![]() | 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. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
"Eastern Anatolia" is 42 to 48 times more commonly used than "Armenian Highland" in reference to eastern Turkey by scholarly sources.
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
Wikipedia is not a battleground, and no place for revanche. -- Mttll ( talk) 17:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
The Asian portion of Turkey, Anatolia (historically Asia Minor), comprises 291,773 square miles (755,693 sq. km), or about 97 percent of the total; the section located on the European continent totals 9,175 square miles (23,763 sq. km). - Encyclopedia of the Modern Middle East and North Africa
The Republic of Turkey consists of Asia Minor, or Anatolia (Anadolu); the small area of eastern Thrace (Trakya), or Turkey in Europe; and a few offshore islands in the Aegean Sea. - Worldmark Encyclopedia of Nations
Approximately 3 percent of Turkey is located in Thrace on the European continent. The remaining 97 percent, called Anatolia, is located on the Asian continent. - World Education Encyclopedia
Anatolia, Turkish Anadolu, also called Asia Minor, the peninsula of land that today constitutes the Asian portion of Turkey. - Encyclopedia Brittanica
Anatolia: Asian part of Turkey, usually synonymous with Asia Minor. - Columbia Encyclopedia
Anatolia, Turkish Anadolu, also called Asia Minor, the peninsula (!) of land that today constitutes the Asian portion of Turkey. - Encyclopedia Brittanica
It was initially protected semi, then fully. Someone unprotected it, this is a wrong chose. -- Hinata talk 20:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Update Main Article notes in History section. Main article for overall history is History of Anatolia. For Classical, Classical Anatolia and Byzantine Anatolia. For Seljuk Turks and the Ottoman Empire, History of Turkey (articles listed there should probably use See also instead of Main articles notes). Republic of Turkey's main articles ( History of the Republic of Turkey and Atatürk's Reforms) are up to date.
The reason the main overall article isn't History of Turkey is that that article only covers the eleventh century to present, the scope of this articles history section is the same as History of Anatolia (except that this section doesn't cover pre-history). Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 00:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I have reduced the protection level of the article to semi-protection, as the discussions about the disputed content appear to have stopped and therefore protection was no longer justified. This means that all autoconfirmed users should be able to edit the article now. However, I will be monitoring the page, and if there is any further edit warring I will hand out blocks rather than protect the page again. I would also like to remind editors that the three-revert rule is not a licence to revert up to three times, and I may block editors who don't reach three reverts. (This is especially true if the reverts are of the material that led to the page being protected in December.) Please let me know if you have any questions about this. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
2007 Konda research 70,500,000 population of Turkey [ [1]]
55.484.000 Turkish , 11,445.000 kurdish-zazas , 3.000.000 other groups
Turkish % 81.33 , kurdish-zazas % 15.6, other (...)
CIA's World Factbook cannot be accepted as a "trusted source" since it has been provided by a very political agency and it would be absurd to expect objectiveness from such an agency.
According to the "Türkiye'nin Etnik Yapısı" (Ethnic Structure in Turkey Ali Tayyar Önder, Fark Yayınları 2006 ISBN:9756424044) Kurdish population is about %5-6 of the population. Noting that you cannot fully seperate these people from Turks and define them as completely different nation.
It is very normal to see many ancestries in Anadolu because it was the maninland of Ottoman Empire which helt many nations, groups etc. But exagratting the Kurdish population serves to who or what? What do they want to do with these people on these lands? (Reminders: Greece, Armenia, World War One...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.123.128.177 ( talk) 09:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Turkey consensus ethnic research 2011-2012 [2]
Turkish population : 57,089,942 people , Kurdish-zazas population : 8,693,000 people — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.160.125.211 ( talk) 12:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Ethnic structure of Turkey are incorrect.
Rate of 78-81% of Turkish,
Kurdish and Zaza rate of 13-15%,
5-7% in the other groups
Native Turkish speakers at the level of 85%.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.160.10.202 ( talk) 11:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
In Turkey %70 of all people votes to right partys but this page entirely writen by left people, they did very partisan job in this page and as an avarge Turkis person this is offends me. First Kemal Dervis accomplished notting all succes belongs AKP you can search it Second They talk about jornalist been arrested but they doesnt talk about military coup(s) which sapported by some jornalist and in this coups manny people (mostly from right wing religious people) sufferd inculuding me, i watch my muslims teachers fired from schools just becouse they use scarf for cover their hair, in turkey forbiden thing isn't only hijap it is simple scarf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.161.109.177 ( talk) 18:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Check out the article list of countries by Human Development Index and then please correct your mistake in the infobox of the Turkey article. 88.251.85.34 ( talk) 22:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I would like to inform you that HDI level of Turkey is set as 'medium' and in fact it is on 'high' level according to all HDI reports. The organisation will not be seen objective and trustable information source by Turkish public as long as current information remains. It is known that this is done deliberatly before tourism season.
