Talk:Turkey: Difference between revisions

	Turkey is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 4, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 18, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted December 21, 2006 Good article nominee Listed January 9, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted December 20, 2011 Featured article review Demoted August 11, 2014 Good article nominee Listed September 15, 2014 Peer review Reviewed March 6, 2015 Featured article candidate Not promoted May 27, 2017 Peer review Not reviewed May 20, 2019 Good article reassessment Delisted May 8, 2020 Peer review Reviewed Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 29, 2005, October 29, 2011, October 29, 2012, October 29, 2013, October 29, 2014, October 29, 2015, October 29, 2016, and October 29, 2017. Current status: Former featured article

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about the article's title. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting on that topic.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Template:Vital article Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Asia B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Assyria B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Assyria, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Assyrian-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.AssyriaWikipedia:WikiProject AssyriaTemplate:WikiProject AssyriaAssyrian articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Caucasia (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caucasia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CaucasiaWikipedia:WikiProject CaucasiaTemplate:WikiProject CaucasiaCaucasia articles Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Countries B‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. WikiProject Countries to-do list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Europe B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Turkey B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

faq page Frequently asked questions Q: Why don't you rename this article Türkiye or Turkiye, the correct name for this country? A: Because the English language Wikipedia has a WP:COMMONNAME policy. We use names for countries and places that are the names commonly used for them in English, regardless of what official organizations use. Technically, this kind of name is known as an exonym. For example, we use the name Germany, instead of the native endonym Deutschland. If or when that general English language usage changes (as has happened in the past with place names such as Mumbai and Beijing), the same WP:COMMONNAME policy implies that the English language Wikipedia will necessarily also follow suit. So far, that hasn't happened. This has been discussed many times, with the same result every time because of the common name policy. Latest discussion. Q: Why is officially the Republic of Türkiye used in the first sentence? A: Because this will make it clear "Türkiye" is official while still using the common colloquial for the article title. This will give readers a quick spelling reference for research purposes. Latest discussion. Q: If this is the country then where's the article for Turkey food? for Turkey bird? Or other "Turkey"-related things? A: We cover Turkey meat as another article, as well as Turkey (bird) for the bird, and other Turkey-related topics separately by other articles, see Turkey (disambiguation).

Old moves and section sizes

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions: RM, Turkey → Turkey (country), Not moved, 12 December 2017, discussion RM, Turkey → Turkey (country), Not moved, 17 August 2021, discussion RM, Turkey → Türkiye, Not moved, 20 January 2022, discussion RM, Turkey → Turkiye, Not moved, 22 January 2022, discussion RM, Turkey → Turkiye, Not moved, 3 June 2022, discussion RM, Turkey → Türkiye, Procedural close, 8 September 2022, discussion RM, Turkey → Türkiye, Not moved, 28 November 2022, discussion RM, Turkey → Turkey (country), Procedural close, 10 February 2023, discussion Archives Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42 This page has archives. Sections older than 50 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 8 sections are present. Section sizes Section size for Turkey (41 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 26,560 26,560 Etymology 7,862 7,862 History 119 58,532 Prehistory and ancient history 7,980 7,980 Early classical antiquity 6,630 6,630 Rome and Byzantine Empire 5,943 5,943 Seljuks and Anatolian beyliks 10,450 10,450 Ottoman Empire 13,145 13,145 Republic of Türkiye 14,265 14,265 Administrative divisions 1,914 1,914 Government and politics 5,424 45,486 Parties and elections 6,095 6,095 Law 4,468 4,468 Foreign relations 9,073 9,073 Military 10,481 10,481 Human rights 5,176 5,176 LGBTQ rights 4,769 4,769 Geography 9,846 20,709 Biodiversity 5,301 5,301 Climate 5,562 5,562 Economy 12,936 29,786 Infrastructure 9,361 9,361 Science and technology 7,489 7,489 Demographics 1,957 35,836 Ethnicity and language 13,993 13,993 Immigration 4,619 4,619 Religion 6,521 6,521 Education 5,493 5,493 Health 3,253 3,253 Culture 957 28,593 Literature, theatre, and visual arts 4,617 4,617 Music and dance 1,246 1,246 Architecture 5,390 5,390 Cuisine 3,549 3,549 Sports 6,706 6,706 Media and cinema 6,128 6,128 See also 65 65 Notes 35 35 References 28 27,858 Sources 27,830 27,830 External links 1,925 1,925 Total 285,161 285,161

