From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Comments 1.1 Bot Request 1.2 Approved for AWB! 1.3 Thanks 1.4 Teşekkür 1.5 Turkey 1.6 Re: Revert 1.7 Reply 1.8 DYK 1.9 Thanks 1.10 Religion in Turkey 1.11 Menderes 1.12 Turkish Statistical Institute 1.13 French Law 1.14 Pan-Turkist POV

Comments

Bot Request

I can have have that task done fairly quickly. I just need the cats that need tagged and the template that your project uses. :) Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 05:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Approved for AWB!

Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. I have approved your request and you should now be able to use the AWB application. Be sure to check every edit before you save it, and don't forget to check out the AWB Guide. You can get any help you need over on the AWB talk page. Feel free to contact me with any questions, Alphachimp 02:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

:) - Francis Tyers · 21:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Teşekkür

Osmanlıca vikisine verdiğiniz destekten dolayı çok teşekkür ederim. Siberyaca wikide hakkında ise:

• Osmanlıca test vikisine her konuda yardımcı olan ve Eski Türçe vikininde ilk zamanlar yöneticisi olan Yaroslav Zolotaryov daha önce şu mesajı yollamıştı:

• • Bize bir oylamada yardım edebilir misiniz? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Siberian_Wikipedia Bu oylama Sıbırca hakkında. Eski Sıbır Türklerin Eski Slavlarla ilişkiler yeni bir dilin ortaya çıkması için sebep olmuş. Ruslar bu dilin kullanmasını yasak etmek istiyorlar, bu dilde yazmış Wikipedia'nı kapamak istiyorlar. Amma şu Wikipedia islam hakkında güzel bilgiler veriyor, güzel yazılar içine alıyor.

--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Çalışmalarınızda başarılar dilerim. İyi akşamlar --Tarih 21:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkey

No problem its added to my watch list now :) Nareklm 23:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy New year! Nareklm 09:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Revert

Baris, I will accept your revert on the title of the section, but not on its content. I realize that this isn't about the history of Turkey, but the earlier version of this section seemed to be more slanted towards the Turkish POV (that Armenian Genocide was a civil war and that there were deaths on both sides and that Armenia was actively at war with Azerbaijan during the Karabakh conflict). I was very even handed in my approach to writing this mentioning both the Armenian and Turkish positions. I also did not create the Pakistan section (I don't know who did), so you can remove it. -- Clevelander 23:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, why not place Russia in a section seperate from the South Caucasus? I realize that you think that the South Caucasus may not be as important to Turkey as Russia, but I believe that they are crucial enough to garner their own section. -- Clevelander 23:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok I will delete the Turkish version of events, they shouldn't be in there either. Nagorno-Karabakh could be mentioned I suppose. However it shouldn't be a whole list of events either.. I didn't write that section, so I don't know who did either.. Baristarim 00:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

No, both sides should be represented and the relations between both nations should be discussed as they are in my version. -- Clevelander 00:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I also began developing the Central Asian section. Hope this helps! Sincerely, Clevelander 00:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Why did you just send me the above message again? -- Clevelander 00:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I was copypasting, I didn't realize that you had put a message. Baristarim 00:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that the Genocide should be mentioned. That's the focal point of Armenian-Turkish relations. If we don't mention that, then what's the point of mentioning Turkey's relations with Armenia or the South Caucasus at all? -- Clevelander 00:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I made a comprised, less historical version. What do you think? -- Clevelander 00:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Excellent! See? Turks and Armenians can work together! :) -- Clevelander 00:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem! -- Clevelander 00:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Yes I am aware of what the tags are used for, and you shouldn't be removing a "POV check" tag when an editor has nominated an article to be checked for its neutrality, what you're doing is both disruptive and rude. --Mardavich 06:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

You don't know what the tag is used for I am afraid, and calling me disruptive and rude for pointing it out is extremely unfair. Did you read this Wikipedia:POV check? I don't think you have. The policy says "The POV check template, {POV-check}, may be added to an article which you feel may need to be edited to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Add the template at the top of the article, and then explain your reasons on the talk page of the article that needs checking (not the talk pages of the template or this article)."

