This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ottoman Aviation Squadrons article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
After WW1 they disappeared. Where is the rest of the story after WW1?
Needs references. Cla68 07:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Nice little article, maybe we can enlarge it. Good job.-- Murat ( talk) 04:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Need a reference section.-- Murat ( talk) 18:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Number of planes, 460 transferred to Ottomans by Germans seem very very high. There were not that many pilots around, hangars, strips or other personnel needed to accomodate this number. Should be referenced.-- Murat ( talk) 15:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
The number of planes is realistic. Remember that these were distributed over a period of more than three years, so there were far fewer than this total in service at any time. 69.110.145.155 ( talk) 08:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)jpiccone
I have started work on the Air commanders of World War I. Any help that editors can offer in the Ottoman section, or elsewhere, would be greatly appreciated. Greenshed ( talk) 21:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Never heard of him. Reference? Murat ( talk) 05:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Too much of the terminology is in modern Turkish rather than Ottoman (Bakanlik vs Nezaret); this should be fixed. 69.110.145.155 ( talk) 08:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)jpiccone
Story of Turkish Aviation (This page is last updated on: 01.08.2008.)
In this article before 01.08.2008 = like this.
Takabeg ( talk) 15:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
It is not clear exactly what the purpose of the first reference in the first paragraph of the article is. Exactly what is the reference for? What exactly is being debated or argued or what fact supported? This irrelevant commentary, by poolry informed and non-expert editor is poorly referenced, does not belong in the opening pragraph. I open it to discussion here. It will be removed until a real rationale presented and argued. Murat ( talk) 02:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
For writing article about Ottoman military, I used Edward J. Erickson and so on. As long as I know, Erickson takes slightly pro-Ottoman stance.
But Erickson mentioned
this term (Ottoman Air Force) is a gross exaggeration and often repeated in contemporary Turkish sources.
Some non academic books use this term (Ottoman Air Force), academic researches about Ottoman military aviation use squadrons.
So we must call readers attention about this exaggeration. Thank you.
Takabeg ( talk) 07:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Firstly, Erikson is hardly a primary source on Ottoman Airforce, as his main focus was somewhere else. Pro-Ottoman? What is this has anything to do with a title? I suppose it shows your ethnic interperatation of most things on these pages and explains a lot. A title is either right, or wrong. What does exaggeration mean? I am asking again, what exactly is the exaggeration? If that is not explained then I will isist that this diversion be removed. Ottoman government and military officially established an air arm, like some other countries at the time. What is exactly exaggerated, Erickson is not clear, neither are you. This belongs in the first paragraph? If you have another name in mind, by all means, put it in a re-direct. After you get concensus. Most people looking for Ottoman Airforce or aviation, will not be searching for Air Squadrons. So one wonders what the agenda is. I urge you to enrich and expand the article IF you have anything real to add, which seems not to be case. In that case, at least spare this article from the ethnic based distortions. My objection remains, and but moving the text and quote to the reference I thought was a good compromise - for now. Murat ( talk) 11:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
This is strange, especially since a simple google search yielded over 190 hits for Ottoman Airforce and only 8 for the Ottoman Aviation Squadrons. Air Force of a any country is recalled by the name of the country as the it is the convention for ALL air forces, even in Wikipedia. Murat ( talk) 22:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Right now we have one reliable source (Erickson) saying 'Aviation Squadrons', and the commonplace placeholder term because none of us knew any better, unsupported by any sources as far as I know - 'Ottoman Air Force'. The best way to settle this is to find some better sources in English on the early history of Ottoman military aviation. Then we can make a better informed decision. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&diff=prev&oldid=431991215 by User:Hudavendigar (Murat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&diff=prev&oldid=431934050 by User:Hudavendigar (Murat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&diff=prev&oldid=431266077 by User:Hudavendigar (Murat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&action=historysubmit&diff=414704332&oldid=414260138 by User:Ben diyom Angara
Takabeg ( talk) 06:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
