Talk:Armenians in Turkey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Armenians in Turkey article.
Article policies
WikiProject Turkey
Turkey Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Turkey, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Turkey-related topics. Please visit the the participants page if you would like to get involved. Happy editing!
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Armenians in Turkey:

No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category
Armenia Portal
Armenians in Turkey is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to better improve and organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Turkey may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Comments

[edit] Why the Propaganda?

I had to remove some phrases, that seem to promote an alleged "Armenian Genocide" when it is completely irrelevant and incorrect. I think this topic needs to stop having information that seems to make the conclusion that the article Armenians in Turkey, is just another way of saying "Well now they are less because of the armenian genocide". There is no hard evidence of 1.5 million armenians being dead. This is clearly propoganda, and should be stopped. And this article should have more information on Armenians In Turkey today. Everything needs to be unbiased and relevant to Armenians In Turkey, rather than historical debates or allegations. Executex 01:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Enough with there is no hard evidence its going to stay that way, its obvious, they didn't "deport them out of war zones" oh so kindly. Nareklm 02:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
They assigned soldiers to protect its citizens who are Armenians also. There was no evidence of 1.5 million Armenians living at the time. Nareklm, I call, relocating them quite a normal thing, since the United States deports people all the time, why wouldn't it be kindly, Armenians were Ottoman citizens for at least 700 years. They didn't relocate Armenians in other parts of Turkey, and why are you so angry about hard evidence, that is how we determine the truth. There was no evidence of systematic killing since there was no order to kill or attack Armenians, so it is not a genocide or an atrocity as some Armenians claim. What about the hundreds of thousands of Armenians that still live in Turkey and that lived in Istanbul and other major cities in the east at the time, deporting the Armenians there would have been easier would it not or to systematically eradicate them as this propaganda mentions? There was NO evidence of 1.5 million Armenians in Eastern Anatolia, let alone the whole Ottoman Empire, in 1915, according to ANY SINGLE ARCHIVE. There is no question about it, that this propaganda has to stop. We Americans deported the Cherokee Indians from one location to another, does that mean we committed genocide too according to your fact less theory? I demand that we stop making Wikipedia a tool for propaganda in innocent articles such as this one. DO THE RESEARCH BEFORE YOU WRITE THESE THINGS TO WIKIPEDIA. Executex 02:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
You'd better learn from "mistakes". Hectorian 02:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Stop reverting the page back to the false propaganda. I edited it to make it more objective, and you are continually re-editing it to the Armenian-propagandist POV. If you continue, I will report you to administrators for creating propaganda on wikipedia. Executex 18:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
It's not only the Armenian POV, but also the POV of most historians. See WP:NPOV#Undue weight. Khoikhoi 04:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
No it's not the POV of most historians, how dare you act like you represent most historians. Most historians that are not biased by being Armenian, agree that it wasn't a genocide. Why? Because Armenian rebels killed people too, that means it is NOT a genocide, please look up genocide in the dictionary. This falls under civil war, especially since the Armenian rebels had sided with the Russians. Now stop reverting it, does mine say something bad about Armenians? Does it make outrageous claims? NO, it merely tries to have an objective view over the history of Armenians. This is NOT an article about Armenian Genocide, as you've created. It is about the history of Armenians, and this doesn't mean Armenians only history is 1915, that makes Armenians look bad, and I cannot tolerate hatred against the rich culture of the Armenians and I also cannot tolerate outrageous claims about a genocide, that historians who are biased against Turks and Muslims created. It was a civil war, and everyone except a small number of Armenian scholars have already accepted this. Please provide evidence before you make such baseless claims. Executex 01:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh really? If so, cite sources that say most historians do not recognize the genocide. According to this article, "To the filmmaker and most historians, the documentary covers settled history, although Turkey continues to deny that it committed what many consider the first genocide of the 20th century." The view that it was only a civil war is a minority view (held by McCarthy, Lewis, etc.). Again, please see WP:NPOV#Undue weight. If you want to prove that the civil war view is a majority opinion, provide reliable sources. Your opinion and mine is irrelevant here. Khoikhoi 01:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if you realize this, but you cannot prove or disprove a majority view. This is impossible, and wrong to do. It's not how many people believe this or that, it's what view is more correct or wrong. I didn't allege that the Armenians are guilty of genocide against the Ottomans, which is a widely held view. I factually explained that this was a civil war. There were deaths on both sides, so this CANNOT be classified as genocide. Please look up the word genocide before you cite false sources and claim the majority supports your view, when you have no proof of that. Please tell me if you believe that only Armenians were killed and no Turks, Kurds, or Muslim citizens of the Ottoman Empire were killed, do you really believe that, Ottomans would slaughter its own citizens for what, the fun of it? Armenian gangs had a motive to kill Ottomans, they wanted independence. Of course, in response, Turkish gangs and villagers killed Armenians. So if it was two different sides killing each other, doesn't this fall under the definition of civil war? If there is not a single Ottoman Archive that clearly states that Armenians should be slaughtered, then how can this be a genocide? Instead of talking about what the majority does or does not think, discuss with me the issue itself. I have sources, http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/ , http://armeniangenocideallegation.blogspot.com http://www.kultur.gov.tr/EN/BelgeGoster.aspx?17A16AE30572D313AAF6AA849816B2EF0CEC0FA6CDA1933E http://www.armenianterror.net/ http://www.anarmenianmyth.com/ http://www.armenian-genocide-lie.com/ http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/ http://www.ataa.org/ataa/ref/ref.html. Why aren't they cited in citations? Does their research not count? So, your theory is, what you think the majority says goes, and any other opinions are 100% wrong? What kind of bias crap is that? That is not ethical historical research, you have to look at all sides of the story not just what you believe is right. So please stop giving me lectures about majority, because you DO NOT know who the majority is, because you didn't ask everyone in the world. Try to be more objective instead of spouting about majority. In Galileo's time the majority believed the Earth was in the center of the solar system, does that mean it's true? Regardless, it's not like the majority now believes one way or another, no one knows that. Now please discuss the issue rather than what you think people think about the issue. And acknowledge others side of the view, instead of the single Armenian side. By just rejecting any other points of views, you are doing nothing but promoting propaganda. Executex 04:19, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
As a compromise of me editing and you reverting, I put a NPOV tag on, since this is definitely not a neutral or objective article and supports Armenian propaganda. Executex 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Removing this per Khoikhoi's own comments here [[1]], and per WP guidelines per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Claims_of_consensus, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Exceptional_claims_require_exceptional_sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_of_questionable_reliability.