Don't worry, I am extremely well aware of how Wikipedia works, and I couldn't see anything in the talk page. There needs to be a detailed explanation of the disagreements, otherwise such placement of template is what is disruptive. I hope that you will agree with this? That template as is was used for harrassment of the article instead of some legitimate encyclopedic behavior. Tags without explanations, or talk pages without discussions are grounds for the immediate removal of such tags. Please keep that in mind. Baristarim 06:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I have every right request an article to be checked for neutrality, you're in no position to remove my tag. --Mardavich 06:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

?? Of course you can nominate it, but you have to explain your reasons in a detailed way in the talk page. Read applicable Wiki policies, instead of calling me rude or disruptive. Cut down on the incivility. If the person making the nomination doesn't explain his reasons in the talk page, the tag will be taken down per Wiki policy as pointed out above, is that clear enough? Instead of apologizing and admitting that I actually knew the policy and you didn't, and as such, you falsely accused me of being disruptive and rude, when in fact it was people who were putting it in without any notes on the talk page were disruptive, you left an even nastier note on my talk page! Thanks. Baristarim 06:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Listen, I am afraid you are in violation of WP:AGF by claiming that the tag was used for "harassment" of the article. That's a bad faith assumption on your part, and you're acting very rudely too. I have explained the reason for the tag, go back and revert yourself immediately. --Mardavich 06:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 December 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article religion in Turkey, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 01:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

• Thanks for your "barnstar".
• Sensitive articles under my watch.

Regards. Must^TC 06:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Religion in Turkey

I added the article to my watchlist. I have an exam today and won't be around for most of the time, but I'll do my best. Atilim Gunes Baydin 12:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Menderes

I don't like Adnan Menderes but when I read the article about him, I thought that it isn't satisfactory so I decided to improve it. I divided the article into 6 sub-secions and I added two new images. If you know some interesting or extra data about Menderes, please share them so we can further improve the article. Saygılarımla, Deliogul 14:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

You can send messages to dilhan@ku.edu.tr. Deliogul 15:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Statistical Institute

Hi, I am aware that the name they are using is a bit awkward. But I believe that it's not up to us to discuss what the appropriate English title of the institute ought to be. If the institute calls itself the "Turkish Statistical Institute", we can only report that exactly as it is. Atilim Gunes Baydin 17:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

But, at the same time, I was expecting that they won't be consistent with the English name they are using, like the case with many government offices in Turkey. You see, here they use the better sounding name of State Institute of Statistics. But I think we should go with the usage in their main publication, the statistics yearbook (here is the pdf, both in English and Turkish) which uses "Turkish Statistical Institute". I don't think the English site is very comprehensive though. Regards, Atilim Gunes Baydin 17:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

As a note, the reason I started looking there was to find some figures on the religion of Turkish citizens, to help you provide some reference for the Religion in Turkey article. Honestly, it's ridiculous that there are statistics of the five most common names in Turkey, according to regions, gender, etc. (here, and the page design is quite funny, check this out!), but none to be found on crucial issues like the religion and languages spoken. Atilim Gunes Baydin 18:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

French Law

Hi there

I have begun to act on cutting out the fat in the France article whilst adding in necessary sections (if one follows other country FA's). I noted on your user page that you are a lawyer and live in France, I therefore presume that you know something about French law. As the article French Law is rather poor, I was wondering if you could write a short summary on this topic in the France#Law subsection. Thanks. --Bob 18:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Pan-Turkist POV

The Germanic Europe article is quite something different than the POV of List of Turkic states. The Germanic Europe article is only naming the Germanic-speaking countries of Europe, and does not lay claims on countless historical governments.

It ios NOT a "Germanic World" article trying to push for nationalistic POV, like "USA, Australia, Europeans are all Germanics and united in their Germanic identity".

The List of Turkic states is a total POV article.

