Jump to content

Talk:Turkey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Arjayay (talk | contribs) at 17:25, 17 August 2014 (→Protected edit request on 16 August 2014: Not done - user has > 5000 edits). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleTurkey 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.
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
December 20, 2011Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Template:Vital article

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

This article caters to an ethnocentric POV

After reading and rereading this article, I have made the conclusion that the article caters to a Turkish ethnocentric POV. Some examples of this include:

  • The only architects mentioned are ethnic Turks
  • The only novelists, poets, and writers featured in the article are ethnic Turks
  • The only painters are ethnic Turks
  • The architecture section lists only mosques and palaces of Ottoman sultans

As of now, this is all that I have uncovered. From my view, the article appears to be Turkified all over since, from the looks of it, it appears that only Turks receive mention in this article and that the only people that have made contributions to the society of the country are ethnic Turks. It is unfortunate to see that non-Turkish minorities, such as the Armenians, Kurds, and Greeks, have been left in the dust. Lest we forget, that the first novel written in Turkey was by an Armenian, Vartan Pasha. The first sculptors in Turkey, both male and female, were Armenians. It is almost absurd to see no mention of the renowned Armenian Balyan family who designed the Dolmabahçe, Çırağan, Feriye, Beylerbeyi, Küçüksu, Ihlamur and Yıldız palaces. What is even more concerning is that all these buildings are mentioned in the article without a mere mention of who designed them. Mosques, even those built by Armenians and Greeks, are the only religious building specifically mentioned. Are there no churches in Turkey? On what basis is the Sumela Monastery or the Armenian Cathedral of the Holy Cross not worthy enough to be mentioned?

My list of concerns raised in the paragraph above are the most relevant to the article, but it can go on and on...

If there's not going to be a more accommodating approach towards the country's non-Turkish minorities, I will have to place a POV tag on the article. The article quite a few months ago had a more accommodating approach this regard ([1]). However, this approach has been severely deteriorated due to the mass amount of edits by various users since then (some of which have been banned/blocked for misconduct and POV editing). If there are not objections in the matter of 24 hours, I will place the POV tag accordingly. Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than jumping straight to tagging, what specifically from the previous version do you think should be added here, and if it applies what do you feel that is in the current article that is undue in prominence? All the issues you point to seem to be in the culture section, which frankly could use a pruning of its uninformative lists in favour of the general overview. CMD (talk) 20:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Article should be improved indeed. Turks consist 70% of modern Turkey, (in Ottoman Empire, the figure might be like 50%) this figure makes minorities important to mention (not just Armenians of course....).

By the way about the churces, there was a discussion, some dudes mentioned that in Germany or France -those Turkish-minority countires- didn't consisted any pics about mosques. Because of that, this page hasn't got any. I've put them but they were reverted actually. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 21:01, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis: If there's no attempt to accommodate, I'm fine with just putting a POV tag in the Culture section rather than the top of the article. That whole section needs to be revamped. It has this whole "list-style" theme going on which needs to be reformatted coherently to avoid further disputes regarding who or what should be added. An emphases on non-Turkish minorities should be mentioned even if it means not having their ethnic background specified. So I propose just adding a few things about the Balyan family and perhaps add something on churches and monasteries. There's 500 of them in the country...it's the least we can do. Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well you're right that the list-style theme needs to change. A list of architects and buildings doesn't help the reader. A general appraisal of changes in architectural style would be better. If the churches and mosques reflect a particular architectural style I don't see why that shouldn't be mentioned. CMD (talk) 00:57, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good notice about the specific sections. In fact, entire paragraphs need to be re-written. Culture & architecture in their present form are extrelemy limited in nature, so a pov tag won't be a surprise if no action takes places.Alexikoua (talk) 20:17, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Surely the whole problem is arising because of the overly-broad content of the article. It starts out as an article about the modern Republic of Turkey, yet strays into trying to mention the history of every area or entity that ever existed anywhere within the current territory of that modern Turkey even when there is no real connection to it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:51, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're touching on another subject there. That's a good observation though. Glad you pointed that out. Where do we draw the lines in terms of the territorial and political boundaries of the Republic of Turkey considering its predecessor state being an Empire? Please, let us have a different talk page section header for any continuation of this discussion though. Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:54, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Give us back the Ottoman Empire, and we will gladly add all ex-Ottoman ethnicities to the Culture section. 81.215.28.56 (talk) 10:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then go to Ottoman Empire's talk page mate I'm sure there are lots of work to do in that article's culture section too. By the way we should start working on it. One of us can create a sandbox page and we can all work on it. You guys gave good reasons to scrap the current culture section. I will gladly work on it. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 23:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