His comments are as follows:

  • "According to WP policy, the interpretation of primary sources such as the Gertrude Bell diaries and old newspapers is considered original research. Though it is sometims useful to quote such sources, normally their interpretation should be left to professional scholars. WP then reports on their work (secondary sources). Khoikhoi 22:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)"

Besides, this source is a MSNBC Internet editorial, not a news report or anything remotely resembling an academic document.

Not to mention the author of the source used is just a "producer". He is not an historian, an academic, or remotely qualified to be used as a source for this subject.

Also per, Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence, it is suggested above that proof to the contrary needs to be added. This, obviously, is not the case.

Somebody can correct me if I am wrong, but it seems this is a deliberate contradiction in order to advance a point of view and is made in bad faith. --Oguz1 16:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The info is cited from the United States Library of Congress. Khoikhoi 04:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
It does not fit exactly, but WP:GAME. By the way, the other one was also from a library. denizTC 05:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

i trust you, executex, that there are dozens of (turkish based) it-"resources" about the genocide like those you cited (which all say the same: there was no genocide and if, the turks have been the victims). and if you bring dozens more (i think there are such), that will only prove one thing: that the majority of turks don't want to face their history. --Severino 20:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

it's not true that armenians are the largest minority group in turkey today. there are far mor kurds! since the genocide, armenians in turkey are a very small group and in their original homeland (northeast-anatolia/western armenia) there are almost no armenians any more. --Severino 15:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Why were the following removed?

