives the situation as it is... I can't understand why some are so insistent on being biased.Aerodil (talk) 15:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, the message was actually for Seb az86556, who reverted my version to Dousis' version. He wanted me to give my input in this discussion. I know you didn't remove anything, Dousis did, and you made his writing more objective, which I am happy of but it was still missing essential parts to become fully unbiased. Yes, thank you,v I agree! The actual Holocaust doesn't even have this many lines in the Germany article - so I would also keep it short. I don't think it should have its own section though - that would be too long. I think it should be reverted to my version and we can make it shorter. -EthemD (talk) 20:00, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That section in the Armenia article, you quoted, is much more unbiased than the current sentence in the Turkey article, but I still don't think we need a separate section also in the Turkey article. If we just mentioned the consequences of the 1st World War and the things that nations and people think about what happened, it should be enough for that section. Well, looking at this discussion now, there is not much to add. I'm not able to edit the article, so how would we be able to change that part of the article? -EthemD (talk) 23:19, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So the mention of the Holocaust in the Germany article should contain an equivocation saying that some people think that the Holocaust never happened? Wikipedia should not bend over backwards to accommodate extreme Turkish nationalists who insist on denying a fact. The section on Ottoman history in this article should have a single sentence mentioning that the Armenian genocide occurred during World War I--there is no need to "show both sides" and be "objective" when the other "side" is an outright lie. Dousis (talk) 22:42, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree with the above. There is will be absolutely no equivocating so as to appease the ethno-nationalist agenda of some users. As far the rest of the world is concerned, the Genocide is a fact, and that's that. The only "debate" is within denialist Turkish nationalist circles. That the Turkish government denies the genocide is also a fact, however, the history section is not the place to mention it. Like Dousis says, one sentence mentioning the Genocide and the number of victims, and that's it. Athenean (talk) 23:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I never said that... read my paragraph again. I said that if you want to state something like a fact, it needs to be accepted by nations worldwide and the united nations. If it's something that is under discussion between nations, it shouldn't be stated like a fact, otherwise it is considered biased and unacceptable in Wikipedia. Topics that are under discussion between nations should be written in an unbiased way, giving propositions from both sides of the discussion, with continuous referencing. The Holocaust is recognized by all nations, so there should not be anything denying this on the Germany article of Wikipedia. This is NOT the case with what you call "the Armenian Genocide". It is not accepted worldwide by nations, therefore it should not be treated like a fact! -EthemD (talk) 23:34, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree with your statement EthemD. If something is not accepted worldwide such as jew holocaust it cannot be treated as a fact and thus needs to be removed from Wikipedia's pages. Users seek unbiased information in Wikipedia and therefor we must supply their needs. A case of ongoing debate DOES NOT MEAN that it is a fact. --88.241.151.157 (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, Iran's president has publicly questioned the Holocaust, so I guess by your standard it's not a fact since it's not accepted by all "nations worldwide." To follow your logic further, I guess it's debatable who the inventor of the toaster is, since North Korea's government would tell you that the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il invented it. The only reason that the veracity of the Armenian Genocide is "under discussion between nations" is that the Turkish government stubbornly denies its guilt. The opinion of the Turkish government, or any government, is irrelevant; if PM Erdogan proclaimed tomorrow that the sky was chartreuse and not blue, would the color of the sky seriously be up for discussion? The point of a Wikipedia article is to display facts from a NPOV, not to promote the Turkish government's view of historical events. Like it or not, the Armenian genocide is a factual event because it was well-documented by multiple eyewitnesses at the time it occurred, and well established by modern historians with neutral perspectives on the issue. This, not the opinion of third-rate, tin-pot dictators, is what defines a fact. Dousis (talk) 02:08, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can see that no one here is taking their time to read any proper book about the subject or even the talk page guidelines. See that's where you're wrong; it's still an on going debate, because there has never been a proper research with both sides contributing and benefiting not just from the Armenian or American archives, but from the Ottoman and Russian archives as well. That's why they're putting so much effort in propagating about it in the first place! You may think that it's a "fact" because you believe in it so much, you've grown to deny anything or anyone who may suggest the other way. It's no different than all the religions really. What they did is talk about it so much that it's true, everybody started to believe that it was true. They literally burned the ones who would dare suggest another point of view, and all they showed as an evidence was a book told to be sent by a god. While at the time everybody unquestionably accepted it, in time they've grown too intelligent not to take it all in without some solid proof... Well at least some did. So I know, that no matter what anyone says, no one will be able to convince you or people thinking like you to the contrary about the subject. I actually think that if all the Armenian people shouted all at once that it never happened, you would think it's been planned and forced by the Turkish government. Because let's face it, you don't like them. And it wouldn't be a problem, if it weren't for this instance. You just CANNOT say it's a fact, unless there's solid, unquestionable proof... and I mean the kind that made us believe the Earth was rotating on its own axis, not the kind that God exists. Until then, it will continue to be a debate, and that's why it deserves to be mentioned in Turkey's own page objectively and without bias and prejudice.Aerodil (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flat Earth Society Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Kudos to you Aerodil!! Very well put! Can I suggest an admin to at least remove that sentence "During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated in the Armenian Genocide."? We're not able to edit the article, and supposed to come to a solution of this "Armenian Genocide" problem via this discussion. It's not really clear when the administrators will recognize the verdict of this discussion. Keeping that sentence in the article during this time is not fair and would just give a reason for the biased participants to go on with this discussion. -EthemD (talk) 01:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appearently how much I show well references, say that there are reasonable doubts about Armenian Genocide and if there are reasonable doubts there is no crime and people are innocent until their guilt is proven it means bullsh*t to some people. And I also figured out that people like that Armenian Genocide paragraph, and if you change it with well reasons you are a propagandist vandal. So how much I would like to tell the plain truth, I need to be politic and make others happy so that some true history can be told. So how about this:
"After nearly a century of decline, the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the Central Powers and was ultimately defeated. During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated in the Armenian Genocide.[13][14][15][16] However there are reasonable doubts that in fact the issue was mutual ethnic fights between Armenians and Turks which were provocated by foreign powers and that both Armenian and Turkish people were violently massacred.[17][18][19][20][21][22][23]"