Human development level of Turkey is calculated by UN development programme and can be seen below.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/data/map
http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/TUR.html -- Msimsak ( talk) 13:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
The mention of the population genetics of the Turkish people does not belong in the lede, for the following reasons
1) This article is about a country, not an ethnic group. Such information may be appropriate for the Turkish people article, but it does not belong here, especially in the lede
2) Not everyone in Turkey is a Turk (only 70-75% are in fact)
3) We do not include population genetics in the lede of country articles. I can't find a single country article where we say "The inhabitants of X primarily descend from ancient X-ians", and there are many countries where we could do that, e.g. Greece, Iran, India, etc...
That the information is sourced is irrelevant. All kinds of things can be sourced. Does that mean we should add them to lede of an article? Athenean ( talk) 06:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Should the claim that the ethnic Turks of Turkey primarily descend from the ancient Anatolians be included in the lede of the article? Athenean ( talk) 16:01, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
“ | Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since Stone Age, with Ancient Anatolians compromising the primary component in Turkish population today, despite waves of immigration and conquests. | ” |
Regarding this revert, by "per talk page" I meant per my expiation on the talk page. In the six days that edit request was up no one objected to the change so there is consensus, and this is just a simple edit to update the main article notes to reflect the current scope of the articles. History of Turkey is not about the whole history, it's about the 11th century to present, correct article is History of Anatolia. History of Anatolia is not about Antiquity, it's about the whole history, prehistory-present. Correct articles are Classical Anatolia and Byzantine Anatolia. History of Turkey doesn't quite match up with "Seljuk Turks and the Ottoman Empire" because the article includes a section about the republic, but it's close enough. Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 19:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
I dont think 98% of Turkish people are Muslims. They are Muslims in the background but there is a lot of atheism in Turkey as well and the main reason people of non-Muslim backgrounds are not living in Turkey is the hate created pre-WW1 and the population exchanges between countries. There were also emigration of Turks from the Balkans and Aegean Islands and of non-Muslims out of modern day Turkey, due to pressures by the society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.75 ( talk) 13:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
The demographical statistics for 1914 also include Ottoman Empire citizens living in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Hejaz, Asir and Yemen, which do not belong to Turkey today (the Republic of Turkey was founded in 1923.)
It is like including the statistics of Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Trentino-Alto Adige (South Tyrol), Friuli, Trieste, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Transylvania and Galicia into the Austria article, not taking into account the difference between pre-1914 Austria-Hungary and post-1918 Republic of Austria. Herr Bundespanzer ( talk) 10:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
İstanbul, Sivas, Edirne, Niğde, Karesi, Antalya, İzmit, Canik, Çatalca, Menteşe, Kale-i sultaniye, Aydın , Hüdavendigâr, Bolu, Kütahya and Eskişehir, Kastamonu, Karahisarısahib, Trabzon, Konya, Erzurum, Ankara, Suriye, Adana, Beyrut, Harput, Kayseri, Haleb, Van, Jerusalem, Bitlis, Zor, Urfa. Total : 1.219.323
Almost all of these provinces fall into today's Turkish Republic. The authors have taken into account that Suriye, Jersualem (Kudus), Beyrut are outside of the Republic of Turkey today. When taking this into consideration and by subtracting 3.245, 3.043 and 5.233 respectively from 1.219.323, you'll receive 1,207,802 which is give or take the same amount as stated in the table. I want to once again reiterate that the source is a completely reliable peer-reviewed source based off of data from the Armed Forces of the Republic of Turkey. Proudbolsahye ( talk) 17:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
The leads in articles for many countries mention historical inhabitants/cultures in their territories. Should Ancient Anatolians be mentioned in Turkey? Cavann ( talk) 21:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
“ | Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since ancient times. | ” |
to
“ | Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since stone age, including various Ancient Anatolian civilizations. | ” |
Cavann ( talk) 21:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok this is my suggestion:
“ | Anatolia has been inhabited since Paleolithic, [1] including various Ancient Anatolian civilizations starting from the earliest Neolithic. [2] After Alexander the Great's conquest, it was Hellenized until Roman acquisition and the subsequent Romanization, which transitioned into the Byzantine era. [2] | ” |
Added into the paragraph containing info starting with Seljuk Turks, it will provide a more comprehensive and correct overview of the history section compared to the current sentence "Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since ancient times." Cavann ( talk) 21:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