There is an article, written by no other than Major Erich Serno, commander of the Ottoman Air Force, titled "The History of the Ottoman Air Force in the Great War". It was translated and edited by Dr. Brian P. Flanagan (original recovered by a Major Hans Hattendorff from Serno's widow, and I am holding in my hand a rare replica), and appeared in the famous CROSS & COCKADE, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1966, pp 140-154. Not only in the title of the article Ottoman Air Force is prominantly mentioned, throughout the whole lengthy article it is referred to with that name. Note that this is a respected aviation magazine, a primary source. As opposed to Erikson, whose focus was more on the land battles and mentions Aviation Squadrons only in passing which a particular editor here seems to have locked on and this is hardly Erikson's expertise. Then there are those close to 200 or so google hits (in English), which seem to be redundant at this point. I urge you again to restore the original title of the article as you have implied you would upon me producing a suitable and proper reference, and then we can certainly continue the argument and parse Erikson's passing comment. I also propose a re-direct from Squadrons. Thank you. Murat ( talk) 01:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I think I have provided the most authoritive reference one can possibly provide, directly from the writings of the commander of the Ottoman Air Force himself. His very title was the "Commander of the Ottoman Air Force". By the way, Germans called this new Air Force "Ottoman Flieger-truppe", which roughly translates to "Osmanli Hava Kuvvetleri" or "Ottoman Air Force" which seems to be derived from the former. Squadron is a different word which they did not use. I could also recommend The Epic of Flight from Time-Life Books, a wonderful multi-volume series. In the volume titled Knights of the Air, on page 40, there is a picture of an Ottoman Air Force officer uniform. The hat and tunic, pretty handsome! Murat ( talk) 02:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I have contributed to this article extensively over time and will continue to do so. It has only recently attracted the attention of biased editors as is the fate of any article in Wikipedia even remotely related to Ottomans and Turks. I would like you to first restore the original title that was changed without a proper discussion and explanation on the basis of a passing reference in a tangential reference. Only then I can add some of the references mentioned and also discuss the proper context of Erikson reference here if still desired. Situation before WWI was also covered in some detail in the article I believe. I also repeat my proposal of adding a re-direct from "Aviation Squadrons" to satisfy other editors who are fixated on it. Thank you for your attention to the matter. Murat ( talk) 04:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunnately I found attemptions that try to remove Erickson's pointing out and historical facts with their national POV pushing biases. As mentioned above, the term "Ottoman Air Force" is popular. I think we can use the term "Ottoman Air Force" expediently in appropriate sentences. But it's clear there was no "Ottoman Air Force" in history and it is not accurate term. Even after Serno was appointed as the commander of the Inspectorate of Aviation Affairs (Umuru Havaiye Mufettisligi) and renamed the General Inspectorate of the Air Force (Kuva-i Havaiye Mufettisi Umumiligi) in July 1918, aviation units and pilots had never belonged to "Ottoman Air Force" but belonged to the Ottoman Army and Ottoman Navy and Serno couldn't command them. As Buckshot06 said, the term Aviation Squadrons is more accurate for the scientific approach. In this article, we refer to not only Ottoman aviation squadrons but also to peripheral activity of the Ottoman military aviation. I propose Military aviation of the Ottoman Empire or History of military aviation of the Ottoman Empire. Takabeg ( talk) 08:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
It was clearly inappropriate for such a massive edit while there is this discussion going on and without a concensus. I am still confused why a seasoned editor would take such action, especially since also clearly this is out side of their expertise. Clearly and obviously, there was an Ottoman Air Force. In ALL countless references and documents that is how it is referenced. The very person who played a leading role did call it Ottoman Air Force, which was also part of his title in ALL English and non-Turkish sources. That is the proper AND scientific way to categorize ANY nation's airforce. This is the norm for ANY encyclopedic source that aims to be a reference source. Any other details of organization, structure, historic names of departments can and should be dealt with in the body of the article. I have also proposed to include other proposed obscure titles and labels to re-directs if the aim is other than some biased agenda. WE have now establised, as the editor who changed the name requested, that there are references to the Ottoman Air Force in English and non-Turkish sources. We have now established that Ottoman Air Force is the popular and proper title of the article. I expect the editor who promised that I produce at least one English reference for him to restore the original and proper title to do the right thing asap. Murat ( talk) 12:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Consensus was to replace the current title but it appears that further discussions could lead to a different name. Vegaswikian ( talk) 05:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Aviation Squadrons (Ottoman Empire) →
Ottoman Air Force — The term is used in reliable sources, is the most
WP:Common name, is not a name made up for Wikipedia (as is the current name), clearly identifies the topic, and is the most likely search term.