I see a tag on there that says the article may be too long. Then it says to contribute to the discussion on the length. There is no discussion of the length. I read what it says about the moratorium. As far as I can make out, this discussion does not come under the moratorium. Yes, of course the article is way too long. For some reason Turkey is a very emotional topic and everyone wants to pitch in. Turkey seems to be at the center of some hot issues. But, here is how we can cut down. First of all, in the history of the west Turkey is a new country. It arises on territory that was formerly other countries. Each of those other countries has multiple articles. And yet, we try to treat those topics under Turkey. I suggest we begin Turkey with the arrival of the Turks. Good Lord, we can't put all those topics under here, it would take up half of Wikipedia. Secondly, I notice a lot of topics are highly specialized aspects of Turkish culture. Can't these be moved to their own articles? Well, I hope I have not stepped on the moratorium. I hope that, while we are waiting to work on the article, you will take up THIS discussion and arrive at some consenuses.Botteville (talk) 23:07, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sub-articles already exist, it's a matter of shifting detail there and writing in WP:Summary style here. This is a very common problem, not a Turkey-specific one (although the 26kB history section is somewhat egregious). CMD (talk) 03:59, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it would be great if you (or anyone else) could move some details to existing sub-articles Chidgk1 (talk) 17:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Name section is extremely long. I will shorten it soon. 148.78.116.4 (talk) 00:45, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@148.78.116.4: Do you or anyone else have time to condense the name section? Chidgk1 (talk) 13:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Turkiye has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The nanme of this counrty is called Turkiye and not turkey 62.72.122.130 (talk) 11:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. CMD (talk) 12:06, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is true, The name of the Country has been changed and already written officially Turkiye. So the caption of this article should be "Turkiye" 91.93.229.148 (talk) 16:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The page source has the template Use American English, but the page notice says to use British English. Should it be changed? Super yoshi013021 (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Pending – I've submitted an edit request at Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Turkey. Tollens (talk) 03:55, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Tollens (talk) 21:20, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page header still says "This article is written in British English", and is in the category Wikipedia articles that use British English. ThunderMite42 (talk) 03:16, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops! Thanks for the catch – fixed now. Tollens (talk) 03:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't the coat of arms being displayed on this page? It says on the Turkish president's website, https://cbddo.gov.tr/kurumsal-kimlik/, that this symbol, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Emblem_of_the_Presidency_of_Turkey.svg, is the coat of arms of the President and the country of Turkey. It says:

"Arma / Güvenlik Alanı : Arma, Cumhurbașkanlığı’nın ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti’nin amblemi niteliğindedir."

which translates to :

"Coat of Arms / Security Area: The coat of arms is the emblem of the Presidency and the Republic of Turkey."

So why isn't this being displayed here? Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 16:13, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if that makes a difference but the Turkish text says "Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti’nin" and not "Türkiye Cumhuriyeti'nin" or just "Türkiye". Also, besides this website, all other sources say that this coat of arms is only the Presidential Seal of Turkey. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 16:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed this. [1] as far I can see this was added after May 2020. I searched and couldn't find any other mention anywhere. English version doesn't mention this either. Beshogur (talk) 17:13, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 09th was when the document here was stamped: https://www.tccb.gov.tr/assets/dosya/resmisimgeler/arma.pdf Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 17:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also relevant is this excerpt from the parent website of that link, https://www.tccb.gov.tr/cumhurbaskanligi/resmi-simgeler/fors/:

"Halen yürürlükte olan 25.01.1985 günlü, 85/9034 sayılı Türk Bayrağı Tüzüğü’nün 28. maddesi ile bu maddenin gönderme yaptığı ilgili örneğine göre bugünkü fors kullanılmaktadır. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Forsu’ndaki güneşin Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’ni, 16 yıldızın ise bağımsız Türk Devletlerini temsil ettiği görüşünü ilk kez, 1969 yılında, Harita Yb. Akîp Özbek Türkiye Cumhurbaşkanlığı Forsu ve Taşıdığı Anlam isimli kitabında ortaya koymuştur. Bu görüş izleyen yıllarda kabul görmüştür."

translated as:

"According to Article 28 of the Turkish Flag Regulation No. 85/9034, dated 25.01.1985, which is still in force, and the relevant example referred to by this article, today's force is used. The view that the sun on the Presidential Seal represents the Republic of Turkey and the 16 stars represent the independent Turkish States was first introduced in 1969 by the Map Yb. Akîp Özbek put it forward in his book titled "Turkish Presidential Emblem and Its Meaning". This view was accepted in the following years." Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 17:42, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This means the middle start represents Turkey. Also the decree doesn't mention the emblem of Turkey. Beshogur (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The decree was for the flag, the book gave the symbol its current meaning. Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 18:44, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you need decree for a flag? The decree talks about where to use the presidential emblem. Beshogur (talk) 18:47, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The decree is to ensure the flags are created in the correct way, the measurements and materials and whatnot. Maybe take a look at the source first and you'll see why the presidential emblem is relevant. It's the big giant image that the entire source is talking about. Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 18:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're talking about. Beshogur (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know. Perhaps leave it to the people who know what they are talking about then? Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 19:08, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This presidential website [2] has a similar message: "Presidential Logo is the visual symbol of the Presidency and the Republic of Türkiye." Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 19:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sure because the president represents the republic. Beshogur (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the presidential logo, not the president, as is stated there in plain English. Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 20:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there one reliable secondary source that says that the Presidential Seal of Turkey is also the coat of arms of the Republic of Turkey? I couldn't find one (I think that https://cbddo.gov.tr/kurumsal-kimlik/ is a weak source). a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I found this excerpt from Ataturk University's Turkic Studies Journal[3] talking about how the coat of arms was created by Ataturk himself and continues on in the form of the Presidential seal:

"Bugün Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti’nin kullandığı, Türkiye Cumhur Başkanlığı bayrağını (kırmızı zemin üzerinde bitmez tükenmez Türklük kaynağını ifade eden güneş etrafında dizilen; şimdiye kadar Türk tarihinde kurulmuş olan on altı büyük Türk devletini-imparatorluğunu sembolize eden her biri, birer parlayan ve etrafını aydınlatan yücelerde yıldızlarla ifade edilen bayrak) bizzat M. Kemal Atatürk düzenleyerek, Türklük ülküsü ve tarih şuuru konularında ne denli bilgili ve duyarlı olduğunu, sanatsal olgulara dikkat ettiğini bir kez daha gösterecektir.75 Bu konuda yani Cumhuriyet Türkiye’sinin resmî devlet arması her ne kadar tartışmalı bir konu olsa da hatıra ve belgeler ışığında O’nun zamanında bu konular üzerinde ciddi şekilde kafa yorulduğu ve mesai harcandığıdır.76 Bütün kuvvetini milletinin inandığı mümtaz değerlerden alan, zaman geçtikçe şahsı ve eserleri hakkında son ve kat’i hüküm hiçbir vakit verilemeyecek olan Türk kültür ve medeniyetine ömrü borunca hizmet eden77 M. Kemal Atatürk, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti’nin kurucusu olarak “ ay-yıldızlı al-bayrağı” aynen devam ettirmekle Türk milletinin ve Türk devletinin kültür ve medeniyet değerlerinin sürekliliğini ölümsüzleştirmiştir. Zira öteden beri Türk tarihinde ortaya çıkan çeşitli Türk devlet ve toplulukları sık sık bayrak ve sancaklar konusunda ciddi birtakım yapısal değişimlere giderken O, tarihî perspektifte yüzlerce yıldır Türk milletinin kullandığı bayrağı ve sancağı asla değiştirmemiştir. Cumhuriyet Türkiye’sinin birçok kurum ve kuruluşunun amblem/arması, (Türkiyat Enstitüsü, Türk Tarih Kurumu vb.) bizzat Atatürk’ünde katkılarıyla tasarlanmıştır. Gerçektende Türklük ruhu ve bilinci ile dolu olan M. Kemal Atatürk, öteden beri Türk tarihinde kullanılan hem kutsal renkleri hem de millî sembolleri tanıyıp bildiğini açıkça bu tür çalışmalarıyla kanıtlamıştır"

translated as:

"Presidency of Turkey, used today by the Republic of Turkey flag (the sun symbolizing the inexhaustible source of Turkishness on a red background). lined up around; sixteen major Turkish cities established so far in Turkish history. Each symbol symbolizing its state-empire is a shining and illuminating environment. The flag expressed with stars on high) was organized by M. Kemal Atatürk himself, how knowledgeable and sensitive he is about his ideals and historical consciousness, and his artistic facts. will show once again that he pays attention.75 In this regard, that is, the Republic of Turkey's Although the official state coat of arms is a controversial issue, in the light of memories and documents In his time, serious thought was given to these issues and 76 It is the time spent, which derives all its strength from the distinguished values in which its nation believes. M. Kemal Atatürk, Turkey, who served the Turkish culture and civilization throughout his life, about whose personality and works the final and definitive judgment will never be made as time goes by. As the founder of the Republic of Turkey, By continuing the same "Take the flag with the crescent and star" The continuity of the cultural and civilizational values of the Turkish nation and the Turkish state immortalized it. Because various Turkish states and states that have emerged in Turkish history for a long time. communities often undergo serious structural changes regarding flags and banners. On his way, he saw the flag that the Turkish nation had used for hundreds of years in historical perspective and He never changed the flag. Many institutions and organizations of the Republic of Turkey The emblem/coat of arms (Turkish Studies Institute, Turkish Historical Society, etc.) was made by Ataturk himself. Designed with contributions. M. Kemal, who is truly full of Turkish spirit and consciousness Atatürk used both the sacred colors and the national symbols that have long been used in Turkish history. He clearly proved that he knew the symbols with such works." Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 02:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neither clear nor convincing. It says that it's a controversial issue.

The Turkish Wikipedia gives more information on the topic: tr:Türkiye arması: 2014 yılının Ağustos ayında ise iktidarda bulunan Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi'nin Şanlıurfa Milletvekili Zeynep Karahan Uslu, resmî olarak yeni bir armanın tasarlanması için 30 Milletvekiliyle birlikte "Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti Resmî Armasının Belirlenmesi Hakkında Kanun Tasarısı"nı partisinin Grup Başkanlığı'na sunmuştur.

Another RS: https://www.trthaber.com/haber/gundem/turkiye-cumhuriyetinin-resmi-armasi-belirlenecek-162094.html

Türkiye'nin bir devlet armasının bulunmamasının önemli bir eksiklik olduğuna işaret eden Uslu, köklü bir tarihsel ve kültürel geçmişe sahip devletin arması olması gerektiğini belirtti. [...] Devlet armasının oluşturulması halinde mevcut uygulamada kullanılan cumhurbaşkanlığı forsunun kaldırılabilmesinin yasal bakımdan önünün açılacağını savunan Özgündüz, şu değerlendirmelerde bulundu: "Burada bir başka sıkıntı çıkacaktır; Türk Bayrağı tüzüğünde şu anda kullanılan cumhurbaşkanlığı forsu var. Cumhurbaşkanı devletin başı sıfatıyla onu kullanıyor. Yarın siz devlet arması yaptığınız anda 'ben devletin başıyım, dolayısıyla bu armayı kullanacağım' diyerek mevcut forsu kaldırabilir. Kanun, tüzükten üstte olduğu için bu uygulanacaktır. Dolayısıyla ilk kez Atatürk tarafından 1922'de İzmir ziyaretinde kullanılan bu mevcut cumhurbaşkanlığı forsu da zımnen ilga edilmiş olacaktır. [...] "İyi niyetten şüphem yok ama halkın belirlediği bir sembol var zaten. O da ay ve yıldızdır. 'Türkiye Cumhuriyeti'nin niye arması yok?' diye sorduğunuz zaman, toplum buna ihtiyaç hissetmiyor. Ay-yıldız var zaten. Ay-yıldız aynı zamanda devletin de sembolüdür. Bu ay-yıldız yerine başka bir sembol belirleyecek olursanız kıyamet kopacak, gereksiz bir tartışma çıkacak. Ne söylerseniz söyleyin, tersini söyleyen de çıkacaktır. Herkesin kabul ettiği ay,yıldız varken ayrı bir sembol arayışı zaman kaybına gereksiz bir tartışmaya yol açacaktır. Ortada bir boşluk yok. Anayasa'nın üçüncü maddesine bir ilave yapar, 'Ay-yıldız aynı zamanda devletin sembolüdür' deriz."