The economic predictions should be removed from the lead. I can't find a single FA country article where economic predictions are included in the lead. Yesterday, at Talk:Istanbul#Economic_predictions, there was a solid consensus to keep economic predictions out of the lead of that article. I don't see why this article should be treated any differently. Athenean ( talk) 06:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Turkey is a south-east european country and its capital is Anycra. But because we are Muslims there are often used pseudo-arguments to detain Turkey's European membership. But there also pan-asian movements to put anatolia into Asia but such as claims are just propaganda. Anatolia neither belongs geological nor cultural into Asia. Anatolia is birthplace of european civilization so biologically anatolian Turks were part of european familiy of peoples. As well archaeogenetics show us that turkic people were eurasian nomads so that Turkey belongs more to the Eurasian Steppe then to Middle East. So stop making propaganda for Orientalism. 95.114.31.7 ( talk) 22:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
This is a completely political argument, having little to do with cultural or physical geography, much less plate tectonics. It seems to matter very much to some Turks whether they are considered European or Asian (because Kemalist vs. Islamicist policies are at stake, as well as EU membership), but both the Ottoman Empire and Turkey are historically considered Asian. So was Anatolia (aka "Asia Minor") before the Turks or Islam arrived, and definitely afterward. To argue that European civilization arose in Anatolia is both highly questionable and also irrelevant: Mesopotamia and the Holy Land contributed mightily to the roots of Western Civilization, but that doesn't make their modern equivalents part of Europe. What's especially interesting about this Anatolia-is-Europe argument is that it is a boast of Turkish tourism that Turkey is a cosmopolitan country bestriding two continents--except when politics enters the stage. But even in the ancient world the Thracian and Anatolian peoples (although both predominantly Indo-European speakers) were considered separate peoples, and even Greek mythology drew the line between Europe and Asia at the Bosphorus. (I myself would argue the very concept of Europe as a completely separate (cultural) continent from Asia is a Eurocentric invention, regardless of plate tectonics, and that there is really only Eurasia, just as there is one African continent, however culturally diverse. But a general encyclopedia is not the place to promulgate that view.) Winter Maiden ( talk) 05:50, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
To put it more briefly, however much some of us might want to reconfigure Europe and Asia as Eurasia, or others might wish to redefine which parts of Europe or Asia actually belong to the other, the conventional long-established understanding of world geography says that Anatolia is in Asia and Thrace is in Europe, and this encyclopedia isn't the place to try to change that through example. Winter Maiden ( talk) 05:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Do you know how unhuman is it to treat us like second class europeans? This were the roughly borders of Anatolia and they belong into Europe. And Europe is a Subcontinent in Eurasia. But unnecessarily many land masses of Russia gets counted into Europe, but not the Anatolian peninsula. That is not only strange, but rather politically motivated. 77.3.103.210 ( talk) 16:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Should reliably sourced economic predictions [7] be included in the economy section and/or lead in Turkey. Many countries do have such info in their economy sections (e.g., Brazil#Economy, China#Economy). Cavann ( talk) 19:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add "founder of the republic" to infobox, because it is the reason of the government. History cannot be denied.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Kemal_Atat%C3%BCrk Jpn zhr ( talk) 16:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) valuation of country GDP (Current international dollar) These data form the basis for the country weights used to generate the World Economic Outlook country group composites for the domestic economy.
The IMF is not a primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. WEO weights have been created from primary sources and are used solely for purposes of generating country group composites. For primary source information, please refer to one of the following sources: the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank, or the Penn World Tables.
For further information see Box A2 in the April 2004 World Economic Outlook, Box 1.2 in the September 2003 World Economic Outlook for a discussion on the measurement of global growth and Box A.1 in the May 2000 World Economic Outlook for a summary of the revised PPP-based weights, and Annex IV of the May 1993 World Economic Outlook. See also Anne Marie Gulde and Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, Purchasing Power Parity Based Weights for the World Economic Outlook, in Staff Studies for the World Economic Outlook (Washington: IMF, December 1993), pp. 106-23.
Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita GDP (Current international dollar) Expressed in GDP in PPP dollars per person. Data are derived by dividing GDP in PPP dollars by total population. These data form the basis for the country weights used to generate the World Economic Outlook country group composites for the domestic economy.
The IMF is not a primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. WEO weights have been created from primary sources and are used solely for purposes of generating country group composites. For primary source information, please refer to one of the following sources: the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank, or the Penn World Tables.
For further information see Box A2 in the April 2004 World Economic Outlook, Box 1.2 in the September 2003 World Economic Outlook for a discussion on the measurement of global growth and Box A.1 in the May 2000 World Economic Outlook for a summary of the revised PPP-based weights, and Annex IV of the May 1993 World Economic Outlook. See also Anne Marie Gulde and Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, Purchasing Power Parity Based Weights for the World Economic Outlook, in Staff Studies for the World Economic Outlook (Washington: IMF, December 1993), pp. 106-23.