SilkTork *
Tea time 10:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.http://www.bogaziciyayinlari.com.tr/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=258
http://ataturkilkeleri.istanbul.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Onder_Kocaturk-Osmanli_Pilotlarinin_Istanbul_Kahire_Iskenderiye_Seyahati-icindekiler.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.255.15.141 ( talk) 09:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Ottoman troops opened fire on an Italian aircraft on 15 December 1911. The first aircraft to be brought down in a war was that of Lieutenant Manzini, shot down on 25 August 1912
Credible references I can find says Manzini suffered engine failure shortly after takeoff, and that the first aircraft actually shot down in combat was being flown by M. Popov, hit by shrapnel shells over Adrianople on 30 October 1912.
Can anyone get a good counterexample?
Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
"In August 1914, the Ottoman military aviation had eight planes assigned for operations and four in the flying school in San Stefano; of six operational planes, two were sent to eastern Anatolia, with the others retained at the flying school."
This statement is confusing. So they had twelve planes, with two operational in eastern Anatolia, eight in flying school and two unknown? 91.10.47.242 ( talk) 21:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Section Structure and organisation says: "By the war's end, the Ottoman aviation squadrons had become a potpourri of about 200 supplied, purchased, and captured aircraft from Germany, France, Russia, and Britain."
Section Operations says: "With the signing of the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Ottoman military aviation effectively came to an end. At the time of the armistice, the Ottoman military aviation had around 100 pilots; 17 land-based airplane companies (4 planes each); and 3 seaplane companies (4 planes each); totalling 80 aircraft."
These two statements seem inconsistent Nickpheas ( talk) 14:26, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ottoman Aviation Squadrons article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
After WW1 they disappeared. Where is the rest of the story after WW1?
Needs references. Cla68 07:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Nice little article, maybe we can enlarge it. Good job.-- Murat ( talk) 04:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Need a reference section.-- Murat ( talk) 18:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Number of planes, 460 transferred to Ottomans by Germans seem very very high. There were not that many pilots around, hangars, strips or other personnel needed to accomodate this number. Should be referenced.-- Murat ( talk) 15:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
The number of planes is realistic. Remember that these were distributed over a period of more than three years, so there were far fewer than this total in service at any time. 69.110.145.155 ( talk) 08:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)jpiccone
I have started work on the Air commanders of World War I. Any help that editors can offer in the Ottoman section, or elsewhere, would be greatly appreciated. Greenshed ( talk) 21:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Never heard of him. Reference? Murat ( talk) 05:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Too much of the terminology is in modern Turkish rather than Ottoman (Bakanlik vs Nezaret); this should be fixed. 69.110.145.155 ( talk) 08:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)jpiccone
Story of Turkish Aviation (This page is last updated on: 01.08.2008.)
In this article before 01.08.2008 = like this.
Takabeg ( talk) 15:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
It is not clear exactly what the purpose of the first reference in the first paragraph of the article is. Exactly what is the reference for? What exactly is being debated or argued or what fact supported? This irrelevant commentary, by poolry informed and non-expert editor is poorly referenced, does not belong in the opening pragraph. I open it to discussion here. It will be removed until a real rationale presented and argued. Murat ( talk) 02:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
For writing article about Ottoman military, I used Edward J. Erickson and so on. As long as I know, Erickson takes slightly pro-Ottoman stance.
But Erickson mentioned
this term (Ottoman Air Force) is a gross exaggeration and often repeated in contemporary Turkish sources.
Some non academic books use this term (Ottoman Air Force), academic researches about Ottoman military aviation use squadrons.
So we must call readers attention about this exaggeration. Thank you.