EtienneDolet, can you give a list of items you think should be added into the culture section that would result in the removal of the POV tag, or perhaps make a start on the issue yourself? This article is currently at GAN, and while I haven't given the article a thorough look through, but having a POV tag is a valid reason to insta-fail this article, so if it's not worked on soon, the first person to look at the GAN will be within reason to simply fail it immediately. CMD (talk) 09:59, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chipmunkdavis (talk · contribs) The POV tag keeps getting removed without proper consultation with the talk page. As for your request, I think the names of the architects should be added (i.e. Balyan family) and perhaps descriptions about various churches or synagogues. That's fine enough for now. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With Balyans; Fossati brothers, Mimar Kemaleddin Bey, Raimondo Tommaso D'Aronco and Alexander Vallaury should be added too. Unfortunately, i couldn't compose a suitable sentence to the relevant place in the paragraph. I could use some help though.elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 21:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Vallaury and Fossati would be good additions too. Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The tag being removed isn't optimal, but it's irrelevant if we add stuff. Personally I don't think we should really add names (and we should remove the list currently there going for GA really). Names tell the reader nothing. The descriptions of churches and synagogues is a much better idea, as it focuses on overall architectural styles, which is what makes up an informative summary. CMD (talk) 00:08, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lets just aim for the removal of this tag first. Then we will recompose the whole section. How bout that ? elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 00:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about Turkey, not people! Architects (or anybody else) should be omitted if possible, no matter how persecuted their ancestors were! All architects, except maybe those from the year 1000, should be removed. People have their own article. Notable structures have their own articles. Student7 (talk) 13:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GDP (PPP) per capita

The GDP (PPP) per capita is stated as $19,080. However, the reference documents states that it is $18,551 and dates back to 2012. IMF puts that number as $15,352.610 for 2013.[1]

References

  1. ^ http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?sy=2013&ey=2013&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&pr1.x=16&pr1.y=7&c=512%2C668%2C914%2C672%2C612%2C946%2C614%2C137%2C311%2C962%2C213%2C674%2C911%2C676%2C193%2C548%2C122%2C556%2C912%2C678%2C313%2C181%2C419%2C867%2C513%2C682%2C316%2C684%2C913%2C273%2C124%2C868%2C339%2C921%2C638%2C948%2C514%2C943%2C218%2C686%2C963%2C688%2C616%2C518%2C223%2C728%2C516%2C558%2C918%2C138%2C748%2C196%2C618%2C278%2C522%2C692%2C622%2C694%2C156%2C142%2C624%2C449%2C626%2C564%2C628%2C565%2C228%2C283%2C924%2C853%2C233%2C288%2C632%2C293%2C636%2C566%2C634%2C964%2C238%2C182%2C662%2C453%2C960%2C968%2C423%2C922%2C935%2C714%2C128%2C862%2C611%2C135%2C321%2C716%2C243%2C456%2C248%2C722%2C469%2C942%2C253%2C718%2C642%2C724%2C643%2C576%2C939%2C936%2C644%2C961%2C819%2C813%2C172%2C199%2C132%2C733%2C646%2C184%2C648%2C524%2C915%2C361%2C134%2C362%2C652%2C364%2C174%2C732%2C328%2C366%2C258%2C734%2C656%2C144%2C654%2C146%2C336%2C463%2C263%2C528%2C268%2C923%2C532%2C738%2C944%2C578%2C176%2C537%2C534%2C742%2C536%2C866%2C429%2C369%2C433%2C744%2C178%2C186%2C436%2C925%2C136%2C869%2C343%2C746%2C158%2C926%2C439%2C466%2C916%2C112%2C664%2C111%2C826%2C298%2C542%2C927%2C967%2C846%2C443%2C299%2C917%2C582%2C544%2C474%2C941%2C754%2C446%2C698%2C666&s=PPPPC&grp=0&a=. {{cite web}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); External link in |work= (help); Missing or empty |title= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help)

The Ahmadiyya religion doesn't exist in Turkey

There isn't a single Ahmadiyya mosque in Turkey. The Ahmadiyya religion was born in 19th century British India and exists only in the Indian subcontinent (in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) and in countries influenced by Indian culture, such as Indonesia.

The Pakistani and Bangladeshi "illegal travellers" (not "illegal immigrants" because Turkey doesn't give them "immigrant" status) who use Turkey as a "transit route" for entering Greece or Bulgaria (thus entering the European Union, as a first step of moving to wealthier countries in Western Europe) should not be counted among Turkey's local population.