Link: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/01/weodata/weoselser.aspx?c=512%2c666%2c914%2c668%2c612%2c672%2c614%2c946%2c311%2c137%2c213%2c962%2c911%2c674%2c193%2c676%2c122%2c548%2c912%2c556%2c313%2c678%2c419%2c181%2c513%2c867%2c316%2c682%2c913%2c684%2c124%2c273%2c339%2c868%2c638%2c921%2c514%2c948%2c218%2c943%2c963%2c686%2c616%2c688%2c223%2c518%2c516%2c728%2c918%2c558%2c748%2c138%2c618%2c196%2c522%2c278%2c622%2c692%2c156%2c694%2c624%2c142%2c626%2c449%2c628%2c564%2c228%2c283%2c924%2c853%2c233%2c288%2c632%2c293%2c636%2c566%2c634%2c964%2c238%2c182%2c662%2c453%2c960%2c968%2c423%2c922%2c935%2c714%2c128%2c862%2c611%2c135%2c321%2c716%2c243%2c456%2c248%2c722%2c469%2c942%2c253%2c718%2c642%2c724%2c643%2c576%2c939%2c936%2c644%2c961%2c819%2c813%2c172%2c199%2c132%2c733%2c646%2c184%2c648%2c524%2c915%2c361%2c134%2c362%2c652%2c364%2c174%2c732%2c328%2c366%2c258%2c734%2c656%2c144%2c654%2c146%2c336%2c463%2c263%2c528%2c268%2c923%2c532%2c738%2c944%2c578%2c176%2c537%2c534%2c742%2c536%2c866%2c429%2c369%2c433%2c744%2c178%2c186%2c436%2c925%2c136%2c869%2c343%2c746%2c158%2c926%2c439%2c466%2c916%2c112%2c664%2c111%2c826%2c298%2c542%2c927%2c967%2c846%2c443%2c299%2c917%2c582%2c544%2c474%2c941%2c754%2c446%2c698&t=188 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokturkk ( talk • contribs) 06:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
The article states: "Turkey is a democratic, secular, ... republic ..... " This statement is probably false because: 1- The state pays the salaries and pensions of the sunni islamic clergymen (imams) while no stipend is awarded to the religious representatives of shias, christians and other religions. 2- ID cards must have the religion of the holder printed clearly and atheism is not acceptable as an option. 3- Religious education to underage youth is promoted actively and financed directly by the state at the detriment of regular secular education.
Therefore basic state activities are not independent of religion and Turkey cannot be considered to be secular. And this, in spite of article 2 in the constitution of the Turkish republic where secularism is claimed. [3]
It seems to me this adjective (secular) must be removed for the sake of truthfulness to actual facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reasonandtruth ( talk • contribs) 00:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
This is mentioned so far: "In 2013, widespread protests erupted in many Turkish provinces, sparked by a plan to demolish Gezi Park but growing into general anti-government dissent." News to add: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57589533/mayhem-in-istanbul-hotel-as-protesters-seek-refuge/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.153.230.50 ( talk) 08:33, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Germany, 5354 words when promoted, 7825 words on the latest Featured article review; Japan, 4643 words at promotion, 6010 words at the last FAR; Australia, 4221 words when promoted, 6555 words on the last FAR; Canada, 4623 words when promoted, 7081 words on the last FAR; India, 2285 words when promoted, 7637 words on the last FAR; Indonesia, 4311 words when promoted, 4346 words on the last FAR. So, even if we consider only the size when they were last checked for FA status, the average size is 6500 words. The article currently has 8100 words, so it would be wise to cut it down a little further. -- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 19:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
One source uses IMF data, the other uses World Bank data. This looks inconsistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oxr033 ( talk • contribs) 14:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
The IMF is not a primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokturkk ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 29 May 2013 (UTC) Read! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Turkey#IMF_and_WB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokturkk ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Link? WB link Gross domestic product 2012, PPP "15 Turkey 1,306,155" http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP_PPP.pdf
WB link GDP per capita, PPP 2012 "Turkey 17,651" http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?order=wbapi_data_value_2012+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.215.81 ( talk) 19:27, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
The current version of the article links to this page, giving it the misleading title of "Motto". In reality, the word 'motto' is not even mentioned there. From this page, also from the ministry of culture, the motto is given equal space, along with Peace at home, peace in the world: "Sovereignty unconditionally belongs to Nation and Peace at home, peace in the world are the raising fundamentals of the Turkish Republic". Peace at Home, Peace in the World is used much more often as Turkey's motto, though never by official sources.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 13:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Peace at Home, Peace in the World is a policy in foreign relations . Because of that you can hear about this in international meetings.