Or, as EthemD suggested, we can delete the sentence about so-said Armenian Genocide.--Lonewolf94 (talk) 08:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I started to believe that Wikipedia is being polluted by racist actions from others members in such subjects. One thing for sure, that paragraphy is not going to stay like that. It will either be removed or it will show the both sides. This version of the page is damaging the reputation of the country with no proven facts and Wikipedia doesn't need racist editors that think the genocide is a fact while there is a such page Armenian_genocide_denial --Orcunbaslak (talk) 23:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or, maybe it'll stay the way it is, because it's stating a fact. The page Armenian genocide denial exists to discuss denial of the Armenian genocide, not to lend credence to it. There's also a Holocaust denial page and a geocentric model page, but they too summarize beliefs that are factually untrue. And as for "proven facts," there's a pile of them linked to the paragraph. Seems to me you'd have to be a "racist editor" yourself not to accept that the Armenian genocide happened. 74.108.128.111 (talk) 00:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please re-read "showing both sides". --Orcunbaslak (talk) 23:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I've contacted Seb az86556 (since he primarily wanted me to write in here) and he told me he isn't an English Wikipedia Administrator when I asked him to check my version of the paragraph, which is totally unbiased compared to the previous one. It is possible now to edit the paragraph, so I gave it a go and changed the paragraph to this: "After nearly a century of decline, the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the Central Powers and was ultimately defeated. Following the Armistice of Mudros on October 30, 1918, the victorious Allied Powers sought the dismemberment of the Ottoman state through the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920.[24] The Ottoman Empire's casualties were enormous during the war and included the deaths of several different ottomans. There has also been a lot of population movement during and after this time, which was due to migration of refugees, asylumseekers and forced migration. According to many historians, the Republic of Armenia and many other nations, an estimated 1 to 1.5 million Armenians have died due to an Armenian Genocide, however this proposition has been denied by the Republic of Turkey and many other historians. Up to this date, there is not sufficient evidence to prove or disprove either proposition, which is the main reason why there is a worldwide controversy.[25][26][27]". Now I see him removing my paragraph, because of "deliberate misuse of sources". I find this a bit awkward... might be because I'm new to Wikipedia, could someone maybe elaborate? and maybe also comment on my paragraph? Thanks in advance! -EthemD (talk) 22:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All sources support the fact that there was a genocide. You didn't change them at all. This is close to vandalism. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This [2] is arguablythe worst, most inane attempt at genocide denial I have seen so far. Unacceptable. I will seek arbitration enforcement if this continues. Athenean (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, Athenean. This paragraph just says that there is a part (a nation) of the world who doesn't think in an extreme way like you and denies the Armenian Genocide. If you haven't noticed, I also mention that there is part of the world that thinks there was an Armenian genocide. This is called objective writing. I didn't 'erase' the Armenian Genocide part, like you all do with my part - I mentioned both sides of the story. Secondly, all the information I used are from the Wikipedia pages, I didn't think it was necessary to use references to external websites in this case. If you really insist (non-English Administrator Seb az86556), I can take the references from those Wikipedia articles, but my paragraph will remain the same, since it is correct! You are just using it as a reason to delete my paragraph. My version of the article is internationally accepted - and I am not going to stop editing this article until all the extremist content is removed. -EthemD (talk) 22:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is an ongoing dispute. Until Turkey accepts the notion of genocide, it's not WP:NPOV to not include other thinkings surrounding this debate. Wikipedia is a place where we insert the information to pages from reliable sources. This place is not for judgmentalism nor a propoganda of beliefs. Reporting facts is the job of wiki editors, whether you like it or not, you need to include stories of other side aswell.--Cerian (talk) 02:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it not an established fact that at no time there were 1.5M Armenians ever in the Ottoman Empire? These very Wikipedia pages attest to that, even those that are heavily edited and patrolled by ultranationalist Armenians. Check the relevant article(s). So, how about keeping only verified and undisputed, in the true sense of the word, be included in these pages? Holocaust is a verifiable fact, no matter what a politician says for domestic consumption. UFOs are not a verfifiable fact though so many claim to have been abducted by them. There is no proof of an Armenian genocide, no plan or act or proof of extermination as evidenced by so many Armenians who trace their origins there. How about just sticking to verifiable facts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.248.90 (talk) 17:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree, I mean just read through the article... it says that the Ottoman Empire simply exterminated foreigners at that time - without stating anything else. How can this be accepted? Let's get the facts straight: people died... A LOT of people from different ethnic groups died including Turkish Ottomans. This is the only fact and it was proven by archaeological research in that area. No one 'knows' if they died due to the war in general or due to planned exterminations... the only way to establish this fact is by having the United Nations agree on it. It's not that I do or don't believe in an Armenian Genocide. I just think that this is a highly disputed and sensitive topic and should be mentioned carefully and objectively on a nation's page (especially one that is considered the successor of the Ottoman Empire.) - EthemD (talk) 15:26, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The user Aethean in his defense of the Armenian genocide by stating the claim (in the first comment of this section) that weasel words cannot be used in a historical proven fact however in his defense of including the so called Armenian genocide he also falls to the fallacy of using weasel words. In the 150+ number of countries only 11 of which recognize the Armenian genocide and recognition is done through diplomatic pressure and not by consensus of historians. The Armenian genocide is not a fact and one needs only to look at the Armenian genocide articles on Wikipedia to find many contradictions (despite it being created by pro genocide advocates the contradictions are carried over by the sources they use).