The user Peaceworld111 previously used the user name Mohsin in Wikipedia. He is an Islamic activist of Bangladeshi origin who lives in the United Kingdom and has made it "his life's goal" to spread Islamist propaganda in Wikipedia. He spammed the Turkey article with an overdose of Islamic content in the past. There were even attempts to add Urdu as a language of the Ottoman Empire, which is totally incorrect. 88.251.65.65 (talk) 14:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear anonymous user, if you do think I am a sockpuppet, you can report me here WP:SI. But let me be clear, I have nothing to do with earlier edits that you accuse me of. --Peaceworld 17:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Muslims in Turkey don't believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835–1908) was the Mahdi and Messiah promised by the Koran. There isn't a single Ahmadiyya mosque in Turkey. The Pakistani and Bangladeshi "illegal travellers" in Turkey (who use Turkey as a "transit route" for entering Greece or Bulgaria, i.e. the European Union) don't count as Turkish citizens. Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 14:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See the Second Coming of Jesus in the person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, according to the Ahmadiyya sect for more details. This belief is not held by the Muslims in Turkey. Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 14:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835–1908) even declared himself as the Caliph, challenging the Ottoman Sultan. Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mehmed the Conqueror is right actually, in addition the fact they don't have any mosque, they don't have any established association or community center either.elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 15:43, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Elmasmelih, the source is clear "...reportedly been organized in Turkey since 1995 and has a presence in eight districts...". This clearly points to an establishment. The lack of presence of a mosque or community centre cannot be used as a justification for the removal of the denomination, especially in cases where countries discriminate faith members for their beliefs, let alone permit the construction of a mosque. --Peaceworld 18:34, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Peaceworld111 Oh i didint noticed it. Thanks for stating that. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 18:39, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@Mehmed the Conqueror You have not replied for some time. Thus I have reverted your edit.--Peaceworld 11:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The "presence in eight districts" refers to the "missionary offices" opened by the sect, without necessarily a single follower. They also have a Turkish-language internet website for missionary purposes, which doesn't mean there are any followers. The financing is from the Ahmadiyya community in the United Kingdom. Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 12:28, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Mehmed the Conqueror, that is your interpretation. --Peaceworld 16:52, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Let me be very honest with you: As soon as the average Turks in the street (and the Islamist government that currently runs Turkey) will find out that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835–1908) claimed to be the last Prophet of God (Muslims believe Mohammed was the last), the Mahdi and Messiah (i.e. the reincarnation of Jesus Christ), as well as the Caliph of Islam (challenging the Ottoman Sultan), those eight "missionary offices" won't probably have a very bright future. Turks are pious Muslims and such claims by Mr. Ahmad are considered heresy and blasphemy in this country. Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 03:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In Turkish we call such efforts "Müslüman mahallesinde salyangoz satmak" (trying to sell escargot in a Muslim neighbourhood.) Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 03:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Mehmed the Conqueror, we cannot go by how the people of a certain country are likely to treat a minority. There are somewhat 4 million Ahmadis in Pakistan and the situation is far worse than it is in Turkey, where they are not permitted to call themselves Muslims by law. The source is clear and we should go by what the source says and not one's personal view.--Peaceworld 08:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Pakistani and Bangladeshi "illegal travellers" use Turkey only as a "transit route" for entering Greece or Bulgaria (the European Union) and are not given "immigrant" status by the Turkish government. Maybe you should add the Ahmadiyya religion to the Greece article (Greece is full of them.) Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 15:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this article is about Turkey.--Peaceworld 08:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that the source does not give any information about the number of adepts of this religion. This is the general article about Turkey, and this means that under the "Religion" paragraph should appear only the main religious groups present in the country now or historically important (like the Sufi). Writing here about all the other small groups present in Turkey, persecuted or not, is WP:UNDUE. So, please bring a reliable source which shows the current numerical consistency of this religion in Turkey or explain its historical importance in this country. Alex2006 (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If WP:UNDUE were to be strictly adhered to, we would need to remove various religious denominations that have already been mentioned. Moreover, I do not think that the presence of population figures is a requirement. The source is clear in stating that the group is established in various districts across the country, and this cannot point to a few individuals. Moreover, the section hardly discusses the historical importance of the denominations. Besides, this section is about "Religion" and not "history of Religion." Had history been of such importance, there should have been discussions of various denominations that have been extinct since time immemorial.--Peaceworld 15:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to remove all the denominations which according to you comply with WP:UNDUE. About religions which are historically important, I am not talking about extinct religions, but about denominations which have a number of adepts so small that numerically they would not deserve the inclusion: above all the Orthodox, whose Patriarchate of Constantinople has been established in the Roman age, and the Sufi, which constitute an important branch of the Islam. Coming back to the religion in discussion, the fact that it is established in various districts of the country does not mean anything without giving more specific numbers: the deduction that this cannot point to a few individuals is your POV. To insert it here, we need reliable sources which show its importance in the country. Alex2006 (talk) 16:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are 2.1 billion Christians and 1.6 billion Muslims in this world. If Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835–1908) was indeed the Messiah (the reincarnation of Jesus Christ) we would have known, as he was supposed to "save entire humanity from evil", which Mr. Ahmad didn't. Interestingly, he claimed to be both the Mahdi and the Messiah, which is sort of an oxymoron (the Mahdi and Messiah (Jesus Christ) are different persons according to the Koran.) Mr. Ahmad can only be the "False Messiah" (Masih ad-Dajjal), but his influence on humanity and impact on history are too weak (insignificant) for even this role. He was merely a fraudster who used religion for personal gain, like thousands of others throughout the world. Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 00:25, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He was the Great Cornholio who needed TP for his bunghole (similar to Sabbatai Zevi and Bahá'u'lláh.) Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 02:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cornholio Bungholio :D Mehmed the Conqueror (talk) 16:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Really shouldn't have religions mentioned in Demographics of Turkey under 1%. Probably for this high level an article, the cut-off should be higher at 3% or so. Otherwise, we have hundreds of religions listed, making no particular point other than WP:SPAM for the reader. Student7 (talk) 14:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2014

I find the term Armenian Genocide false and the source cited too subjective also not reliable to be used in a so called objective information source.