...intergroup tensions prompted the emigration of possibly...

Armenians outside Turkey refer to the deaths of 1915-16 as an instance of genocide, and over the years various Armenian political groups have sought to avenge the tragedy by carrying out terrorist attacks against Turkish diplomats and officials abroad.

We can rename "terrorist" to "militant" or something else, per Wikipedia:Words to avoid, but I'm not sure why the rest was removed. —Khoikhoi 20:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed it because I didn't find it to be related to the topic at hand, the Armenians of Turkey. I feel that this article had been written with a pro-Turkish POV, and for example tying in Armenian terrorists/militants of the 1970s directly with the victims of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 have little to do with each other. Of course those attacks happened because of the unrecognized nature of the genocide, however I did not see why they should be brought up in the same sentence, or even at all. Keep in mind these attacks happened in the Diaspora, and were not carried out by the Armenians of Turkey, making it an even more irrelevent non-sequiter aimed at making Armenians look bad (as if to argue, yeah they might have been victims of a genocide, but 50 years later some of them were terrorists too! It all equals out!). I did not remove it because I want to hide it, it is a sad part of the sad story of the legacy of the Armenian Genocide, however it does not belong in this article and was likely placed there with more sinister rather than informative motives. Also, I had removed the phrase intergroup tensions because I found it to be a euphamism for the Hamidian massacres, mention of which was completely absent despite the fact the vast majority of Armenians that left did so to flee those massacres. I guess that phrase can stay now that there is reference to the Hamidian massacres, however I think a series of massacres goes far beyond the term "ethnic tensions". Vartan84 12:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually, everything except the final paragraph was directly copied from the Library of Congress country profiles (in the public domian), so I don't think it was biased towards the Turkish side. Anyways, I see what you're saying. I wasn't aware that attacks carried out by the ASALA were mostly from the diaspora.
As for the Hamidian massacres, you might want to respond to this comment. —Khoikhoi 18:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hamshenis

there should be a link to the hamshenis-article --Severino 10:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

added --Severino

[edit] The Armenians are not the wealthy and prominent minority of Turkey they once were

