Talk:Kaymaklı Monastery

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kaymaklı Monastery article.
Article policies
Kaymaklı Monastery was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: September 24, 2007
Armenia Portal
Kaymaklı Monastery 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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments
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!
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Kaymaklı Monastery:

No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category
Architecture Portal
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] Comments

[edit] Kaymaklı Dab

Kaymaklı monastery, is in Trabzon. There is no relation with other Kaymaklı's like as Kaymaklı underground city/cappadocia. My last version reflect these infos. For example no need to have link to Derinkuyu U.G.city/cappadocia in See also section. etc. Also I put some info about monastery; architecture,fresques, dates etc.To delete them and to fork here a baseles allegation is not suitable. Regards.Must.T C 09:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Yes, but you use poor english and delete other forms of information about the article. Can you cite sources for your writing? In honor of Jesus by John IV? Burned by Fire in 1918. Where is this coming from? Hetoum 15:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Even the protection template is bigger than the main text. I think 11 see also's are too much here, please expand quite a lot or remove them. Also, I don't understand why all those underground cities are there. There should be at least an explanation. At least mention that there is an underground city there, if correct. If you are referring to the external link on the main age, I don't think they are related except having the same word 'Kaymaklı' in their names. The distance between Trabzon (where the monastery is) and Göreme (where the underground cities are) is like 290 miles (long live Google Earth). So Hetoum, what you are doing might be vandalism. Anyway we, all of us, should not assume bad faith. Correct the sentence, if it has poor English, put a fact tag if it is not obvious. denizTC 22:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Since starting this article, I have not touched it much if you notice - so I havent vandalized anything - I did not add all dubious links and etc ... I kinda observed to see what is best. Since Makalps removal I do not know what faith to accept. But seriously, lets get to business. I agree on removal of links to underground cities and externel link to Cappadocia. AG reference should stay, and I am currently looking for scientific publications and images relating to the article so at to try to expand this. Unfortunately of thousands of examples of Armenian monuments in Turkey numerous are destroyed, and publications do not cover everyhting. Hetoum 00:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You called a (possibly) legitimate edit a vandalism, I was referring to that. Lets refrain from using the word, let it be our WTA on talk pages :) If you reply, I may not reply (swiftly) because of my busy sechedule atm. back to work. denizTC 22:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Blanking out a reference to AG, adding unreferenced material I dont take to be a positive edit. Partly I am to blame too: Created a stub and left it as a bastard child. Ive been busy too unfortunatrly. Will try to get some pics and reliable info soon, hopefully not late after the block expires.Hetoum 04:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] expanded

added a lot on this article. Hetoum I 02:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Continued vandalism

Makalp has continued vandalous edits I reverted them and made some minor improvements. I suggest he talk before editing. Hetoum I 19:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

We need a citation to support "it was abandoned during the Armenian Genocide." Tom Harrison Talk 20:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That is pretty generally known. We know for a fact that that this monastery operated until 1915.

In 1915 the Armenian/Pontic Greek Genocide commenced. Trebizond was among areas affected. Here is newspaper clipping from period from a notable paper Image:Pontiangreeks.jpg showing abandonment. This is a well known fact.Hetoum I 20:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

If you want to mention the Armenian genocide, we need a citation connecting the monastery with the Armenian genocide. Tom Harrison Talk 21:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think its clear the monks did not take an accidental vacation in 1915 to never return. Connection is more than clear.Hetoum I 21:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC) Also, look at Akhtamar's Surp Khach Monastery page, we dont need to prove he same thing for every monastery or church, Im getting carpel tunner as it is ... Hetoum I 21:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Akdamar is in Lake Van, this is in Trabzon, I am not even sure that Armenians there were subject to relocation/deportation. Also this is Armenian church, not a Greek one, so what is the relevance to what you call Pontic Greek Genocide which supposedly happened years later? Please don't do such things. Also, we need incline citations, are all these info from Sinclair? DenizTC 22:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