Please do change the Term Armenian Genocide. Turkey is not the only country, which rejects to call the incidents "genocide".

Below is also a letter written by Stanford University Turkish Student Association regarding the matter.

http://web.stanford.edu/group/ccr/GreenHatBlog/armenian.pdf

217.110.82.61 (talk) 09:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The term is in common usage, whilst a letter, on a blog, from such a group is neither an Independent nor a reliable source - Arjayay (talk) 11:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations - I propose to move some history to main article and add a sentence re Iraqi Kurdistan

Recently my addition of the sentence: "Relations with Iraqi Kurdistan are good, which is important both to help prevent a restart of the Turkey–PKK conflict and to diversify Turkey's energy sources." referencing http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/24/world/meast/iraq-kurds-oil-sale/ was removed as being too detailed and more suitable for the "Turkey Iraq relations" article.

I agree that some of the info in this article is too detailed, but not the above. However I propose moving the historical info about foreign relations with America to a more detailed article and re-adding the above sentence. Because I believe Turkey's current relations with immediate neighbours are more important than its former relations with the USA (except as part of NATO which I would add to the list of imternational organisations at the top of the section).

Another ref: http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21606297-buoyed-recent-success-their-iraqi-brethren-kurds-turkey-look-hopefully?zid=307&ah=5e80419d1bc9821ebe173f4f0f060a07

Any strong opinions? Jzlcdh (talk) 15:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure of a country's diplomatic relationship with a province. Like saying that France gets along well with Quebec. Or "France gets along well with Bavaria." Just doesn't sound right. Yes, Turkey needs to have an "understanding" with Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan, in particular, about possible support of Turkish Kurds, but not really that convincing that this is at the correct level. With Iraq having a totally dysfunctional government, hard to argue what level is correct! :( Student7 (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well mate, like Student7 said, we can't just put Turkey's relations with every single country or autonomous republic into that section. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 20:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a consulate in Erbil,the title of the section is "foreign relations" and it also covers relations with other entities as well as nation states. Of course Elmasmelih's comment is right, however it does not refute my argument. According to [1] "the potential ramifications of recent developments in Turkey and along its borders have become critical to U.S. interests and the long-term trajectory of the Middle East as a whole."Jzlcdh (talk) 18:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see the sentence I added was removed without any discussion here. That is a bit irritating. I will add it back when the protection expires unless anyone gives a convincing argument here why it was removed. Jzlcdh (talk) 14:00, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/report/2014/07/31/94936/the-united-states-turkey-and-the-kurdish-regions/

Ethnic population misspelled

Political political reasons misspelled exaggerated ethnic population.

Ethnic population in Turkey : Turks % 78-81 ,kurdis-zazas % 14-16 ,other % 5-7

The Republic of Turkey State Institute of Statistics in 1965, the census and the mother tongue in the census results that:% 90.11 Turkish, 7.07% Kurdish, 1.16% Arabic and 0.48% Zaza, 0.18%, Circassian 0.08% Laz and other languages ​​spoken belirlenmiştir.1965 in Turkey, which is 31,391,421 2,219,502 of the population 'have reported that the mother tongue is Kurdish[^ Heinz Kloss & Grant McConnel, Linguistic composition of the nations of the world, vol,5, Europe and USSR, Québec, Presses de l'Université Laval, 1984, ISBN 2-7637-7044-4],[2]

EUROBAROMETER SURVEY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 2005: TURKEY DIE MOTHER TONGUE OF TURKISH 93 percent of those who

After 1965 census questions have been asked in the native language. Research on ethnicity in Turkey "mother tongue" basis, while maintaining one of the last major work was the European Union. The European Commission's Eurobarometer statistics agency made ​​between May-July 2005 that "Europeans and Languages​​" Research has released in September 2005. According to the study, which considered native speakers of Turkish in Turkey was 93 percent. Accept Turkey as a mother tongue other languages ​​were reported as 9 per cent of those who[3]

[Turks % 78.1-81.33 ,kurdis-zazas % 9.02-13.4-15.6 ,other 5-7,native language 84.54 percent of Turkish , kurdish-zaza 11.97 ,other % 3-4 http://www.milliyet.com.tr/2007/03/22/guncel/agun.html] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.178.59.85 (talk) 19:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The info about the ethnic groups is from CIA World Factbook. You call that source wrong?elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 20:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Turkey/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 03:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