To date many of the Armenian genocide sources are using the Soviet Armenian Encyclopedia, a politically motivated source of information at a time (circa: 1965) when the Soviet Union's hostility towards Turkey (a key NATO member and southern flank against Soviet Expansion or through it's Arab League proxy) was at it's highest. The equivalent to modern standards would be the acceptance of Iranian state policy in that they are both politically motivated, a weapon to be used against the source's diplomatic enemies. The usage of Iran is an example and not fact however the preceding belief is that Iranian state announcements are factually incorrect and are aimed to weaken her political rivals. AussieSkeptic82 (talk) 13:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article is semi-protected

{{Edit semi-protected}} I want to make some changes on the article. But i can't do that because of the lock. How can i be able to edit? I created a vectoral version of the presidential seal, and i want to change the seal image in this article with my vectoral image(svg). --Feravoon (talk) 09:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I've replaced File:Presidential Seal of the Republic of Turkey.png with File:Presidential Seal of the Republic of Turkey.svg, which I presume is what you wanted. This page lists all articles that still link the old .png file; you could replace those with the file you uploaded if you like. You're only four edits away from becoming autoconfirmed, which will mean you can edit semi-protected pages like this one yourself. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 10:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Genocide Claims

To this date pro Armenian Genocide supporters continue to add claims of genocide to this document. It has been continuously stated that the genocide is an accepted fact to say that the world accepts it as undeniable fact, however some 11 countries through political pressure have via the creation of policy accepted the Armenian genocide claims. This clearly does not present these disputed claims as "undeniable fact" as 11 countries from the some 150+ does not constitute a majority.