The article ( rosy according to me and many Turkish Armenians in the first paragraphs) will create the impression that the Armenian community (estimated around 50,000 people) of Turkey meaning İstanbul is wealthy and politically powerful, happy a with high confidence which is totally false. Unfortunately the opposite is true, especially concerning their status as citizens - second class citizens. Yes the Armenians like the Greeks used to be wealthy merchants and traders with international connections - but in Ottoman times especially before 1915! That is not the case anymore after the foundation of the Turkish Republic and especially after the very violent and destructive Istanbul Pogroms of 6-7 September 1955. Just like the Greeks, this traumatic turning point not only ruined them ecocnomically, it also practically disenfriched them; and they became withdrawn form Turkish society economically and psychologically wounded, and constantly frightened abouth their future. This tension was further heightened by the assasinations of the Turkish diplomats by ASALA in the 1970's and 1980's. They became regarded with hostility and suspision (a fifth column ) not only by the society but also by the Turkish state, as if they were behind the assasinations. They were (and still are) constantly intimidated, harrased by the authorities as if they were the terrorists or harboured them. Now having a "perfect excuse" with the attacks, the jingositic press and the government further fueled hatred and tension of the Turkish society against the already marginalized Armenian community stepping up their immigration to the West and putting all sorts of petty and legal discriminations against them in their daily lives. This continues up to today. Yes the Armenians in Turkey have their newspapers and minority schools (whicha are well equipped by Turkish state education standarts indeed by any standart), but they are all in Turkish ! The Armenian minority schools' curriculum ,except Armenian language lessons of course, and including religion classes is completely in Turkish. They are not taught about Armenian history and culture of course (unthinkable anyway); only officialy sanctioned Turkish history courses where Armenians and Greeks are villified as the enemy, which humiliates and dispirits the Armenian pupils who are supposed to be the future generation and citizens of Turkey. This is one of the reasons why Armenians mostly speak Turkish as a mother language at home and more so among the public because of these discriminatory and destructive policies and because of the fear of being detected as Armenians or Greeks for that matter, by the Turkish public. This fear goes so far that many Armenians turkify their names and surnames. Their names may not be Turkish names but "neutral sounding" enough not be detectable. Another reason why the Turkish language Armenian weekly Agos was founded that many Armenians especially the younger generations cannot speak or read Armenian, as well as to integrate the inward looking Armenian community ( still unsuccessfuly) with the mainstream society. As I have mentioned before, as well as the above mentioned reasons of the Armenian community, they are constantly suffering from petty and legal discriminations which makes them practically second class citizens. For instance they have not been legally represented since 1960, the last time an Armenian MP was elected to the Turkish parliament. Even though there are no legal barriers on piece of paper, they are not allowed to become soldiers or civil servants or have any other government job, simply because they are regarded as "disloyal" and "treacherous" people who are bound to stab Turkey in the back at any moment. This is also the view of the vast majority of the Turkish society. Though with roughly 50,000 members (definately compared to the doomed Greek minority of Turkey) the Armenian community may look robust, but is suffering from steady decreasingly numbers because of immigration to the West mainly U.S.A and Europe (France particularly), low birth rates, high death rates, and gentrification. In addition to that some of their schools have been closed due to low enrollment and transfer to Turkish schools. I know what I described is very gloomy but sadly this is the reality of the Armenians in Turkey they are enduring today. If the Turkish goverment does not change and reforms its human and minority rights records, the Armenian community will also suffer the fate of the Greek minority of Turkey, who have suffered even more under the Turkish state due to the on and off conflict with Greece over the decades, and have been reduced to less than 2,000 mainly elderly people who are heading to certain extinction.

Thank you for the above observations. While they won't be particularly new to anyone who knows the actual conditions on the ground, they will be for those who think that the wikipedia article in its current form in any way reflects reality. It's so far gone it's not worth editing out all the errors, errors which are mostly deliberate.
You have pointed out some of the inaccuracies. Other include -
We are told "Following the tragic events of 1915-1917, some Armenian children became orphans." What piece of **** human could use the word "some" in this context! Hundreds of thousands became orphans. The majority of children who survived were orphans! Nor were many "adopted by local Muslim families" - unless you think the word enslaved also means adopted. We are told "some 1.5 million Armenians lived in eastern Anatolia" - firstly, this is an inacurate inflated figure, secondly, it implies (deliberately) that all the Armenians before 1915 lived in eastern Anatolia. Actually most lived in central or western anatolia, and the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire was at least 2 million. We are then told "In 1915 the Ottoman government ordered all Armenians deported from eastern Anatolia" with the implication that either (again) all Armenans lived in this region (thus leading the way for the "just an evacuation from a war zone" excuse to be use by genocide deniers) or that Armenians in other parts of the Ottoman Empire continued to lived happily without being deported or killed. We read the phrase "Following the tragic events of 1915-1917". What about the "tragic events" of 1918, or 1919, or 1920, or 1921, or 1922. And what about the events of every year until the 1930s, when tens of thousands of Armenians per year would arrive at the Syrian border having been deported from Kemalist Turkey. And finally, the Hemshinli are not "crypto-Christians" and none have ever, to my knowledge, conveted back to Christianity.