REMOVE KEB- I mean, hi! An article on a highly populous, well-known country looks like an interesting nomination, so I'll take a look. Tezero (talk) 03:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
  • Images all look fine. (Does Abdullah Gül look kinda like Neil deGrasse Tyson to you? Huh.)
  • There are some unformatted or improperly formatted citations, e.g. #252 ("Türk kahvesi, UNESCO'nun listesinde"), #237 ("Ankara – T.C. Ziraat Bankası Müzesi"), #64 ("19 Mayıs-Türk Ulusal Kurtuluş Hareketinin Başlangıcı").
  • Current citations #125 and #109 are dead links.
  • I'm not well-versed on what constitutes a reliable source for geographical/political articles, but the following look unreliable: #149 (History World), #49 (Dolmabahçe Palace Museum), #187 (Blue Mosque - if it's that important, surely you could use a secondary source?).
  • There's been a bit of back-and-forth reverting lately. Is that cleared up?

I have to go now, but I'll be back later. Tezero (talk) 02:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Those citation numbers are not correct mate could you please take look at them again? elmasmelih 16:58, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Someone must've edited since. "Brief Seismic History of Turkey" and "Brief History of ISAF" are dead links. I trust you can find the rest by their titles. Tezero (talk) 17:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced the dead links with the 'alive' ones. By the way what do you mean by improperly formatted citations ? They have cite web templates though? elmasmelih 13:08, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They do use that template, perhaps, but they need to show the page's publisher (just whatever website it's hosted on, e.g. "IGN" in a page whose URL begins with "http://www.ign.com/...") [publisher], the date the article was written [date], the date you retrieved it [accessdate], and the author's first [first] and last [last] names. Tezero (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying it. I will take care of that three references. Can you provide more of them? elmasmelih 17:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here they are, in addition to the ones I mentioned above:

  • 262: Anadolu Efes S.K.: Our successes
  • 259: Türk kahvesi Unesco korumasında - Hürriyet KÜLTÜR - SANAT
  • 257: Ethnic Cuisine - Turkey by Terrie Wright Chrones
  • 255: Nur İlkin: Taste of Turkish cuisine
  • 250: The Media Industry in Turkey
  • 244: The first Türkiye İş Bankası headquarters in Ankara
  • 235: A list of the buildings designed by Mimar Sinan
  • 228: Turkish Statistical Institute: Number of citizens per healthcare personnel in Turkey
  • 227: Turkish Statistical Institute: Number of medical institutions in Turkey
  • 226: Hürriyet: "Sağlığa 76,3 milyar lira harcandı" (10 October 2013)
  • 224: Guide for Foreign Students planning Education in Turkey
  • 192: http://www.citypopulation.de/Turkey-RBC20.html December 2013 address-based calculation of the Turkish Statistical Institute as presented by citypopulation.de
  • 191: "Interactive Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger". UNESCO.
  • 189: "Syria Regional Refugee Response: Turkey". UNHCR.
  • 186: Nurcan Kaya and Clive Baldwin (July 2004). "Submission to the European Union and the Government of Turkey". Minority Rights Group International.
  • 183: Remote Sensing of Urban and Suburban Areas - Page 295, Tarek Rashed, Carsten Jürgens - 2010
  • 182: Daily Life in Ancient and Modern Istanbul - Page 51, Robert Bator - 2000
  • 177: Turkish Atomic Energy Authority - Mission of TAEK
  • 176: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi
  • 175: Who We Are? | The Scientific And Technological Research Council Of Turkey
  • 172: Yol Ağı Bilgileri
  • 161: The Unknown TV Giant - Businessweek
  • 160: Beko Avrupa’da üçüncülüğe oynuyor
  • 159: About | Best-Selling Home Appliance Brand | Beko UK
  • 158: "The Shipbuilding Industry in Turkey". OECD. September 2011.
  • 154: Turkey - UNESCO World Heritage Centre
  • 153: http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/IcerikGetir.do?istab_id=69
  • 135: Pontic Mountains and highlands
  • 132: "Biodiversity in Turkey".
  • 124: Turkey Districts
  • 113: "Turkey, Egypt recall envoys in wake of violence". Bloomberg. 16 August 2013.
  • 112: "Syria ratchets up tension with Turkey – warning it of dangers of rebel support". Euronews. 4 October 2013.
  • 107: http://istanbul2004.ku.edu.tr/syilmaz/public_html/doc/03.pdf
  • 70: 19 Mayıs-Türk Ulusal Kurtuluş Hareketinin Başlangıcı
  • 62: "Death toll of the Armenian Massacres". Encyclopædia Britannica.
  • 57: TheOttomans.org - Discover The Ottomans
  • 56: Dolmabahçe Palace Museum
  • 45: Müller-Wiener (1977), p. 112.
  • 44: Georges Roux - Ancient Iraq page 314
  • 42: Urartian Material Culture As State Assemblage: An Anomaly in the Archaeology of Empire, Paul Zimansky, Page 103 of 103-115
  • 17: The Economist: "Turkey in the Balkans: The good old days?", 5 November 2011. (Contains the basic information, but it shouldn't all be in the link title.)
  • 15: Seal of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  • 14: Seal of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey
  • 13: Seal of the Presidential Office of Turkey
  • 12: Sign of Turkish Embassy in Vienna
  • 11: Turkish Drivers Licence
  • 10: Turkish Identity Card
  • 9: Turkish Passport

In addition, are the following sources reliable?