Why don't you just create an article "List of Turkic countries" and only sum up the present Turkic states, WITHOUT the usual Pan-Turkist POV about "all civilization comes from Turks" BS?! It would also be good to mention the large numbers of Non-Turkic minorities in those countries, because unlike European nations, Asian states are a conglomeration of different ethnicities (just for the case that you do not know it: this multi-ethnic character is also the reason why the USA cannot be considered a "Germanic nation"!)

Tājik 20:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I will just repeat what I said before.. "These are your words: there are no articles called List of Germanic states (containing Germany, USA, UK, etc) or a List of Slavic states (containing Russia, Bulgaria, etc) either ... " I am not going to take seriously the arguments of someone who was insulting others by calling them pan-turkist on the premise that there were no "list of slavic states (containing Russia, Bulgaria) etc." The utter proval of the falsity of your god-like affirmations stops me from lending any type of credibility to any of your arguments any more, nor can I assume good faith. There is a list of states that group Bulgaria and Russia, and your god-like affirmations have been proven to be utterly false. You might at least apologize for your propagation of un-truths, it is called disruption. Europe is also a mix of ethnicities, what r u talking about? Basques, Slavs, Nordmen, Latins, Hellenes, Celts etc. The level of non-academic character of your arguments is so low that do not even try to take others to take your arguments seriously. Slavic Europe clearly mentions "Austria-Hungary", "Imperial Russia", "Mongol invasion", "Ottoman invasion", "Holy Roman Empire".. Do not ever expect me to take you seriously. The good faith assumption, and so-called knowledgability of the subject matter is out of the window, and that utterly. That article is not pushing for all of them to be "united in their Turkic identity". I can assume the same thing about Iranian peoples, Arab world, Slavic Europe etc in that case. How about looking at the issue with greater good faith? Do not reply to me unless you are ready to accept that you were "utterly wrong" when you affirmed "there are no articles that group Russia/Bulgaria" etc. End of story. Baristarim 20:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

It was not me who nominated the articles for deletion, but certainly do support its deletion. There may not be a "Turkic conspiracy", but there certainly is a very ill-minded Turkish ultra-nationalism that has infiltrated many Wikipedias, most of all the German and English Wikipedias ... the Turkish Wikipedia is a joke and does not have any reliability.

What you call a "history section" is in reality pseudo-history - it's the manifestation of odd Pan-Turkist theories that should have no place in a serious encyclopaedia.

I have nothing against a List of Turkic states article that is NEUTRAL and is limitted to modern Turkic states. But the current article is POV. It wants to present historical kingdoms and dynasties as "Turkic" although these peoples were either not Turks, or they did not have any Turkic identity. There is already an article Turkic peoples (which also containst certain POV sections), there is no need to create another article.

You can say whatever you want, but you cannot convince me, because POV stays POV.

After more than a year of constant fights with nationalistic Turkish Wikipedians and their POV, I do not expect any good faith from them ... there are only a very few neutral and open-minded Turkish Wikipedians who are not biased with the usual Pan-Turkist propaganda of the post-Atatürk era.

Tājik 20:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Pfff... Baristarim 20:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

a) do not abuse the 1RR ...

b) do not put too much information into the short list: it's totally enough to give short infos (example: origianlly Turkic descent; Turkic identity is disputed

Invalid language.

You need to specify a language like this: <source lang="html">...</source>

Supported languages for syntax highlighting:

actionscript, ada, apache, applescript, asm, asp, autoit, bash, blitzbasic, bnf, c, c_mac, caddcl, cadlisp, cfdg, cfm, cpp, cpp-qt, csharp, css, d, delphi, diff, div, dos, eiffel, fortran, freebasic, gml, groovy, html4strict, idl, ini, inno, io, java, java5, javascript, latex, lisp, lua, matlab, mirc, mpasm, mysql, nsis, objc, ocaml, ocaml-brief, oobas, oracle8, pascal, perl, php, php-brief, plsql, python, qbasic, rails, reg, robots, ruby, sas, scheme, sdlbasic, smalltalk, smarty, sql, tcl, text, thinbasic, tsql, vb, vbnet, vhdl, visualfoxpro, winbatch, xml, xpp, z80