Meowy 15:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Let's cut the yada yada

The title of the article is Armenians in Turkey, so when I came across this article, I was expecting to find some info about Armenian culture in TR, such as Turkish artists of AR origin, Agos - an Armenian NewsP, Armenian schools, and something that is very important as well: recent migratory movements to TR from Armenia, there are 70 thousand armenian citizens who work in TR and I think that that could have been mentioned too.. But no.. same old, same old: was it 1916, or 1917??, were the Hemshinli crypto Christians or were they not? Gees.. Pls take that them to the talk pages of relevant articles, Arm Gen and Hamsheni, respectively.. regards Baristarim 22:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The section is not called "Armenians in contemporary Turkey", or "Armenians in the Turkish Republic". And even if it were called that, some historical background will be required and there is no justification for all those deliberate ("Library of Congress country profiles"?) distortions I have mentioned to remain. Meowy 00:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Again.. This is exactly what I was talking about.. What makes you think that I was asking for that info or any others to be deleted, or not added??? That's why I added the expandarticle and sections tags.. In any case, Turkey means Republic of Turkey, there is already an article called armenians in ottaman empire if i am not mistaken, even if Turkey was the successor state, they don't refer to the same thing.. But that's beside the point anyways.. What happened to the assumption of good faith dude? Have u read my post above? What about trying to add info about what I mentioned above.. Articles always have background or history sections, therefore I fail to see why you r trying to justify its existence, since it is already a given!! :)) I was just trying to point out the fact that some people are too busy squabbling over petty details (were the Hemshinli crypto-Christians, or were they not? :))) Where is the mention of turkish artists of armenian origin? where is the info about Agos, the main armenian NewsP? Recent armenian immigrantion to TR? No.. of course they will never be there, coz it is easier to argue if Hamshenis were crypto-christians than actually going out there and digging up sources about what I just mentioned.. Anyways, i hope that u were able to follow me :)) cheers! Baristarim 01:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

in a way you are right,baristarim, especially your points regarding contemporary armenians in turkey and contemporary armenian life in turkey. but i think its no mistake to mention the hamshenis as they still exist (you wrote "were") and their (part) armenian origin is quite trusted. --Severino 20:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Second-class citizen

The Armenians were also targetted during the Istanbul pogrom. The Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople, is also deprived from its rights. The Armenian Gregorians still do not have the same privilleges with the Sunni muslims. The Armenians in Turkey were also victims of the law "for the unification of education" (violation of the Lausanne Treaty), etc. Seems like Second-class citizens to me... Hectorian 15:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

It was more than 50 years ago. The Istanbul pogrom was an agent-provocateur act. The unification of education is only to make the education system secular but is not applied to the defined minorities in the Lausanne treaty. There are Armenian schools in Turkey, so no violation to Lausanne. E104421 11:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Saying that it happened long ago does not justify the exclusion of the category, having in mind that the pogrom's effects are still obvious: the Armenian community has shrunk, due to the porgom. No matter if it was an agent-provocateur act, the pogrom was state-sponsored (and even the Turks accept this). According to the law of the unification of education and its supposed "secular" aspects, it did apply to the minorities as well. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, the 3 recognised minorities (Greeks, Armenians, Jews) were supposed to organise and maintain their schools on their own. In violation of the treaty, the turkish government appointed Turkish heads on the schools, not to mention that the teaching of the minority language was minimized, and many of those schools were closed... The fact that there are todays some armenian and greek schools (only in Istanbul, apparently), cannot hide the fact that the treaty was violated... Perhaps these schools are the only who managed to "escape" the law (or were left operating on purpose for diplomatic reasons). Above i said other things as well, on which u did not comment: do the armenian gregorians in turkey have the same rights with the sunnis? does their patriarchate still has the proverty it had upon the sign of the Lausanne Treaty? if all that i said are true (and they are) the Armenians are treated as second-class citizens and so the category has every right to stay. Regards Hectorian 12:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
You're mixing the issues. First, if you compare the number of schools per population, you'll see that your argument is not correct. The schools are mostly in Istanbul, cause they are mostly living in istanbul. It is impossible to open a school for few students. There is not enough fund to maintain all. That's why some are closed. If there are enough students, there is no problem for them to be re-opened. The head of the schools should be Turkish citizen does not mean that they should be ethnically Turkish. Nothing has minimized, there are about 70000 armenians in Turkey, and enough schools for them. There is no diference between a turk and armenian legally in turkey. Your another pov that i do strongly disagree is that you're forgeting that turkey is a secular country. 90% of the population is muslim, but this does not mean that turkey is an islamic country. Turkey is a secular republic, there is no difference due to religion in turkish laws. Furthermore, there is no restriction on any language. E104421 14:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I have explained above everything that has to do with the reasons to have this category. Secularism is something usually quoted by the Turkish government, but really is not that... The Sunni muslims are the privilleged by the turkish system, all the rest are under various degrees of discrimination (the Alevis also). The Treaty of Lausanne does not say that the head of the school should not be turkish citizen, quite the contrary: turkish citizenship but' member of the minority. this was not respected by the law of the "unification of education" (another violation of the treaty which states that no national law is allowed to lift the treaty's articles). Hectorian 14:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you're misunderstood, by saying turkish citizen, i mean an armenian, a greek, or a jewish but being turkish citizen. There is nothing to dispute about this. Turkey does no have to import the teachers from outside. E104421 18:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