  • allaboutturkey.com (133)
  • statoids.com (124)
  • theottomans.org (57)
  • istanbul.net (56) - looks like a tourism website

And for citation 6 ("The World Bank: World Development Indicators Database. Gross Domestic Product 2012. Last revised on 1 July 2013."), see if you can find an archived, stable version at web.archive.org, in case the information changes, which is highly possible if it has been revised.

I think I've decided that I don't care about completely consistent source formatting for GA, but I do care about having the basic information there. At the very least, accessdates and publishers for are necessary for the web citations, in addition to the title and URL. Dates and author names are preferred, but less important. Tezero (talk) 19:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well i can't do anything for their accesdates mate you should take it into account and I will replace 'istanbul.net' it is a dating site. elmasmelih 22:00, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't you do anything about the accessdates? I can put today for each of them if you want, but why can't you? Also, yes, please do fix istanbul.net. Tezero (talk) 22:08, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For example i cannot know that when '*177: Turkish Atomic Energy Authority - Mission of TAEK' added as a reference right? elmasmelih 20:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Well, that's no problem. Just click each one without an accessdate. If the site isn't dead, put today's date as the accessdate, and if it is, go to http://web.archive.org and find an archived version of the site. (If there isn't an archived version there, remove the information or find another source for it.) I realize it seems silly, but accessdates help show that web retrieval isn't perfect and that, as of that date, the site was working fine. Tezero (talk) 01:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All done. elmasmelih 13:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, good. Have you looked into the possibly unreliable sources, though? I suspect reliable alternatives would be easy enough to find if you've got Google Books in hand. Tezero (talk) 15:42, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All good except istanbul.net(which I've replaced earlier.) elmasmelih 16:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to slide on the other two, but "statoids" really rubs me the wrong way. That site, however, states, "His source was Turkey's State Institute for Statistics. Mario Pezza sent a spreadsheet with population data from the 2000 and 2007 censuses." Why not find and use that information? Tezero (talk) 16:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please find the page numbers for sources with "page needed" tags, such as 50 and 51.

Also, the following information needs citations:

  • "In the post–Cold War environment, Turkey's geostrategic importance shifted towards its proximity to the Middle East, the Caucasus and the Balkans."
  • "Although the ministers do not have to be members of the parliament, ministers with parliament membership are common in Turkish politics."
  • "Turkey's constitution governs the legal framework of the country. It sets out the main principles of government and establishes Turkey as a unitary centralized state. The President of the Republic is the head of state and has a largely ceremonial role. The president is elected for a seven-year term by direct elections. However the current president, Abdullah Gül, was elected in 2007 by parliamentary vote, the system at that time."
  • "Both countries were included in the Marshall Plan and OEEC for rebuilding European economies in 1948, and subsequently became founding members of the OECD in 1961."
  • "From the beginning of the 19th century onwards, the Ottoman Empire began to decline. As it gradually shrank in size, military power and wealth, many Balkan Muslims migrated to the Empire's heartland in Anatolia" (there is a "not in citation given" tag) - or is all of this covered by citation 58?
  • "along with the Circassians fleeing the Russian conquest of the Caucasus. The decline of the Ottoman Empire led to a rise in nationalist sentiment among the various subject peoples, leading to increased ethnic tensions which occasionally burst into violence, such as the Hamidian massacres of Armenians."
  • "In 1453, the Ottomans completed their conquest of the Byzantine Empire by capturing its capital, Constantinople."
  • "In the 10th century, the Seljuks started migrating from their ancestral homeland into Persia, which became the administrative core of the Great Seljuk Empire."
  • "The most powerful of Phrygia's successor states were Lydia, Caria and Lycia."
  • "The settlement of Troy started in the Neolithic Age and continued into the Iron Age."
  • "The Ottoman Empire was sometimes referred to as Turkey or the Turkish Empire among its contemporaries."