Takabeg ( talk) 07:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Firstly, Erikson is hardly a primary source on Ottoman Airforce, as his main focus was somewhere else. Pro-Ottoman? What is this has anything to do with a title? I suppose it shows your ethnic interperatation of most things on these pages and explains a lot. A title is either right, or wrong. What does exaggeration mean? I am asking again, what exactly is the exaggeration? If that is not explained then I will isist that this diversion be removed. Ottoman government and military officially established an air arm, like some other countries at the time. What is exactly exaggerated, Erickson is not clear, neither are you. This belongs in the first paragraph? If you have another name in mind, by all means, put it in a re-direct. After you get concensus. Most people looking for Ottoman Airforce or aviation, will not be searching for Air Squadrons. So one wonders what the agenda is. I urge you to enrich and expand the article IF you have anything real to add, which seems not to be case. In that case, at least spare this article from the ethnic based distortions. My objection remains, and but moving the text and quote to the reference I thought was a good compromise - for now. Murat ( talk) 11:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
This is strange, especially since a simple google search yielded over 190 hits for Ottoman Airforce and only 8 for the Ottoman Aviation Squadrons. Air Force of a any country is recalled by the name of the country as the it is the convention for ALL air forces, even in Wikipedia. Murat ( talk) 22:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Right now we have one reliable source (Erickson) saying 'Aviation Squadrons', and the commonplace placeholder term because none of us knew any better, unsupported by any sources as far as I know - 'Ottoman Air Force'. The best way to settle this is to find some better sources in English on the early history of Ottoman military aviation. Then we can make a better informed decision. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&diff=prev&oldid=431991215 by User:Hudavendigar (Murat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&diff=prev&oldid=431934050 by User:Hudavendigar (Murat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&diff=prev&oldid=431266077 by User:Hudavendigar (Murat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Aviation_Squadrons_(Ottoman_Empire)&action=historysubmit&diff=414704332&oldid=414260138 by User:Ben diyom Angara
Takabeg ( talk) 06:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
There is an article, written by no other than Major Erich Serno, commander of the Ottoman Air Force, titled "The History of the Ottoman Air Force in the Great War". It was translated and edited by Dr. Brian P. Flanagan (original recovered by a Major Hans Hattendorff from Serno's widow, and I am holding in my hand a rare replica), and appeared in the famous CROSS & COCKADE, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1966, pp 140-154. Not only in the title of the article Ottoman Air Force is prominantly mentioned, throughout the whole lengthy article it is referred to with that name. Note that this is a respected aviation magazine, a primary source. As opposed to Erikson, whose focus was more on the land battles and mentions Aviation Squadrons only in passing which a particular editor here seems to have locked on and this is hardly Erikson's expertise. Then there are those close to 200 or so google hits (in English), which seem to be redundant at this point. I urge you again to restore the original title of the article as you have implied you would upon me producing a suitable and proper reference, and then we can certainly continue the argument and parse Erikson's passing comment. I also propose a re-direct from Squadrons. Thank you. Murat ( talk) 01:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I think I have provided the most authoritive reference one can possibly provide, directly from the writings of the commander of the Ottoman Air Force himself. His very title was the "Commander of the Ottoman Air Force". By the way, Germans called this new Air Force "Ottoman Flieger-truppe", which roughly translates to "Osmanli Hava Kuvvetleri" or "Ottoman Air Force" which seems to be derived from the former. Squadron is a different word which they did not use. I could also recommend The Epic of Flight from Time-Life Books, a wonderful multi-volume series. In the volume titled Knights of the Air, on page 40, there is a picture of an Ottoman Air Force officer uniform. The hat and tunic, pretty handsome! Murat ( talk) 02:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I have contributed to this article extensively over time and will continue to do so. It has only recently attracted the attention of biased editors as is the fate of any article in Wikipedia even remotely related to Ottomans and Turks. I would like you to first restore the original title that was changed without a proper discussion and explanation on the basis of a passing reference in a tangential reference. Only then I can add some of the references mentioned and also discuss the proper context of Erikson reference here if still desired. Situation before WWI was also covered in some detail in the article