As I said before, its pretty generally known what happened to Armenians AND Greeks in the region. If you are not sure on the conditions of massacre and deportation on the Armenians and Greeks of Pontos, there is plenty of books dealing with it. Here is reference as to why it was abandoned during the Armenian Genocide:


New York Times headlines which observes that the entire Christian population of Trabzon was "wiped out". More relevant headlines
New York Times headlines which observes that the entire Christian population of Trabzon was "wiped out". More relevant headlines[1]


It is also important in the article to mention how the Greek monasteries as Kizlar and Sumela suffered the same fate in the course of the Pontic Greek genocide. There is really no need to elaborate on this. Hetoum I 23:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the link and citation. I think we would have a better article if we could add more, and more specific, references supporting how and why the monastery was abandoned. Tom Harrison Talk 12:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

the problem is that both you and makalp unfairly attack me. I am the one who wrote the article and you are the ones deleting my information asking citations and not even looking to check first. READ the article and citation before attacking me.

1. Makalp keeps adding his article removing reference to unknown origins of the name Kaymakli. He also removes Armenian name of monastery, all of which are cited. He claims it was founded by the Trabesondine emperor John IV. This is absurd, because he was an Orthodox emperor, and Armenians are apostolic. There is an inscription above one of the chapels naming Hoja Stepanos as a founder.

2. Why does he keep adding paragraph about structures on site in intro, this is in the body. He also uses incorrect language.

3. U ask for Khachkar citation. It is in Dick Osseman pictures, LOOK AT WALL WITH CROSS STONES ON IT!

So please at least read the article unfairly destroying it and attacking me. Makalp should get citations for his additions that clearly DO NOT MAKE SENSE.Hetoum I 17:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I have put up a reasonable compromise version that I think combines elements important to everyone. Let me know what you think. Tom Harrison Talk 17:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

No, not really. this is not fair compromise. You ignored my above commentary and added back vandalous edits that had added dubious information that is not only unsourced, but also false. If you claim to be fair, it would at least help to read my comment above. Hetoum I 17:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Other than reverting to the version you like best, what would you like to change? Tom Harrison Talk 17:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

ok, how about lets start in the intro. Makalp removed my intro with Armenian name of the church and interwiki link to the armenian apostolic church. Lets start there. Hetoum I 17:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense to me. What else? Tom Harrison Talk 17:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

That was terribly edited, my article continues to get destroyed. Make it this:

Kaymaklı Monastery (Armenian: Ամենափրկիչ Վանք; Monastery of All Saviours, Turkish: Kaymaklı Manastırı; Kaymakli Monastery) is a ruined Armenian monastery on the outskirts of modern Trabzon, Turkey.

It is not known as Amenapigic ermeni kilisesi ... It is kaymakli in turkishHetoum I 17:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

It is not your article. I think it would be best to leave it as it is for a while and see what others think. I will give appropriate consideration to your opinion of my writing. Tom Harrison Talk 18:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Fine, not my article, but you still continue to unfairly bash me and add in poorly written content. Amenapigic (which is misspelt) Ermeni Kilisesi means All Saviours Armenian Church in Turkish. This is incorrect, not name of monastery! Meanwhile googling Kaymakli gives us correct result. You are the administrator, look at names of other articles. This version is fine I suggest. Hetoum I 18:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think you are right. It looks like Amenapıgiç Ermeni Kilisesi means something like Savior of All Armenian Church. I cannot say this name was never somehow associated with the monastery, but we would need a citation, if only to see where that name comes from. Tom Harrison Talk 00:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I googled "Amenapıgiç Ermeni Kilisesi" which did not bring any result. However, there was wrong spelling in saying "Amenapırgiç" - Makalp missed the r. So, I google with correct spelling "Amenapırgiç Ermeni Kilisesi" which gave several links. All seem to be based on the Turkish Wikipedia version calling it "Amenapırgiç Ermeni Kilisesi" which doesnt cite sources. This is my reason for deletion of this name, as it seems an incorrect name was entered into Turkish wikipedia in the first place. Hetoum I 02:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photos, article