Tezero (talk) 16:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All done. elmasmelih 21:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. I haven't gone through the sources in depth, but try to find page numbers for the books with "page needed" tags (would they be on Google Books?) while I peruse the body text and do a bit of source formatting. Tezero (talk) 23:27, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've missed some other things (or have they been added since?) that need sources:

  • "The country is among the founding members of the OECD and the G-20 major economies."
  • "Another Turkish basketball club, Beşiktaş, won the FIBA EuroChallenge in 2012. The Final of the 2013–14 EuroLeague Women basketball championship was played between two Turkish teams, Galatasaray and Fenerbahçe, and won by Galatasaray."
  • "The Turkish women's national volleyball team won the silver medal in the 2003 European Championship, the bronze medal in the 2011 European Championship, and the bronze medal in the 2012 FIVB World Grand Prix. They also won a gold medal (2005), six silver medals (1987, 1991, 1997, 2001, 2009, 2013) and a bronze medal (1993) in the Mediterranean Games. Women's volleyball clubs in Turkey, namely Fenerbahçe, Eczacıbaşı and Vakıfbank, have won numerous European championship titles and medals. Fenerbahçe won the 2010 FIVB Women's Club World Championship and the 2012 CEV Women's Champions League. Representing Europe as the winner of the 2012–13 CEV Women's Champions League, Vakıfbank also became the world champion by winning the 2013 FIVB Women's Club World Championship."
  • "Galatasaray won the UEFA Cup and UEFA Super Cup in 2000. The Turkish national football team finished 3rd and won the bronze medal in the 2002 FIFA World Cup and in the 2003 FIFA Confederations Cup; while also reaching the semi-finals (finishing 3rd by goals difference) in the UEFA Euro 2008."
  • "Nowadays most controversy is about the Gülen movement, but that controversy is mainly political rather than religious."

In general, every paragraph should end with a citation, because every fact should be cited. The only exception would be when something's extremely obvious, like WP:BLUE. Tezero (talk) 23:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Took care of these issues. Are there any other? elmasmelih 20:00, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • "There are about 26,000 people who are Jewish, the vast majority of whom are Sephardi" - Can you expand a bit on the history of the Jews in Turkey? One-sentence paragraphs are unseemly, and it'd be interesting to know a little more.
  • "Life expectancy stands at 71.1 years for men and 75.3 years for women, with an overall average of 73.2 years for the populace as a whole." - Similarly, can you expand a little? Are any diseases widespread? What are the most common causes of death for Turks?
  • "There are 40 national parks, 189 nature parks, 31 nature preserve areas, 80 wildlife protection areas and 109 nature monuments in Turkey." - Can you elaborate a bit? Are there any that are widely known outside Turkey, ones that readers might have heard of?
  • I've split up "Culture" into subsections; would you mind figuring out a way to do the same with "Economy"? It's quite long to navigate.
  • There's one more uncited statement I've found, marked with a "citation needed" tag.
  • The "page needed" tags are still there.

I think it looks good otherwise. Tezero (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All done except for the Economy. If you check the older revisions of this page, you will see that the Economy section merged under one text by consensus. I made partitions but like i said it was merged. And I dont have these books so i cant provide you page numbers mate..elmasmelih 19:55, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've found some on Google Books. I'll go through the rest of the "page needed" tags and then bring up any final issues I have before passing this. Tezero (talk) 20:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, there are still some minor citation issues, but those would be a pain to fix and probably not necessary to the average reader. You're gonna have to fix them if you want to take this to FAC, though. For now, I'll pass this. Nice work. Tezero (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tezero i am happy as f*ck right now. If you are eager to help me, we can add the subsection 'Infrastructure' to Economy and can go over those page needed tags. I mean if you are available elmasmelih 17:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Elmasmelih, there aren't any "page needed" tags; I found all the pages (or, where I only had access to a table of contents, ranges of pages) before passing. You can add that subsection and ask me for feedback if you want, though; I don't feel strongly about it. Tezero (talk) 23:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tezero thanks for your collab. on this article mate. We should give each other barnstars :)elmasmelih 19:46, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the emblem?

Why was the emblem of Turkey removed? I think it should be restored. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 12:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a valid reason to remove it. Turkey has no official emblem. It can be added bacak with a footnote which states it. Like in the Emblem of Turkey article. elmasmelih 11:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HDR

Turkey actually ranks 69th in 2014 hdr report, NOT 2013. 21:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)Kaxovskiy (talk) 21:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

National emblem

The Emblems of Turkey article states that, "Turkey is one of the few countries that does not have an official national coat of arms or national emblem." Despite this, Elmasmelih is ignoring previous discussions about this matter[4] and passing off File:TurkishEmblem.svg as the emblem of Turkey - providing the reader with incorrect information. Elmasmelih notes that the star and crescent is used on passports, ID cards etc. However this symbol is derived from, and seems to be used as a substitute for, the national flag which is the sole national identifier of Turkey. Perhaps other users can come up with justifications for including this symbol in the infobox, despite it not being official? -- Hazhk Talk to me 18:27, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I've explained the whole thing in the note which goes as: Altough Turkey has no official emblem, this star and crescent is being used on passports, ID cards, driving licences, embassy signs, and the seal of the TBMM -- unsigned comment by Elmasmelih

I understand the note. However, by including the note at the top of the infobox and identifying it as the "emblem", you're creating the false impression that this is a national emblem. You accept that this is a symbol being used only for certain, select purposes; so what I want to ask is why you think it needs to be in the infobox? Other articles use a national coat of arms or emblem, when one is available. Why should the Turkey article be different by including an arbitrary symbol that is clearly a substitute for the national flag and not a national emblem in its own right.
You talk of consensus, but I don't see any consensus for including this symbol as you've done. I'm also having trouble locating the edit where you inserted this symbol in the first place. -- Hazhk Talk to me 19:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is the symbol which is nearly the official emblem except it isnt official do you get my point mate?