Overall, Turkey conducts a foreign policy guided by the principle of “Peace at Home, Peace in the World” as set out by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk http://www.mfa.gov.tr/synopsis-of-the-turkish-foreign-policy.en.mfa
But
Sovereignty unconditionally belongs to the Nation is motto of founding and governance. if you can check the link you will see that principle is always written on the wall behind the chairman of the General Assembly Hall in the
Grand National Assembly and in Turkish constitutions.--
Qwl (
talk) 08:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Don't use Wikipedia talk pages for expressing personal views. Kavas ( talk) 13:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Firstly, Alevism is not a separate religious belief! It is a different sect of Islam like Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Jaafari. Besides, Cemevi officialy is not an alternative to a mosque because of not been adopted as a place of worship. 2.6 million Alevis live in Syria but there is no icon about cemevi in this chapter. This article is not the place of propaganda a specific opinion! Maurice07 ( talk) 08:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change needed for false information on this page, Politics section.
"According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, the AKP government has waged one of the world's biggest crackdowns on press freedoms.[73] A large number of journalists have been arrested using charges of "terrorism" and "anti-state activities" such as the Ergenekon and Balyoz cases, while thousands have been investigated on charges such as "denigrating Turkishness" or "insulting Islam" in an effort to sow self-censorship.[73] In 2012, the CPJ identified 76 jailed journalists in Turkey, including 61 directly held for their published work, more than in Iran, Eritrea or China.[73] A former U.S. State Department spokesman, Philip J. Crowley, said that the United States had "broad concerns about trends involving intimidation of journalists in Turkey."[74]"
This information is false. It should be replaced with "According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, the AKP government has waged one of the world's biggest crackdowns on press freedoms.[73]But the government claims "Journalists are not arrested because they are journalists, but because there are serious claims, some were accepted by courts, like the attempts made to overthrow the government." There are always such atrocious propogandas against the government, and mentioned articles in the report are altered or basically changed/are being planned to be changed."
Purple phenomenon ( talk) 13:24, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. You have provided no sources for your view that the information on the number of journalists jailed is false, and also no sources for the government quote.
Dana boomer (
talk) 18:58, 15 September 2013 (UTC)What info should go in the section and what in the article? Jzlcdh ( talk) 18:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Not Turkey.Turkey is old name.That must be Turkei (in Turkish Türkiye) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.8.177.235 ( talk) 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The specific text that should be removed; "During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were deported and exterminated in the Armenian Genocide.[46][47] The Turkish government denies that there was an Armenian Genocide and claims that Armenians were only relocated from the eastern war zone.[48] Large scale massacres were also committed against the empire's other minority groups such as the Greeks and Assyrians.[49][50][51]" because the sources that are cited are not academically reliable nor variable. In order to be objective the text should also mention that Armenians reject to open their National Archives about the "so called genocide" issue. There is a vast difference between history written to defend one-sided nationalist convictions and real accounts of history. Also ignore the fact that the Armenians who were most under Ottoman control, those in Western cities such as Izmir, Istanbul, and Edirne, were neither deported nor molested, presumably because they were not a threat. If genocide is to be considered, however, then the murders of Turks and Kurds in 1915 and 1916 must be included in the calculation of blame. The Armenian molestations and massacres in Cilicia, deplored even by their French and British allies, must be judged. And the exile or death of two-thirds of the Turks of Erivan Province, the Armenian Republic, during the war must be remembered. Any civil war will appear to be a genocide if only the dead of one side are counted. Their writings would be far more accurate, and would tell a very different story, if they included facts such as the deaths of nearly two-thirds of the Muslims of Van Vilayeti, deaths caused by the Russians and Armenians. Histories that strive for accuracy must include all the facts, and the deaths of millions of Muslims is surely a fact that deserves mention.