Dear Hetoum I,

  • Please stop to add your political (unsourced) Pov's to the article. You dont have any info about Turkey( It is not a shame). Look at to your old edits; You created this article with one sentence with the aim of to add "Genocide" one more article. later-Old versions also was a garbage; Trabzon&Cappadocia together; Kaymaklı underground city and this monastery in one article etc. I created a dab page and made underground city and monastery in seperate articles; related infos and links to related pages etc. Please continue to contribute in positive way.
  • I want to know the source URL of Image:Kaymakli.jpg. You are uploader.Your stated; "Description: pre-1915 postcard", "Source: postcard", "Date: pre-1915", "Author:--", "Permission: none, no copyright" and your tag; "PD US". Ok.
  • Consider that to give false Copyright info is subject to punishment.

Regards.Must.T C 20:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photos, removal again, personal attack

Before I begin item by item discussion of article, I would like to note:

Those are postcards over 80 years old as I said on your talk page, so I think it is ok. Like Sumela, I put same copyrights.

Second, I tried to show understanding and agreed to go to talk page to discuss changes. You listened to me Tom, and we began discussion on how to modify. User Makalp continued his edits with removing all images and reference to murder of Armenian population without talking about it or reaching consensus on talk page.

He also made personal attack claiming I am ignorant to Turkey, threatened me with reprisal for my scans of postcards and accused me of being POV. I want to say keep this in mind.

He also still does not cite his sources where he got his information or WHY he is removing what he is removing. I kindly asked this, but my pleas have fallen on deaf ears from Makalp. I cite my sources from book and links and try to work and improve, contributing to this Wikipedia article, but I feel opposition. Hetoum I 21:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Hetoum, be cool please.
Consensus? Ok. Where is consensus in your rv&edits.You didnt look any consensus till to now.After now, lets see.
Dont make upside-down the events; You made personal attacks (till to now no excuse) not me. Where?when? I am ready to forget all.
What you are saying with images. Are you scan yourself? from where? From original phptps or fron any other web.Please supply URL. I wait without any prejudice, with good faith.
Till to now, I never deleted any info in this article except "Genocide" related allegations.You didnt bring any source that this monastery abondoned during alleged Genocide. What are the events? What was the (Armenian)population in Kaymaklı village before and after 1915, what happens to that people?Bring reliable sources.(Armenipedia can not be acceptible).

Happy editing.Regards.Must.T C 21:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


I think personal attack is here clear, and so is an attempt to diffuse this attack by user Makalp. I demand apology for rude remark. I think to call Genocide an allegation is clear attempt to provoke user Hetoum, attack on me continued. It is established through dozens of archives on Wikipidia talk under Armenian Genocide article, and general scholarly consensus of WHY it is genocide. Why does user makalp only delete Armenian Genocide internal link on small articles but doesn't PROVE it on Armenian Genocide talk when it is known to be true. I think this action of removal is clear vandalism. And yes, those are scans from original postcards. Is it illegal to own antique postcard? Is it illegal for Armenian church to be in Turkey? I think I have right as a human being. Hetoum I 22:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My edits suggestions

[edit] Intro

Kaymaklı Monastery (Armenian: Ամենափրկիչ Վանք; Monastery of All Saviours, Turkish: Kaymaklı Manastırı; Kaymakli Monastery) is a ruined Armenian monastery on the outskirts of modern Trabzon, Turkey. Originally founded in the 15th century, it operated until the Armenian Genocide of 1915, when the Christian population of Trebizond was wiped out.

This is the version I originally support for intro paragraph. I will try to justify why I support this over the present version:

It gives correct Turkish and Armenian name for monastery. I googled for right names Kaymakli Manastiri, and Amenapigic as Makalp said is a name. I find Kaymakli, but no google hit on Amenapigic. It is also not translated grammatically correct to name monastery a church.

Next, current version says it is located on Kaymakli village farm, 3 km south of Trabzon. Is Kaymakli a village? Maybe it is mixed with Kaymakli village for Cappadocia underground city? Is it cited by Makalp? According to respectable website Virtualani:

The Armenian monastery of All Saviours at Kaymakli stands on the top of a hill to the south of Trabzon.