"There is no diference between a turk and armenian legally in turkey." Correct.

"Turkey is a secular republic, there is no difference due to religion in turkish laws." Correct.

BUT: the turkish laws are one thing and the reality is something else, e1...,and you shold know that. --Severino 16:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hmm

This could be true: "Like the Greeks, they are bankers and merchants with extensive international contacts.", but I think we might use a few more sources on that one :) I am not at all a specialist of the subject, but as far as I know, Armenians have been the poorer of the three minorities. But again, categorizing whole minorities like "rich", "poor", "merchants" is not very healthy either I think... But they could be really be rich however, I simply don't know. Baristarim 08:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Most of the article was copied from the (public domain) Library of Congress profiles of countries. See "Armenians" from the Turkey profile. :-) Cheers, Khoikhoi 08:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christmas

that part is so irrevelant! that has more to do with Christian schisms than Armenians OR Turkey or a combination of the two! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.131.164.144 (talk) 01:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

It can be relevant to both Christmas and Armenians in Turkey. Hectorian 01:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Then why isn't it in the Christmas section or the Armenian section? Arthurian Legend 19:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Read first what u remove. The Armenians in Turkey have some customs of their own regarding Christmas. And there is no more appropriate article to include them in, than this one. Hectorian 19:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I just read it. Why doesn't someone who knows about the topic make it clear that the customs are different from other Christmas customs? When then don't you talk about the significance of those differences in terms of their Armenian-ness and their Turkish environment. Don't keep a bad paragraph just because you think it provides information. 68.175.83.141 19:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I wrote that section. I am not Armenian and I used the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul's web site. I found it interesting, that is why I added it. If you would like to improve on it, please feel free to do so. --Free smyrnan 19:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Improve it by removing it! Just because it's on the patriarch's website does not mean that is it important!

Armenians celebrate Christmas at a date later than most of the Christians, on 6th of January rather than 25th of December. The reason for this is historical; Christians once celebrated Christmas on 6th of January, until the 4th century. The 25th of December was originally a pagan holiday that celebrated the birth of the sun. Many members of the church continued to celebrate both holidays, and the Roman church changed the date of Christmas to be the 25th of December and declared January 6th to be the date when the three wise men visited the baby Jesus. this is not unique to armenians, armenians in turkey, or anyone in turkey As the Armenian Apostolic Church had already separated from the Roman church at that time, the date of Christmas remained unchanged for Armenians. On January 6th, the following greetings are traditionally appropriate: Krisdos Dzınav yev haydnetsav! (Christ is born and revealed) and Orhnyal e Dzınuntı yev Haydnutyunı Krisdosi! (Blessed be Christ's birth and revelation).[4] this is not unique the Armenian-Turkish experience The Armenians in Turkey refer to Christmas as Surp Dzınunt (Holy Birth) and have fifty days of preparation called Hisnag before Christmas. The first, fourth and seventh weeks of Hisnag are periods of vegetarian fast for church members and every Saturday at sunset a new purple candle is lit with prayers and hymns. this may be relevant, but say how it differs in Armenia and in the diaspora and why it is different for us to know that, it may be the same for all Armenians!