Just above this section, Kutsuit wants it to be re-instated as well.elmasmelih 19:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It may be "nearly" the national emblem, but it isn't the national emblem. So no, I don't get your point. It may be used on passports and drivers licenses, but it isn't used to represent the state in foreign relations, because it is not a symbol of the nation. To pass it off as a national emblem is misleading the reader. You're not appealing to any official law or third party source, you're selectively taking instances where the star and crescent are used and deciding that's 'good enough' for a national emblem; this is your own personal preference. There's no rule that says we have to have a coat of arms or emblem in the infobox (in fact the Canada article, a FA, has chosen to omit the coat of arms for various reasons), so there's no reason we should have to settle with something that is "nearly" an emblem.
The above section cannot be taken as a consensus or a justification to include your emblem; you actually disagreed with him? Your response to Kutsuit is spot on - there is a valid reason for not including this emblem. The only reasonable action to take is to remove the symbol from the top of the infobox, that is the overwhelming consensus that can be gleamed from every past discussion on this talk page. I'm sure other users will agree with me. -- Hazhk Talk to me 20:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that User:Hazhk is right here. An official emblem should be codified by the respective state, otherwise it does not exist, and its insertion in the article (with or without footnote) is arbitrary. Alex2006 (talk) 04:46, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should we wait for one more user to write his/her thoughts or should we remove the emblem right away?elmasmelih 19:48, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should remove it now. An alternative option is to display the symbol in the notes st the foot of the infobox, with your note accompanying it. 81.149.32.116 (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal is back on business

Some of you know about User:Lord of Rivendell and his distruptive edits(he got banned because of them). Well he is on again, under the name Eldarion of Gondor and Arnor, doing same things.

He is ruining the page again like he did before(check history and you'll see) and because of him, we might lose this article's GA promotion.

Some of the Signs of sock puppetry already fits his current position but i will need more help in order to open up a Sockpuppet investigations and to get rid from his nonsense vandalism. Any help will be appriciated.

Well well Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lord of Rivendell, not the first time eh?elmasmelih 20:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article fully protected for three days

The alternative would have been to block a couple of editors for edit-warring, and we don't want that – do we? Both parties to the talk page! Favonian (talk) 12:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One of them is a probable sock. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 12:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, seen it. I'll let the CheckUsers do their stuff rather than pass behavioral judgment at this point. Favonian (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Thank you Favonian. Take care. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 12:39, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He won't collaborate with us. He is User:Lord of Rivendell, who was famous with is distruptive edits like i said just above us. Thank you for the page protection. elmasmelih 12:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am shocked as to how this article became a GA with its persistent instability and its Turkish nationalist oriented POV as mentioned by me and several other users above. Étienne Dolet (talk) 16:56, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm only here for the socks. I have no other involvement. :) Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 18:00, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Étienne Dolet; I've tried to neutralize the article as adding some missing pieces but you can iprove it further as the GA tag says, and the persistent instability is caused by those who make distruptive edits/removals, not on some argued content edits by decent editors though, take it into account. And don't see it as WP:OTHERCRAP but for example Germany(which is a FA) is written German-oriented as well. elmasmelih 20:51, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your good-faith edits towards this article are highly appreciated. I am glad you've taken the time to get rid of much of the problems this article has had. We can talk about improvement after the protection expires. Cheers, Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate. I've opened up a WP:PR request for the article. You should comment in there. elmasmelih 21:00, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted to indefinite semi-protection following the block of one of the combatants – see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lord of Rivendell. Favonian (talk) 16:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 16 August 2014

Hi. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries#Sections the 'Administrative divisions' sub-section under the 'Politics' section must be seperated and placed just above of Politics section. Could anyone do that please. Thanks. elmasmelih 21:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: According to the page's protection level and your user rights, you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details.- Arjayay (talk) 17:25, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Gül and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan may sue Wikipedia for accusing them with corruption

Abdullah Gül and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan may sue Wikipedia for accusing them with corruption in the Politics section of the Turkey article. There is no court decision in Turkey which has found them guilty of corruption so far, and there is no ongoing trial in Turkish courts with allegations of corruption. May I warn you that, from a purely legal standing point, Wikipedia might get into trouble in terms of being forced to pay a substantial fine.

Also, the Law section in the Turkey article resembles the film Midnight Express in terms of its exaggerated portrayal of the situation in Turkey. I haven't seen a similar section in any other country article in Wikipedia, including the countries of Latin America and Africa which are notorious for their far worse legal systems, police brutality and organized crime. 81.214.42.235 (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Turkey&oldid=621651257"