If Makalp can provide reference for proof of a village named Kaymakli and it is 3 km from Trabzon, I am happy do add, I will not make attempt to suppress information, I want article to be better. If he does, we should add this in body, under section of location, name, and founding section. I think it is best to keep intro section short and simple, and to elaborate in main body with specifics.

I also do not want to say founded in 1424 but 15th century, because Virtualani page says many conflicts on attributing exact date. General scholarly consensus for 15th century. We know only one chapel was built in 1424. Does this mean all the chapels were built in 1424?

Next, I want to say remove this information from intro paragraph by Makalp:

"The monastery originally included a church with one pentagonal abscissa in the center, a bell tower at the northwestcorner, and a small chapel near the southeast corner. Frescoes in the church (dating from the 18th century) can be seen today. It was repaired many times in its history. Many of the buildings were destroyed in a fire around 1918."

Did Makalp make good faith to look in rest of article before adding this? Was there a detailed description of all structures on body of article? Yes there was. Intro is very brief, main part talks about structures. Did user Hetoum make good faith to research books and credible websites on buildings in compound? yes he did.

Next, I want to say, I was wrong, and we should keep this part from Toms version in beginning paragraph:

The monastery operated until 1915, when the Christian population of Trebizond was wiped out.

Tells until when operated, and under what conditions monastery ceased to function. Brief, more specific will be in modern times section.

We might say something like, "A religious community was present at the site since at least the fifteenth century, and possibly as early as the eleventh. The oldest surviving structure, a chapel, was completed in the 1420s," or, 'completed early in the fifteenth century.' Tom Harrison Talk 00:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Body

Next, I want to say to put back deletion by Makalp of following sentence in first body paragraph: The origins of the Turkish name Kaymaklı remain unclear. Kaymaklı means 'containing kaymak' in Turkish.

Why is Makalp removing information talking about Turkish name? Did user Deniz agree and modify to leave information about origins in? Yes. Virtualani link talks about unknown origin. Don't we need to know WHAT turkish name means? WHAT Armenian name means?

Further, I want to ask to remove citation notice for this: The chapel has reused khachkars in its walls.

Did user Makalp take good faith and to check Virtualani link citing use of Khachkars. Did he take good faith to look at wonderful images by Dick Osseman showing Khachkars in the walls:

See for proof: http://www.pbase.com/dosseman/image/33098323 http://www.pbase.com/dosseman/image/33098324

No he did not.

For modern times paragraph,

I accept Tom's version here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kaymakl%C4%B1_Monastery&oldid=131082570

I am sorry I was rash earlier, your version seems fine. I really apologize for taking bad faith.

User makalps says to say it was abandoned during Armenian genocide and similiar fate was suffered by Pontic Greeks is POV political propaganda. Is telling HOW this monastery ceased to function propaganda? Was this monastery the ONLY Christian organization to get closed or destroyed in same period? No it was not. Did monastery personnel go on accident vacation in 1915? No they did not.

Thanks, awaiting your reaction Tom. Hetoum I 22:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I had not understood the presence of a village was disputed. I will look on the best map I can find when I get a chance, but we should not say there is a village unless we know there is.
As far as names and languages go, I will have to defer to others more knowledgeable. I do think we should favor including any relevant names and word origins, regardless of language.
The sources seem to me adequate to support saying the monastery was abandoned sometime after 1914 when the area was depopulated during the genocides. It makes sense to mention the other monasteries also in this context. It would improve the article to have additional citations to a major newspaper or history book, and I will try to get some of these if I can.
Tom Harrison Talk 00:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, before we move on, can we add back in what is agreed between us? Hetoum I 02:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I would like to give Makalp a chance to say what he thinks. Waiting until later today should not do any harm. Tom Harrison Talk 12:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Tom, thanks for your contributions.
your last version seems neutral for me.
For future; wikipedia is not a battleground for political POV's.No any fork here like as Genocide cannot be acceptible without reliably evidences; about old population of that area, that population massacred, monastery fired during these events(if so) etc.
I still assume good faith and wait sources for photos (see section above), if; User:Hetoum I (also named as User:Hetoum please check why username changed) would not supply any info, I would change my idea about Good Faith, and I would take some further actions.
I required also from User:Hetoum I to change Tone, to stop insults and an Excuse. Is there a wiki rule that; a user have different tones against admins and normal users?
I hope we will end this headached conversation/transaction soon. We lost much time here. Regards.Must.T C 13:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Makalp, I am still waiting for apology for personal attacks and continued hate speech taunting regarding Armenian Genocide.