New Year's Eve which falls within Hisnag is spent with families. Armenians go to church to give thanks for the year past and in the evening, family members and friends come together for the evening meal. Poor, lonely, orphaned people are not forgotten and are invited to dinner. Since it is a period of fast, sea-food and vegetables are served, with topik and dried nuts always present. On New Year's Eve, around midnight, all lights are turned off and the Lord's Prayer is said at midnight. After the prayer, all lights in the house are turned on, and families greet one another, gifts are given to children and anuşabur is served. On New Year's day, Armenians in Istanbul often burst a pomegranate, a symbol of plenty, in the shop entrances, or put a pomegranate on their desks. At least one ayazma is visited.

this may be relevant, but say how it differs in Armenia and in the diaspora and why it is different for us to know that, it may be the same for all Armenians!

On Christmas Eve, on 5th of January, seven purple candles are lit together and after attending church on sunset, families get together for the Christmas dinner which, like on New Year's Eve, is mostly sea-food based. On Christmas day, on 6th of January, churchgoers attend Christmas mass between 10:00 and 12:00. In the Kumkapi district of Istanbul, the Patriarch presides over a religious parade starting at 10:00 AM from the Patriarchal Headquarters to the Surp Asdvadzadzin Patriarchal Church. In the afternoon, an open-house celebration is held at the Patriarchate. On the second day of Christmas, on 7th of January, families visit graves of relatives and say prayers.[5]

this may be relevant, but say how it differs in Armenia and in the diaspora and why it is different for us to know that, it may be the same for all Armenians!

This article is not about ALL ARMENIANS but ethnic Armenians in the country now known as Turkey. Anything in this article should pertain to them and how they may be the same or different to others in the Armenian diaspora and others in Turkey. Get it right. Delete that section until you can find anything proving it adds to the article. You're just adding fluff. 68.175.83.141 19:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


Free smyrnan, you shouldn't be writing this article. A) you copied it from another source (good job, real innovative, for that reason alone we should delete it, did you get permission) B) you don't know what that section has to do with anything else in Armenian culture, for all you know all Armenians experience Christmas like that? Why did you think it was unique to your country? DO RESEARCH don't just add sections because they make you smile. 68.175.83.141 19:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh go check it out, it's sourced, you can verify whether or not it is a copy, or a use of source. BTW, this is the way wikipedia is supposed to work. I (or anyone else) add something. If you think you can improve it, you do so. If you think that this information is something that is well covered elsewhere, you provide the proof that it is so. Today's not my day for dealing with anonymous users who can only negate, so good day and good luck to you. --Free smyrnan 20:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
just because you have citations does it mean it is relevant nor does it mean that you were given the right to use that information as your own. THIS INFORMATION DOES NOT HAVE TO DO WITH THIS ARTICLE. get it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.175.83.141 (talk) 21:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Aremenians

They should immigrate to Armenia, instead of eating the wealth of Turkey. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.132.108.178 (talk) 14:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

For shame, what rubbish! They are not immigrants and their being part of our country is not open to any sort of debate. Turkey is their native land and always has been. --Free smyrnan 14:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armenian Churches in Turkey

On the http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Turkey it says, there were about 5000 Armenian churches and schools in Turkey in 1914 and currently there is about 50 churches I although the source is not reliable, couldn't find any reliable sources. ROOB323 21:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The following is a list of operational Armenian churches in Istanbul, Apostolic, Catholic and Protestant. Churches and Graveyards I also recently got Pamukciyan's Istanbul Yazilari, so if someone starts a church section, I can probably add some detail on a few. I have also found on google contact phone numbers and addresses for the churches, but would that detail be relevant or useful? For churches outside of Istanbul, I guess it would be possible to ask the Patriarchate. --Free smyrnan 21:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armenian minority a realistic and stark introduction