I believe. I also repeat my proposal of adding a re-direct from "Aviation Squadrons" to satisfy other editors who are fixated on it. Thank you for your attention to the matter. Murat ( talk) 04:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunnately I found attemptions that try to remove Erickson's pointing out and historical facts with their national POV pushing biases. As mentioned above, the term "Ottoman Air Force" is popular. I think we can use the term "Ottoman Air Force" expediently in appropriate sentences. But it's clear there was no "Ottoman Air Force" in history and it is not accurate term. Even after Serno was appointed as the commander of the Inspectorate of Aviation Affairs (Umuru Havaiye Mufettisligi) and renamed the General Inspectorate of the Air Force (Kuva-i Havaiye Mufettisi Umumiligi) in July 1918, aviation units and pilots had never belonged to "Ottoman Air Force" but belonged to the Ottoman Army and Ottoman Navy and Serno couldn't command them. As Buckshot06 said, the term Aviation Squadrons is more accurate for the scientific approach. In this article, we refer to not only Ottoman aviation squadrons but also to peripheral activity of the Ottoman military aviation. I propose Military aviation of the Ottoman Empire or History of military aviation of the Ottoman Empire. Takabeg ( talk) 08:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
It was clearly inappropriate for such a massive edit while there is this discussion going on and without a concensus. I am still confused why a seasoned editor would take such action, especially since also clearly this is out side of their expertise. Clearly and obviously, there was an Ottoman Air Force. In ALL countless references and documents that is how it is referenced. The very person who played a leading role did call it Ottoman Air Force, which was also part of his title in ALL English and non-Turkish sources. That is the proper AND scientific way to categorize ANY nation's airforce. This is the norm for ANY encyclopedic source that aims to be a reference source. Any other details of organization, structure, historic names of departments can and should be dealt with in the body of the article. I have also proposed to include other proposed obscure titles and labels to re-directs if the aim is other than some biased agenda. WE have now establised, as the editor who changed the name requested, that there are references to the Ottoman Air Force in English and non-Turkish sources. We have now established that Ottoman Air Force is the popular and proper title of the article. I expect the editor who promised that I produce at least one English reference for him to restore the original and proper title to do the right thing asap. Murat ( talk) 12:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Consensus was to replace the current title but it appears that further discussions could lead to a different name. Vegaswikian ( talk) 05:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Aviation Squadrons (Ottoman Empire) →
Ottoman Air Force — The term is used in reliable sources, is the most
WP:Common name, is not a name made up for Wikipedia (as is the current name), clearly identifies the topic, and is the most likely search term.
SilkTork *
Tea time 10:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.http://www.bogaziciyayinlari.com.tr/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=258
http://ataturkilkeleri.istanbul.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Onder_Kocaturk-Osmanli_Pilotlarinin_Istanbul_Kahire_Iskenderiye_Seyahati-icindekiler.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.255.15.141 ( talk) 09:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Ottoman troops opened fire on an Italian aircraft on 15 December 1911. The first aircraft to be brought down in a war was that of Lieutenant Manzini, shot down on 25 August 1912
Credible references I can find says Manzini suffered engine failure shortly after takeoff, and that the first aircraft actually shot down in combat was being flown by M. Popov, hit by shrapnel shells over Adrianople on 30 October 1912.
Can anyone get a good counterexample?
Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
"In August 1914, the Ottoman military aviation had eight planes assigned for operations and four in the flying school in San Stefano; of six operational planes, two were sent to eastern Anatolia, with the others retained at the flying school."
This statement is confusing. So they had twelve planes, with two operational in eastern Anatolia, eight in flying school and two unknown? 91.10.47.242 ( talk) 21:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Section Structure and organisation says: "By the war's end, the Ottoman aviation squadrons had become a potpourri of about 200 supplied, purchased, and captured aircraft from Germany, France, Russia, and Britain."
Section Operations says: "With the signing of the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Ottoman military aviation effectively came to an end. At the time of the armistice, the Ottoman military aviation had around 100 pilots; 17 land-based airplane companies (4 planes each); and 3 seaplane companies (4 planes each); totalling 80 aircraft."
These two statements seem inconsistent Nickpheas ( talk) 14:26, 8 November 2019 (UTC)