Tom, I still see no response from Makalp over item by item discussion of article content. Should we give him more time and attempt to discuss details, as me and you have, or can we move ahead with edits me and you OK'ed. SincerelyHetoum I 19:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

From his comment above, it sounds like we are basically in agreement. It seems reasonable to make the changes we discussed and see how they are received. I am on my way out, so excuse me if I do not reply for a while. Tom Harrison Talk 19:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, well wait for changes to be made by you. Hetoum I 20:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I have left to you anything relating to languages and names, because I don't really feel competent to do it myself. Should the khakchars be mentioned with the frescoes, or is mentioning them meant to suggest that older structures were reused in the newer? Tom Harrison Talk 00:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, first in regards to names, please re-add following sentence in section on name, location heading:

The origins of the Turkish name Kaymaklı remain unclear. Kaymaklı means 'containing kaymak' in Turkish. Hetoum I 00:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please feel free to go ahead and add it. I did not intend my earlier (maybe too heated) remarks to inhibit anyone else from editing, and I would be sorry of that were the result. Tom Harrison Talk 01:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, made edits. Are they Ok?Hetoum I 01:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Tom Harrison Talk 01:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Next, I googled "Amenapıgiç Ermeni Kilisesi" which did not bring any result. However, there was wrong spelling in saying "Amenapırgiç" - Makalp missed the r. So, I google with correct spelling "Amenapırgiç Ermeni Kilisesi" which gave several links. All seem to be based on the Turkish Wikipedia version calling it "Amenapırgiç Ermeni Kilisesi" which doesnt cite sources. This is my reason for deletion of this name, as it seems an incorrect name was entered into Turkish wikipedia in the first place. If you look at the Trabzon province website link you gave, it lists tourist sites - monasteries, including Kaymakli.[1] For other monasteries it gives alternate names in parenthasis. This is an incorrect name for this monastery, and promotes wrong and gramatically incorrect name. Hetoum I 02:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name

  • Kaymaklı Monastery means; monastery in/at/of Kaymaklı, like as; "İzmir Körfezi" (gulf of İzmir).Note;this is a compounded name, and compounded names are used as it is,(as "Kaymaklı Monastery" in this case) can not be seperated.Otherwise they give no sense.
  • Kaymaklı (which is the name of village/quarter now) ;is a unic name whic is produced from "Kaymak". Kaymak+lı means; with/include Kaymak. This village possibly known with its Kaymak production and so named with it. Note: Kaymak of Trabzon (Trabzon Kaymağı) is well known/popular product in Turkey also currently.
  • In the light of these two above explanations; there is no relation between Monastery and Kaymak. Nothing is unclear.Must.T C 11:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

This makes sense I suppose, but I would still like it cited, so citation tag should stay. In the meantime, no one has answered to Amenapirgic Ermeni Kilisesi name, its verifiability or origins. So, I am going to remove it.Hetoum I 19:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sorry

and sorry once more for being rash earlier this is not me and hope you can accept apology.Hetoum I 22:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course, I understand; no problem at all. Tom Harrison Talk 00:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armenian Genocide and wiping out of clergy in Trebizond reference

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/br-12-26-16-text.html

http://armenia-survival.50megs.com/Survival_Ch_7.htm

http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/1915/bryce/a10.htm#VIII

Notice this paragraph from one of the links:

I will spare you the recital of other outrages which have occurred sporadically all over the country, under the cloak of searches for arms and for revolutionary agents. Not a single house has been left unsearched, not even the episcopal residences, the churches or the schools. Hundreds of women, girls, and even quite young children are groaning in prison. Churches and convents have been pillaged, desecrated and destroyed. Even the Bishops are not spared. Mgr. Barkev Danielian (Bishop of Broussa), Mgr. Kevork Tourian (Bishop of Trebizond), Mgr. Khosrov Behrikian (Bishop of Kaisaria), Mgr. Vaghinadj Torikian (Bishop of Shabin Kara-Hissar), and Mgr. Kevork Nalbandian (Bishop of Tchar-Sandjak) have been arrested and handed over to the courts martial. Father Muggerditch, locum-tenens of the Bishop of Diyarbekir, has died of blows received in prison. We have no news of the other bishops, but I imagine that the greater part of them are in prison.


Hetoum I 22:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hetoum, Tom, and Mustafa, please see this link, a Turkish MP boasts about his 'services', and 'Kaymaklı köyü' (Kaymakli village) is listed there, sorry it is Turkish. I suggest changing the first section to this (note the title change as well):

[edit] Location and founding

The monastery is located on top of Boztepe hill on a steep slope on a farm near Kaymaklı 3 kilometers southeast of Trabzon,[2] nearby the village Kaymaklı (Kaymaklı means 'containing kaymak' in Turkish). The site overlooks the Değirmendere Valley from Boztepe neighbourhood.[3] The exact dates of the monastery's foundation and origin remain unclear. A religious community was present at the site from at least the fifteenth century, and possibly as early as the eleventh. The oldest dated structure, a chapel, was completed in 1424. It was named Ամենափրկիչ Վանք (Amenaprkich Vank) in Armenian, which is translated to Monastery of All Saviours.

I won't be able to edit often, please make this edit if there are no objections. I think we should not make name connections for now.

Mustafa and Hetoum, please do assume good faith. Hetoum let me tell you that I personally did not like you doubting the existence of the village, of course you are entitled to question such things, but imo we should have some trust in the editors. Mustafa, from your edits here and everywhere else, I got the impression that you have stayed in Trabzon for many years. Please do not add OR if you are doing that. For instance, the name 'Amenapırgiç Ermeni Kilisesi' is OR now, but I must admit that it is plausible, given that the transliteration of the Armenian name is 'Amenaprkich Vank'. 'Ermeni kilisesi' means 'Armenian church', and Turkish does not allow a sequence of 3 consonants in a syllable, so adding 'ı' we get two syllables there, and solve this. Also the pronunciation by the Western Armenians of the Armenian letter transliterated as k might be similar to pronunciation of the g in Turkish or in Turkish dialect there. 'ç' is pronounced like English 'ch'. DenizTC 22:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Now i found a good source for the other name. See this. Sorry Turkish again. I am copying a few paragraphs:

Amenapırgiç Manastırı, surla çevrili hücreleri ve galerisi ile, şehirden bir saat uzak doğu tarafta bir tepenin üzerinde metin bir binadır. Manastır kilisesi, narhex ile beraber üç şapelden ibarettir. Bunlardan Asduadzadzin adım taşıyan, batı tarafta dörtköşe güzel bir yapıdır. Surp Ohannes adım taşıyan ikincisi, bahçesi ile beraber doğu taraftadır. Surp Yerortutyun (Ekanim-i Selase) adlı uçunu şapel de batı tarafta çankulesinin üzerindeki kitabede, onun Koca Bağdasar, alttaki hücrenin de keşiş Asduadzadur tarafından tamir edildiği yazılıdır.
Manastırı, şarktan gelmiş olduğu için Şemsedli lakabım taşıyan Koca Stepan yaptırmıştır. Bu ad, fermanlarda "Trabzon ve tevabi ermenyan manastır Şemsedlisi" olarak yazılıdır. Manastırın ilk fermanı Sultan Beyazıd II tarafından verilmiştir. Sultan Selim, adet olduğu üzere, şehzadeliği zamanında Trabzon'da bulunduğu sırada Şemsedin'in oğlunun ricası üzerine, manastırın yıkılmış kısımlanmn tamirine izin verilmesini babasına yazmıştır.
Manastır kilisesinin kapışı üzerinde mevcut kitabede, kilise ve manastırın imparator Aleksios zamanında 1424 sene-sinde Koca Stepanos tarafından yapılmış olduğu yazılıdır. Kutsal telakki edilen ve Lusağpür (Nurlu Pınar) denilen çeşmenin yanında vaktiyle ziyaretçilere mahsus bir ev bulunduğu ve yapılan muhtelif tamirleri, manastırın hatıra defterinde 1689 tarihli olarak kayıtlıdır. Manastır topraklannın bir vakit şehrin uçunda bulunan Aya Filippos'a kadar uzanmış olduğu fermanlarda gösterilmektedir.
Manastırdan aşağı, şehir tarafında orada bulunan kilisenin adı ile Aya Marn, yani Aziz Mamas denilen bir ermeni mahallesi vardı. Kalıntıları tepe üzerinde görülen aynı kilisenin altından manastır kilisesinin mihrabının altına kadar uzanan yeraltı geçidinin bulunduğu rivayet edilir. Manastırın hatıra defterinde kayıtlı rahibelerin adları ve verdikleri paranın nevinden, Trabzon ermenilerini Ani şehrinde başka İran'dan da hicret etmiş adamlar oldukları anlaşılmaktadır.

It has some good information written by a P.Minas BIJIŞKYAN. I hope someone will translate soon, if nobody does I might try and translate later. Particularly it mentions that the church was established under the ferman of Sultan Beyazid II, and the official name is "Trabzon ve tevabi ermenyan manastır Şemsedlisi", which does not make much sense in modern Turkish, it might be transliteration of Ottoman Turkish or something else (the text in general has rather poor Turkish). Şemsedli there supposedly refers to 'Koca Stepan' (Saint Stepanos?) who built it (-si is a suffix). DenizTC 23:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am ok with the village now and I will remove need for citation. However, this source is questionable. Hoja Stepanos Shemsedli is the name given as the founder of the small chapel. During this time Trebizond was still free from the Ottoman's under Trapezuntine sovereignty. So the fact that an Ottoman sultan issues a decree to found a monastery is weird in the least. I have never heard of an ottoman sultan issuing an edict to found a monastery. In general what is reliability of this source? virtualani is cited and the webmaster is Steve Sims, a well known expert on Armenian architecture. This appears to be written in poor English and lists odd things to say the least.Hetoum I 03:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I've been to Kaymakli monastery, and there is no village on or near to the site. The land around the monastery is a maze of little lanes running between fields of hazelnut groves. That a nearby village has taken to calling itself Kaymakli doesn't mean that it has any connection to the actual monastery site. Meowy 20:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My most recent edits - Nothing POV

Hello,

I reinstated the reference to the Armenian Genocide because it tells how the monastery came to its fate in 1915. There is a term used to describe the events of 1915 - Armenian Genocide.

Other monastery pages do the same thing. See Akhtamar. Also note the term used as Dissolution of the Monasteries to describe the closure of monasteries in England. For example, the page on Fountains Abbey does this, describing the term that resulted in the closure of the monasteries.

What makes this page SO different?

User Makalp maintains this is a POV fork. Can he explain why this is POV? I cited sources and described conditions under which monastery ceased function. How does this meet POV criteria? Can he EXPLAIN?

This user has a history of maaking such disruptive edits removing references on diverse pages without reaching a consrensus. See his most recent efforts on the Pontic Greek Genocide page history and talk page. An inactive participant who simply removed info.

I also included a reference to Pontic Genocide(moved it under see also because it was clumsy) and Population exchange at the bottom referring to what happened to other monasteries and Christians in the region. It is additional info and not "POV."

Hetoum I 23:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources versus political agenda

No any political agenda is acceptible.Needed Reliable sources.