Claims have also been put forward accompanied by weasel words and weak premises, such as claims of the majority of historians accepting it as fact or that "any historian worth his salt" has accepted the genocide claims. This is biased and it is arrogant to assume that a historian who does not accept the claimed Armenian genocide as undeniable fact does not have the necessary academic credentials to be accepted as a historian, indeed the argument "any historian worth his salt" contains the hidden premise "only historians that accept my view point are historians". Not only is this wrong but it also carries emotional weight which can easily mis represent the facts and present something as proof when it is not, Wikipedia is not made for this.

Students of academia and accepted historians who contribute to Wikipedia are bound by ethics to present the unbiased truth, the truth in regards to the Armenian genocide claim is that it is not a universally accepted fact. Accepting publications from politically motivated groups such as the Genocide Scholars Association is not and will not be accepted by the greater academic community since it falls into the trap that a politically motivated group who contributes publications will not only mis represent information but will also represent selected information as the whole undeniable truth. Attempts have been made at showing historians who are not associated with some sort of political entity of accepting the Armenian genocide claims as conclusive proof (representations are focused on numbers and not in the expertise of area of the historian), with some lists containing individuals who are businessmen, bankers & politicians - these are not historians as they focus on modern mechanics of finance and running of a country and do not constitute authority of past events.

Until such a time when the majority of the world's nations unanimously accept these Genocide Claims and not through parliament but through academic institutions (which would constitute the unanimous acceptance by academia of these events) who's duty is to investigate such claims then I propose and implore those who have access to this semi protected article that the genocide reference be removed and the document to be permanently protected from further edits with further edit rights given to those who are known to be bias free. The people who edit this article should also be bias free or should have their edit rights removed. AussieSkeptic82 (talk) 14:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am shocked to see such blatant armenian propaganda exists here. Such a huge paragraph that accounts for almodt a third of the "History" part. This page illustrates why wikipedia will never ever replace the real thing. Any hatemongering turkophobe can comr on here and write all kinds of lies about Turkey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ortacyel (talk • contribs) 08:16, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely right. The handful of nation that hae recognized this "genocide" fairytale have done it mainly because of political pressure and lobbying. I say delete it completely from "History" because it is simply not that significant for the history of Turkey which spans several millenia. It maybe significant for Armenians since their identity is built on this fake narrative of self victimization and many of them are obsessed with hating anyone or anything Turkish. Of course wikipedia as an open source "encylopedia" which is editable by anyone is an ideal propaganda tool for their agenda. Armenian issues are much more appopriate in foreign relations on the subject of current relations with Armenia.

"Another source of tension is the deportation of Armenians during World War I that occurred when Armenian groups sided with the invading Russian Army to carve out an independent Armenian nation state. Armenia and Armenian groups want this to be recognized as a case of genocide" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ortacyel (talk • contribs) 10:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Emblem

Turkish officials include embassies that represents Turkey abroad, use this emblem. But this emblem is not prescribed by law. So they said "unofficial". And this emblem is used only by President of the Republic of Turkey. Because of Historic states represented in Turkish presidential seal, some nationalists prefer it. But it is not national symbol but the symbol of presidency. In infobox of United States ee don't use this presidential seal. We don't use the presidential seal in the infobox of this article. Takabeg (talk) 01:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot remove the official seal of state under such POV as "some nationalist prefer it". The emblem is listed at the official website of Turkish Presidential Administration [3]. Atabəy (talk) 18:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles needs become newer

NEW PICTURES BUST BE ADDED! ARTICLE HAS BECOME TOO OLD Worldglobal (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Sonerin, 25 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} The religion part is wrongly made. 90 percent of the Turkey believes in Islam, not 97.