So Turkey does not have coat of arms. Until a new law is adopted. End of the debate? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 07:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The TRTHaber article is very interesting and sheds a lot of light on why this topic is so controversial, as someone that had no idea about any of this controversy two days ago it's been very fascinating for me to learn about all of this. i would say that this ends the debate for now but that article is almost nine years old at this point. Has there been no update on this since January 2015? Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 07:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I didn't know the topic was this controversial either. (Worth using this source to improve National emblem of Turkey btw). As far as I know, there's been no progress. Given how polarized Turkish society is, it seems unlikely that Turkish politicians will reach a consensus on this any time soon. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 08:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There had been law proposal to design one in 2015 but nothing. Beshogur (talk) 10:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would want them to be included.. DaManFrFr (talk) 10:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For much the same reason as the one given to you in Talk: Greece. Uness232 (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I back that, since modern Turkey and Anatolia overlaps pretty much, the beginning of Turkish presence in Anatolia should be mentioned in the establishmentinfobox. Main events are : Battle of Manzikert and founding of Sultanate of Rum Yakamoz51 (talk) 12:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, modern Turkey and Anatolia only really overlap in Turkish nationalist discourse. See Anatolia for more information on that. Also, the Sultanate of Rûm was a very different state than modern Turkey for a variety of reasons. Modern historiography contends that the late Ottoman Empire (post-1800s) was really the only administrative predecessor to Turkey. Uness232 (talk) 14:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Turkstat seems to have them for individual months but does anyone know where to find for the complete year? I ask as I am updating agriculture in Turkey and want to know what share of exports were from agriculture in 2022 Chidgk1 (talk) 07:38, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://oec.world/en/profile/country/tur#:~:text=Exports%20The%20top%20exports%20of,and%20Iraq%20(%2411.1B). Moxy- 11:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Moxy Ah I did not know about that site. I could not find the agriculture share as a total though as there was so much detail. However the fact that Turkey is the world's biggest importer of sunflower seeds was new to me and may be useful for a DYK hook thanks very much Chidgk1 (talk) 18:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Metuboy

You have only commented one of the many changes you made today. Please could you give us a brief overview of their purpose as I am struggling to understand from diffs Chidgk1 (talk) 18:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

The article is reduced in size significantly a few days ago and there were many sandwiching of text between the images. So I tried to fix them by removing some images and adjusting their positions inside the article. Indeed I should have added Minor option for them.

I am not sure if it is possible add Minor option or add a comment later on. If it is possible I am not aware of it.

But this is the main change that I did though the articles. Also I added some See Also and Main Article hyperlinks for some sections. Since they were missing and readers might want to get more information about the specifics. Metuboy (talk) 22:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any idea please suggest at Talk:Agriculture_in_Turkey#Any_suggestions_for_better_lead_picture? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Other mainstream sports such as basketball and volleyball are also popular. The men's national basketball team and women's national basketball team have been successful."