  • "Monastery operated till to 1915"..Source??
  • People deported from X, not acceptable, baseless. Sources needed for people of Kaymaklı was massacred!.Bring sources.

Must.T C 13:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Makalp, the problem remains that you once more removed cited information without reaching consensus as you do on most pages. If you look above, your questions were already answered and you are simply wasting time trying to remove this information.

A. You say no political agenda. But you fail to explain how naming the event under which this event happened constitutes a political agenda. Is use of the term Dissolution of Monasteries a Catholic or Protestant agenda?

B. The sources I have given are quite reliable, and dont explain yourself, just label anything genocide related as "unreliable."

C. The source is virtualani for 1915, which I may add is quite reliable and most respected resource on the web dealing with Armenian monuments in modern day Turkey, or what is left of them.

D. You again begin to attempt to provoke me with hate speech denying Armenian genocide, we were over this. If you are so right that no genocide happens try to revise the Armenian genocide page, why have you not done this? EXACTLY.

E. Connection is quite clear, sourced and cited, we do not need to go in circles.

Hetoum I 19:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Ummm ... if you had said that you were going to use it for this place I would have been more specific about that info I gave on VirtualAni. The monastery operated normally until 1915. But at some time later Armenian monks returned, and there were monks there until the 1920s (probably until the population exchange in 1923). Meowy 20:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA

I made some changes, please check that OCLC for Soviet Armenian Ency. is correct [2]. Also, some (minor ?) info is lost when I introduced cite tags on "Further Readings" section (whose title we might need to change). I cannot access 'the map of Trabzon' DenizTC 21:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all the additions! Can you translate anything useful from that Bjiskian Turkish article?Hetoum I 04:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not good with translations, but I'll try to help soon, I am going to sleep now, it is 3:30 here. Let me first tell you that there is a book by Minas Bzhshkean translated into Turkish by Hrand D Andreasyan, OCLC 15065949 , I don't know whether the text is from that book. 16 books (13 of them in Armenian) by Bzhshkean are listed on worldcat site: [3]. DenizTC 07:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I am not sure. In the Soviet Armenian Encyclopedia article, they gave a book name under biblio by a Bzhshkean, but I currently do not have access to it. Titles sound similar, and might be the same work.Hetoum I 01:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I may be able to take a look at the SAE this weekend, if so, I will add about the book.Hetoum I 04:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, there is a reference to a Minas Bzhshkyan work in SAE/ It is called "History of Pontos ..." Published in Venice in 1819. Also, the authors of the SAE Trapizon article are G. Avagyan and A. Melkonyan, can u insert it into the Bib properly? Thanks!Hetoum I 03:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

tried a few searches on WorldCat and Google, could not find it. Can you find its ISBN, ISSN, or OCLC? DenizTC 11:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Found it: http://worldcat.org/oclc/42517266&referer=brief_results Hetoum I 19:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 24, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: The article needs to be reviewed for basic adherence to the Manual of Style, and sometimes suffers from a time bias. It also does a poor job of stating the obvious, and does not unequivocally assert the importance of the subject, historically and architecturally.
2. Factually accurate?: The article suffers from a common problem, which is that though it has a good amount of reference material, it lacks comprehensive inline citations. A citation to the end of each paragraph is the bare minimum, and inline cites for all facts likely to be challenged is recommended.
3. Broad in coverage?: Several sections need significant expansion. The lead is far too short, and does not provide a comprehensive overview. The article does a decent job of providing a basic timeline and run-down of the structure, but fails to adequately discuss the artistic, architectural and religious attributes of the monastery with clear historical context.
4. Neutral point of view?: Seems to be neutral.
5. Article stability? No recent or on-going edit wars.
6. Images?: Images are present and accounted for, but a few minor issues. First, it would be very desirable to have images that are truly free in license and do not require in caption attribution. Second, placement needs some work. Sandwiching text between images as is done in the Buildings section is discouraged by WP:MOS#Images.

As the changes necessary to bring this article to GA status would take in excess of the maximum seven days, I did not provide the customary hold period.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far. — VanTucky Talk 03:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)