Sonerin (talk) 13:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The CIA gives 99.8%, so I'm actually in doubt of the current 97. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ http://www.armeniangenocidedebate.com/armenian-genocide-books-amp-research
  2. ^ INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GENOCIDE SCHOLARS (June 13, 2005), open letter to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
  3. ^ The International Campagne to End Genocide
  4. ^ Armenian Genocide open letter to Erdogan
  5. ^ Extensive bibliography by University of Michigan on the Armenian Genocide
  6. ^ "Introduction." Ermeni Sorunu. 24 June 2010 <http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/english/intro/index.html>.
  7. ^ "DID THE TURKS UNDERTAKE A PLANNNED AND SYSTEMATIC MASSACRE OF THE ARMENIANS IN 1915?" The Armenian Issue in Nine Questions and Answers. 27 june 2010 <http://www.foreignpolicy.org.tr/documents/books/the_armenian_issue.pdf>.
  8. ^ "The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide." Tall Armenian Tale. 28 June 2010 <http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/index.htm>.
  9. ^ "Radical Views." The Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans…the Big Lie. 28 June 2010 <http://www.radicalviews.org/index.php/analysis/politics/118-the-armenian-genocide-by-the-ottomansthe-big-lie.html>.
  10. ^ Katchaznouni, Hovhannes. Dashnagtzoutiun Has Nothing To Do Anymore. Istanbul: Kaynak Publishing, 2007.
  11. ^ McCarthy, Justin. Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922. New Jersey: Darwin Press, 1995.
  12. ^ Fein, Bruce. “Lies, Damn Lies, and Armenian Deaths.” The Huffington Post. 29 june 2010 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-fein/lies-damn-lies-and-armeni_b_211408.html>
  13. ^ INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GENOCIDE SCHOLARS (June 13, 2005), open letter to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
  14. ^ The International Campagne to End Genocide
  15. ^ Armenian Genocide open letter to Erdogan
  16. ^ Extensive bibliography by University of Michigan on the Armenian Genocide
  17. ^ "Introduction." Ermeni Sorunu. 24 June 2010 <http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/english/intro/index.html>.
  18. ^ "DID THE TURKS UNDERTAKE A PLANNNED AND SYSTEMATIC MASSACRE OF THE ARMENIANS IN 1915?" The Armenian Issue in Nine Questions and Answers. 27 june 2010 <http://www.foreignpolicy.org.tr/documents/books/the_armenian_issue.pdf>.
  19. ^ "The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide." Tall Armenian Tale. 28 June 2010 <http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/index.htm>.
  20. ^ "Radical Views." The Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans…the Big Lie. 28 June 2010 <http://www.radicalviews.org/index.php/analysis/politics/118-the-armenian-genocide-by-the-ottomansthe-big-lie.html>.
  21. ^ Katchaznouni, Hovhannes. Dashnagtzoutiun Has Nothing To Do Anymore. Istanbul: Kaynak Publishing, 2007.
  22. ^ McCarthy, Justin. Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922. New Jersey: Darwin Press, 1995.
  23. ^ Fein, Bruce. “Lies, Damn Lies, and Armenian Deaths.” The Huffington Post. 29 june 2010 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-fein/lies-damn-lies-and-armeni_b_211408.html>
  24. ^ Cite error: The named reference Ottomans was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  25. ^ http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:xzXpnf0sUK8J:www.teachgenocide.org/files/The%2520New%2520York%2520Times%2520and%2520the%2520Armenian%2520Genocide.pdf+New+York+Times+armenian+genocide&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi1MFjAM4Nh1a4y8V5sZSd06QKFbqJow55JkFH01Eo4dWUGsqAtXixTY67j_sRHzFRi7ElXSDKFL95A_x7a0RiitjX1ewHlIcquWJCajOvu7alUojKXbmOYf0F6BUCrXjSOh5g5&sig=AHIEtbRJBbG4bDu2FZ6lJsXTT8QRqKLRAA
  26. ^ http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:znXbtjrti_sJ:www.genocidescholars.org/images/OpenLetterTurkishPMreArmenia6-13-05.pdf+INTERNATIONAL+ASSOCIATION+OF+GENOCIDE+SCHOLARS+erdogan&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgvHXqAK1OTnath_lx2MDI5lwjBabicec72Mg_y5DW826WlLEPhHwMDFKo_ze7GalCbtu7we_3ucqh7ZOIGOEzp22-cYGHpfIUcDzgxnosnIDJeGnKVVcYyolNpvZ3uWlONtQd0&sig=AHIEtbShKjHemd9tupBEnw2iwalxbsOl1A
  27. ^ http://www.genocidewatch.org/campaigntoendgenocide/about.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Turkey&oldid=409967374"