Please change this "During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were deported and exterminated in the Armenian Genocide.[46][47] The Turkish government denies that there was an Armenian Genocide and claims that Armenians were only relocated from the eastern war zone.Large scale massacres were also committed against the empire's other minority groups such as the Greeks and Assyrians.[49][50][51]"
to During the war, an estimated between 125,000 and 150,000 Armenians emigrated from Ottoman Anatolia to Erivan and other parts of the Russian southern Caucasus. One of-the many forced migration was the organized expulsion of Armenians from much of Anatolia by the Ottoman government. In light of the history and the events of this war, it is true that the Ottomans had obvious reason to fear the Armenians, and that forced migration was an age-old tool in Middle Eastern and Balkan conflicts. It is also true that while its troops were fighting the Russians and Armenians, the Ottoman Government could not and did not properly protect the Armenian migrants. Nevertheless, more than 200,000 of the deported Armenians reached Greater Syria and survived. (Some estimate that as many as two-thirds of the deportees survived.)Popular opinion today knows of only one set of deportations, more properly called forced migrations, in Anatolia, the deportation of the Armenians. There were in fact many forced migrations. For the Armenians, the worst forced migrations came when they accompanied their own armies in retreat. Starvation and disease killed great numbers of both, far more than fell to enemies' bullets. Turkish Republic propose to the Armenian Republic that a joint commission be established, its members selected by scholarly academies in both countries. All archives should be opened to the commission -- not only the Ottoman Archives, but the archives of Armenia and of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. (The call is often made for the Turkish Archives to be opened completely. It is time to demand that Armenians do likewise.) I have been told that the Armenians will never agree to this, but how can anyone know unless they try? In any case, refusal to fairly and honestly consider this question would in itself be evidence that the accusations against the Turks are political, not scholarly." Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims at the end of the Empire, Justin McCarthy, 1997 Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
http://wilson.engr.wisc.edu/Armenia/mccarthy.html
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
71.145.243.67 (
talk •
contribs) 04:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. --
N
Y
Kevin 03:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)In the citation number 3, there is a reference to Turkstat, but no link to the actual report that says the population estimate for Turkey in 2013. 163.117.203.65 ( talk) 12:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Your last edits about wide panoramic photos, I am evaluating the scope of the WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT also, I didn't see any satisfactory explanation [12]. Such large panoramic photographs show only article more crowded and chaotic. Please take a look to the featured country articles : Germany, Japan, India, Rwanda and other advanced arts. France, United Kingdom, Iran and etc. There is no any wide panoromic image! Also, It's runs contrary to the criteria of featured article. Other disputed picture on Sport, I think, we must be objective about this. Turkey has three major sports club and dozens. Instead of a single reserve sport club on the section; a national approach, may be more constructive. Yes, footballers does not represent the current squad but the date was specified on the caption. Examples: Germany, Brazil. Maurice07 ( talk) 21:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
According to the figures by The World Bank, the actual Gini Coefficient rate in Turkey was 39 for 2008, not 40. Please change, no need for it to be higher than it is.
In the most recent survey it was 40:
GINI World Bank
Pqnlrn (
talk) 04:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
I am adding main sectors of economy and other subtitles to 'culture' sections(why there was an only subtitle 'sports' anyway). Check these countries about my changes,in those pages more than two subtitles for economy and culture are used; Japan, Denmark,Spain,Greece,S.Korea. KazekageTR ( talk) 14:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
I didint know that there was an actual image dimension standart thanks for saying that. The one in the biodiverstiy section is useless and we could remove one of two panoramic pics in the economics section. KazekageTR ( talk) 14:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
"Eastern Anatolia" is 42 to 48 times more commonly used than "Armenian Highland" in reference to eastern Turkey by scholarly sources.
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
Wikipedia is not a battleground, and no place for revanche. -- Mttll ( talk) 17:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
The Asian portion of Turkey, Anatolia (historically Asia Minor), comprises 291,773 square miles (755,693 sq. km), or about 97 percent of the total; the section located on the European continent totals 9,175 square miles (23,763 sq. km). - Encyclopedia of the Modern Middle East and North Africa
The Republic of Turkey consists of Asia Minor, or Anatolia (Anadolu); the small area of eastern Thrace (Trakya), or Turkey in Europe; and a few offshore islands in the Aegean Sea. - Worldmark Encyclopedia of Nations
Approximately 3 percent of Turkey is located in Thrace on the European continent. The remaining 97 percent, called Anatolia, is located on the Asian continent. - World Education Encyclopedia
Anatolia, Turkish Anadolu, also called Asia Minor, the peninsula of land that today constitutes the Asian portion of Turkey. - Encyclopedia Brittanica
Anatolia: Asian part of Turkey, usually synonymous with Asia Minor. - Columbia Encyclopedia
Anatolia, Turkish Anadolu, also called Asia Minor, the peninsula (!) of land that today constitutes the Asian portion of Turkey. - Encyclopedia Brittanica
It was initially protected semi, then fully. Someone unprotected it, this is a wrong chose. -- Hinata talk 20:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Update Main Article notes in History section. Main article for overall history is History of Anatolia. For Classical, Classical Anatolia and Byzantine Anatolia. For Seljuk Turks and the Ottoman Empire, History of Turkey (articles listed there should probably use See also instead of Main articles notes). Republic of Turkey's main articles ( History of the Republic of Turkey and Atatürk's Reforms) are up to date.
The reason the main overall article isn't History of Turkey is that that article only covers the eleventh century to present, the scope of this articles history section is the same as History of Anatolia (except that this section doesn't cover pre-history). Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 00:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I have reduced the protection level of the article to semi-protection, as the discussions about the disputed content appear to have stopped and therefore protection was no longer justified. This means that all autoconfirmed users should be able to edit the article now. However, I will be monitoring the page, and if there is any further edit warring I will hand out blocks rather than protect the page again. I would also like to remind editors that the three-revert rule is not a licence to revert up to three times, and I may block editors who don't reach three reverts. (This is especially true if the reverts are of the material that led to the page being protected in December.) Please let me know if you have any questions about this. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
2007 Konda research 70,500,000 population of Turkey [ [1]]
55.484.000 Turkish , 11,445.000 kurdish-zazas , 3.000.000 other groups
Turkish % 81.33 , kurdish-zazas % 15.6, other (...)