During the Ottoman Empire just like the Greeks, they used to be bankers and merchants with extensive international contacts. The Armenians support their own newspapers and schools. They are belong to the Armenian Apostolic faith and though they are Turkish citizens, they are solely identified as Armenians rather than Turks by the Turkish society and Turkish state. Discrimination by the Turkish state in all levels, verbal and sometimes physical attacks as well as Armenia's war with Turkic Azerbaijan, combined with the jingoistic support of Azerbaijan in the Turkish media during the Nagorno-Karabakh War, has raised apprehensions among the Armenian minority about their future status in Turkey. The assasination of the Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink has caused a deep trauma and fear among the Armenian minority. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Saguamundi (talk • contribs) 21:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

Denizz, either include the whole text from the source or non at all.

"The genocide, as we have seen, destroyed western Armenia and numerous other Armenian centers in Turkey. By the Second World War, Constantinople or Istanbul was the sole urban center with an Armenian presence. In 1945, an arbitrary property tax on the minorities impoverished many Greek and Armenian businessmen. Ten years later, mobs looted and burned Greek and Armenian businesses in Istanbul. At present there are some 75,000 Armenians in Turkey, the majority of whom live in Istanbul, where conditions, despite cultural pressures and occasional hostile acts, are not as unfavorable as one may imagine. Twenty schools, some three dozen churches, and a hospital maintain a strong Armenian identity. A number of Armenian newspapers, including the daily Marmara continue to publish, and Armenian organizations go about collecting donations and sponsoring cultural activities. The Armenian patriarch is also invited to official Turkish state ceremonies. Major problems include the lack of a seminary, Armenian institutions of higher education, and linguistic assimilation.

This is called selective quotation. VartanM 22:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I used that resource to give information about the current situation of Armenian minority in Turkey. We dont have to carry EVERY information in a source to Wikipedia. Besides, we must be careful about information from the Republic of Armenia, they are hardly an objective source about Armenian minority in Turkey. Yet, when they admit that the Armenian minority is doing well in Turkey, this becomes significant, since that is against their interests. Consider their citing the lack of an Armenian University in Turkey as a major problem. This is a 40 to 70.000 strong minority. How many cities of that population in the world have universities? Obviously they are biased, yet, when they say Armenian minority in Turkey is in good condition, that is worth citing. Armenians in Turkey are not in a bad condition, we need to find a resource about that, Republic of Armenia is an excellent one. Regards, Filanca 19:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I removed the "disputed" tag

I removed the "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed" tag from this entry. The tag seems to have been placed there by Executrex back in February 2007. He made no further contributions to the talk page after that date (i.e. after he placed the tag). According to Wikipedia policy, "the editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page". Given that Executrex has not done this, the tag has been unjustly placed on this entry and should be removed. Meowy 13:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armenian state as a source

With regard to Armenian embassy quote: I've introduced it as a reference to the favorable situation of Armenian minority in Turkey, which is, contrary to what many people believe, a first class citizenship. In that respect, I believe Armenian state is a very good reference (since claiming so is against their political interests). However, Armenian state is a very bad reference for the negative issues about Armenian minority in Turkey. Criticising Turkey is what we would normally expect from Armenia. Think about what they say: They cite lack of an Armenian University as a problem! How many Armenians live in Turkey today? 70.000? Most cities of that size don't have a university. This is a clear sight of their bias. I would like to hear what others think in this matter. Regards, Filanca (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

As you can see from my comment in Talk:Armenians_in_Turkey#Armenian_minority_a_realistic_and_stark_introduction, the source was misrepresented by selective quoting. I would much rather see the quote replaced by neutral wording that we all can agree on. VartanM (talk) 20:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)