No word about women's volleyball? World champs in girls, European champs in adults, many more international success stories both by national selections and clubs in all age groups. Where are the -mostly- Greek and Armenian editors who work hard everyday to add more and more shit to (I mean "improve" - sic) this article? They should write a long section on Turkish women's volleyball here (other than giving a link to the related article) and "maybe" we could forgive a small part of their sins in Wikipedia. Regards. 212.174.190.24 (talk) 11:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article should mention the name "Türkiye" independently from the country's official name "Republic of Türkiye" in the opening sentence, which is the case with Ivory Coast and Cape Verde as other countries in a similar situation as Turkey. So, it should read Turkey or Türkiye, officially the Republic of Türkiye (Turkish: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti [ˈtyɾcije dʒumˈhuːɾijeti]), is a country... or Turkey, officially the Republic of Türkiye (Turkish: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti [ˈtyɾcije dʒumˈhuːɾijeti]), also known as Türkiye, is a country.... There are plenty of sources in the English language that use the name "Türkiye" (to begin with, see the UN, IMF and World Bank country directories).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This usage became more common in official organizations. Beshogur (talk) 15:59, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to me. Largoplazo (talk) 17:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially agree with this having personally seen it in travel ads, but it would be better to have sources that demonstrate normal English use as a name rather than 3 links which all simply reflect Turkish government statements. CMD (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know what you mean exactly by “normal English use”, but there are news outlets and other websites that switched to Türkiye (see for instance this article on the OSCE website).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, Turkey or Turkiye should be written. LionelCristiano (talk) 04:23, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English letters must be used. LionelCristiano (talk) 04:23, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It already says Republic of Türkiye. LionelCristiano (talk) 04:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was born in Argentina but I am Turkish. 🇹🇷🇦🇷 LionelCristiano (talk) 04:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English letters can include accent marks EvergreenFir (talk) 04:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it should stay as it was before @Kiril Simeonovski's edit. Per @CMD's point, do we have sources that demonstrate it is widely used as a standalone name? Even then, do we have any specific guidelines telling that articles should follow this repetitive structure? Ideally, there should be a longer discussion on this, and Mr. Simeonovski should revert their edit per WP:BRD, because it was done 5 minutes after they started this thread on December 7, and even after this brief series of comments, I can't say there is a clear consensus. Not to mention that the initial edit overruled the comment in the sourcecode that explicitly states Do not change lead sentence to Türkiye per WP:COMMONNAME. Thanks. Aintabli (talk) 00:37, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We do really want something better than a fourth multilateral institution. CMD (talk) 01:04, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think international organizations that Turkey is a member of are great bellwethers of common use. They have no reason not to accept the wishes of their member countries and are not particularly motivated to use terms that are understandable by wide audiences. I haven't looked into news media or independent academic usage since the last big RfC, but I'm not sure enough evidence has been shown that we should move away from the stable, concise compromise "Turkey, officially the Republic of Türkiye". Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aintabli: My edit didn’t overrule anything, as I didn’t change “Turkey” to “Türkiye”, but just added the latter after the former, which still presents “Turkey” as the primary name. Firefangledfeathers, if the sources above aren’t compelling because they’re from organisations that the country is a member of, then there are sources that the European Union uses the new name, which Turkey is most definitely not a member of (see this report). There are research papers by non-Turkish authors that use the name “Türkiye” (see this). There are even non-Turkish news outlets that use “Türkiye” (see this). I don’t say the article should be renamed because “Turkey” is still the primary name in the English language, but there’s sufficient amount of sources that “Türkiye” is also used.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:59, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about membership per se, the sources you gave are all from formal multilateral institutions which are simply going to reflect the Turkish government as a matter of course. Anything published by the EU or the IMF falls into a similar category. I don't know much about the Middle East Monitor, but it appears to be closer to the sort of source that shows ordinary usage. CMD (talk) 07:37, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Middle East Monitor is a long way from ordinary English-language usage in the media. There's zero use of Türkiye in mainstream English language media. From personal experience I know there has been zero knowledge of the word amongst "ordinary" English-speakers. However, the first signs of that changing, I think, is people noticing it in Turkish-government tourism advertising. It will be interesting to see if that's the thing that changes usage in the end. DeCausa (talk) 07:51, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the safest way to go when you don't like something is move the goal posts. At first, the international organisations used to be the main problem, but now a research paper and a London-based not-for-profit organisation are also problematic. To add some context, there's a disclaimer on the page of the paper that says IMF Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to encourage debate. The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management., which clearly states that the paper doesn't represent the views of the IMF. Do we have any guidelines that international organisations cannot be used as reliable sources? What makes a source more reliable than other? The only thing that we have is this list, which doesn't mention any of the sources provided here as unreliable. If "Türkiye" were used in mainstream English-language media, that would make a strong case to rename the article (as we did with virtually all Ukrainian cities). There are even practical reasons why "Türkiye" should be used in the opening sentence. As the infobox uses the IMF as a source for the GDP data, a reader willing to vet the source would end up getting "Türkiye" instead of "Turkey".--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a Turk, I support @Kiril Simeonovski it should remain Turkey or Türkiye. Do not revert the change. LionelCristiano (talk) 10:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No goal posts have been moved. Further, it's unclear why you are raising reliability and RS/P as they are not relevant to the question here. This is about assessing English language use, and trying to argue that an IMF-published paper demonstrates ordinary usage is not a productive avenue on that matter. CMD (talk) 11:37, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1 "The word Türkiye represents and expresses the culture, civilisation, and values of the Turkish nation in the best way," Erdoğan said. How do u think about ? LionelCristiano (talk) 12:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is unrelated to MOS:LEADSENTENCE. CMD (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis: I provided reliable sources in the English language that clearly demonstrate the use of the name “Türkiye” as an alternative to "Turkey" (they don't make up majority, which is why "Turkey" should remain the primary name, but they most definitely exist). Sources reflecting Turkish government statements? This is a made-up criterion that goes even against our naming conventions. WP:WIAN lists the The World Factbook, which evidently uses both names in its country's directory, as an example of disinterested and authoritative reliable reference work.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to being made up, it's the exact spirit behind WP:COMMONNAME. The sources you listed were all from multilateral institutions and other official bodies that are going to simply adopt the official government name. If we can't find examples of usage that is not determined by a bureaucratic application of politically correct terminology, it is unlikely that the names reach the 10%ish usage point of potential inclusion in the article. CMD (talk) 12:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME is irrelevant here as it explains which name should be preferred as primary. If “Türkiye” were the common name, the article would need to be renamed, but it’s not the case. I’m wondering why WP:WIAN lists the The World Factbook as an example if it makes a “bureaucratic application of politically correct terminology”.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:47, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good question for WIAN, it clearly doesn't fit there. CMD (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aintabli: My edit didn’t overrule anything, as I didn’t change “Turkey” to “Türkiye”, but just added the latter after the former, which still presents “Turkey” as the primary name. Firefangledfeathers, if the sources above aren’t compelling because they’re from organisations that the country is a member of, then there are sources that the European Union uses the new name, which Turkey is most definitely not a member of. There are research papers by non-Turkish authors that use the name “Türkiye”. I don’t say the article should be renamed because “Turkey” is still the primary name in the English language, but there’s sufficient amount of sources that “Türkiye” is also used. If you ask all Turks in the world, I am sure that everyone will support this view. LionelCristiano (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've revereted this. There's no consensus for it. It's also a pointless change - or already references it in the "official name". DeCausa (talk) 14:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not right what you're doing. LionelCristiano (talk) 14:32, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you ask all Turks in the world, I am sure that everyone will support this view. Ironic. Aintabli (talk) 15:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it is not important for u, it is an important change for me. LionelCristiano (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DeCausa: I'm surprised that you reverted this as an involved party in the discussion. You expressed your opinion that it should be removed, which is fine, but an involved editor isn't entitled to judge whether there's consensus or not. It should be done by an uninvolved editor per WP:CONSENSUS.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised at 12k edits you have such a basic misunderstanding. That's not how WP:CONSENSUS works - this isn't an RfC. You, on the other hand, should be following WP:BRD: restore your edit only once there is a consensus for it, which clealrly there isn't yet. DeCausa (talk) 18:24, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Below is a list of independent sources using the name "Türkiye" from a quick superficial search:

• Tech.eu: [4], [5], [6] (earlier this year used "Turkey" as in [7], but then switched to "Türkiye")
• AzerNews: [8], [9], [10], [11]
• Xinhua: [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]

I can certainly found much more if I make a more thorough search, but these should be enough to prove that the name "Türkiye" is indeed used in the English language as an alternative name.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey's water percentage not %2 is %2.03 it is the same in other wikis, Pls update. 31.155.67.147 (talk) 23:39, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it, not because of what other Wikipedias have but because it's what the cited source says. Largoplazo (talk) 09:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I said it because it said so in the source. 31.155.67.147 (talk) 09:50, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks sir. 31.155.67.147 (talk) 09:51, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@31.155.67.147: @Largoplazo: I changed it back from 2.03% to 2% because although the OECD is a reliable source it is from a few years ago. Since then new dams have become operational, such as Yusufeli, and there has been drought. So I don’t believe it is possible now to say that 2.03% is correct to that many decimal places. Anyway the freshwater area will vary during the year and between years depending on precipitation. But obviously 2% is correct to that many decimal places. If you wish I will be happy to discuss this in more detail on the talk page of a more detailed article, for example Drought in Turkey See also Lake_Van#Recent_lake_level_change Chidgk1 (talk) 08:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chidgk1: The cited source is the cited source until someone comes up with a more recent figure in another source that can be cited in the current one's place. That's the whole point of citing sources. Everything you wrote above may be correct—but it's also original research. This is the article where the editing in question is occurring so this is the proper talk page for discussing it. Largoplazo (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am in favor of staying at 2.03% until new data is announced. LionelCristiano (talk) 10:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]