CIA's World Factbook cannot be accepted as a "trusted source" since it has been provided by a very political agency and it would be absurd to expect objectiveness from such an agency.
According to the "Türkiye'nin Etnik Yapısı" (Ethnic Structure in Turkey Ali Tayyar Önder, Fark Yayınları 2006 ISBN:9756424044) Kurdish population is about %5-6 of the population. Noting that you cannot fully seperate these people from Turks and define them as completely different nation.
It is very normal to see many ancestries in Anadolu because it was the maninland of Ottoman Empire which helt many nations, groups etc. But exagratting the Kurdish population serves to who or what? What do they want to do with these people on these lands? (Reminders: Greece, Armenia, World War One...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.123.128.177 ( talk) 09:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Turkey consensus ethnic research 2011-2012 [2]
Turkish population : 57,089,942 people , Kurdish-zazas population : 8,693,000 people — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.160.125.211 ( talk) 12:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Ethnic structure of Turkey are incorrect.
Rate of 78-81% of Turkish,
Kurdish and Zaza rate of 13-15%,
5-7% in the other groups
Native Turkish speakers at the level of 85%.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.160.10.202 ( talk) 11:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
In Turkey %70 of all people votes to right partys but this page entirely writen by left people, they did very partisan job in this page and as an avarge Turkis person this is offends me. First Kemal Dervis accomplished notting all succes belongs AKP you can search it Second They talk about jornalist been arrested but they doesnt talk about military coup(s) which sapported by some jornalist and in this coups manny people (mostly from right wing religious people) sufferd inculuding me, i watch my muslims teachers fired from schools just becouse they use scarf for cover their hair, in turkey forbiden thing isn't only hijap it is simple scarf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.161.109.177 ( talk) 18:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Check out the article list of countries by Human Development Index and then please correct your mistake in the infobox of the Turkey article. 88.251.85.34 ( talk) 22:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I would like to inform you that HDI level of Turkey is set as 'medium' and in fact it is on 'high' level according to all HDI reports. The organisation will not be seen objective and trustable information source by Turkish public as long as current information remains. It is known that this is done deliberatly before tourism season.
Human development level of Turkey is calculated by UN development programme and can be seen below.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/data/map
http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/TUR.html -- Msimsak ( talk) 13:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
The mention of the population genetics of the Turkish people does not belong in the lede, for the following reasons
1) This article is about a country, not an ethnic group. Such information may be appropriate for the Turkish people article, but it does not belong here, especially in the lede
2) Not everyone in Turkey is a Turk (only 70-75% are in fact)
3) We do not include population genetics in the lede of country articles. I can't find a single country article where we say "The inhabitants of X primarily descend from ancient X-ians", and there are many countries where we could do that, e.g. Greece, Iran, India, etc...
That the information is sourced is irrelevant. All kinds of things can be sourced. Does that mean we should add them to lede of an article? Athenean ( talk) 06:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Should the claim that the ethnic Turks of Turkey primarily descend from the ancient Anatolians be included in the lede of the article? Athenean ( talk) 16:01, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
“ | Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since Stone Age, with Ancient Anatolians compromising the primary component in Turkish population today, despite waves of immigration and conquests. | ” |
Regarding this revert, by "per talk page" I meant per my expiation on the talk page. In the six days that edit request was up no one objected to the change so there is consensus, and this is just a simple edit to update the main article notes to reflect the current scope of the articles. History of Turkey is not about the whole history, it's about the 11th century to present, correct article is History of Anatolia. History of Anatolia is not about Antiquity, it's about the whole history, prehistory-present. Correct articles are Classical Anatolia and Byzantine Anatolia. History of Turkey doesn't quite match up with "Seljuk Turks and the Ottoman Empire" because the article includes a section about the republic, but it's close enough. Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 19:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
I dont think 98% of Turkish people are Muslims. They are Muslims in the background but there is a lot of atheism in Turkey as well and the main reason people of non-Muslim backgrounds are not living in Turkey is the hate created pre-WW1 and the population exchanges between countries. There were also emigration of Turks from the Balkans and Aegean Islands and of non-Muslims out of modern day Turkey, due to pressures by the society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.75 ( talk) 13:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
The demographical statistics for 1914 also include Ottoman Empire citizens living in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Hejaz, Asir and Yemen, which do not belong to Turkey today (the Republic of Turkey was founded in 1923.)
It is like including the statistics of Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Trentino-Alto Adige (South Tyrol), Friuli, Trieste, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Transylvania and Galicia into the Austria article, not taking into account the difference between pre-1914 Austria-Hungary and post-1918 Republic of Austria. Herr Bundespanzer ( talk) 10:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
İstanbul, Sivas, Edirne, Niğde, Karesi, Antalya, İzmit, Canik, Çatalca, Menteşe, Kale-i sultaniye, Aydın , Hüdavendigâr, Bolu, Kütahya and Eskişehir, Kastamonu, Karahisarısahib, Trabzon, Konya, Erzurum, Ankara, Suriye, Adana, Beyrut, Harput, Kayseri, Haleb, Van, Jerusalem, Bitlis, Zor, Urfa. Total : 1.219.323
Almost all of these provinces fall into today's Turkish Republic. The authors have taken into account that Suriye, Jersualem (Kudus), Beyrut are outside of the Republic of Turkey today. When taking this into consideration and by subtracting 3.245, 3.043 and 5.233 respectively from 1.219.323, you'll receive 1,207,802 which is give or take the same amount as stated in the table. I want to once again reiterate that the source is a completely reliable peer-reviewed source based off of data from the Armed Forces of the Republic of Turkey. Proudbolsahye ( talk) 17:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
The leads in articles for many countries mention historical inhabitants/cultures in their territories. Should Ancient Anatolians be mentioned in Turkey? Cavann ( talk) 21:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
“ | Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since ancient times. | ” |
to
“ | Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since stone age, including various Ancient Anatolian civilizations. | ” |
Cavann ( talk) 21:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok this is my suggestion:
“ | Anatolia has been inhabited since Paleolithic, [1] including various Ancient Anatolian civilizations starting from the earliest Neolithic. [2] After Alexander the Great's conquest, it was Hellenized until Roman acquisition and the subsequent Romanization, which transitioned into the Byzantine era. [2] | ” |
Added into the paragraph containing info starting with Seljuk Turks, it will provide a more comprehensive and correct overview of the history section compared to the current sentence "Anatolia has been continuously inhabited since ancient times." Cavann ( talk) 21:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
The economic predictions should be removed from the lead. I can't find a single FA country article where economic predictions are included in the lead. Yesterday, at Talk:Istanbul#Economic_predictions, there was a solid consensus to keep economic predictions out of the lead of that article. I don't see why this article should be treated any differently. Athenean ( talk) 06:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Turkey is a south-east european country and its capital is Anycra. But because we are Muslims there are often used pseudo-arguments to detain Turkey's European membership. But there also pan-asian movements to put anatolia into Asia but such as claims are just propaganda. Anatolia neither belongs geological nor cultural into Asia. Anatolia is birthplace of european civilization so biologically anatolian Turks were part of european familiy of peoples. As well archaeogenetics show us that turkic people were eurasian nomads so that Turkey belongs more to the Eurasian Steppe then to Middle East. So stop making propaganda for Orientalism. 95.114.31.7 ( talk) 22:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
This is a completely political argument, having little to do with cultural or physical geography, much less plate tectonics. It seems to matter very much to some Turks whether they are considered European or Asian (because Kemalist vs. Islamicist policies are at stake, as well as EU membership), but both the Ottoman Empire and Turkey are historically considered Asian. So was Anatolia (aka "Asia Minor") before the Turks or Islam arrived, and definitely afterward. To argue that European civilization arose in Anatolia is both highly questionable and also irrelevant: Mesopotamia and the Holy Land contributed mightily to the roots of Western Civilization, but that doesn't make their modern equivalents part of Europe. What's especially interesting about this Anatolia-is-Europe argument is that it is a boast of Turkish tourism that Turkey is a cosmopolitan country bestriding two continents--except when politics enters the stage. But even in the ancient world the Thracian and Anatolian peoples (although both predominantly Indo-European speakers) were considered separate peoples, and even Greek mythology drew the line between Europe and Asia at the Bosphorus. (I myself would argue the very concept of Europe as a completely separate (cultural) continent from Asia is a Eurocentric invention, regardless of plate tectonics, and that there is really only Eurasia, just as there is one African continent, however culturally diverse. But a general encyclopedia is not the place to promulgate that view.) Winter Maiden ( talk) 05:50, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
To put it more briefly, however much some of us might want to reconfigure Europe and Asia as Eurasia, or others might wish to redefine which parts of Europe or Asia actually belong to the other, the conventional long-established understanding of world geography says that Anatolia is in Asia and Thrace is in Europe, and this encyclopedia isn't the place to try to change that through example. Winter Maiden ( talk) 05:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Do you know how unhuman is it to treat us like second class europeans? This were the roughly borders of Anatolia and they belong into Europe. And Europe is a Subcontinent in Eurasia. But unnecessarily many land masses of Russia gets counted into Europe, but not the Anatolian peninsula. That is not only strange, but rather politically motivated. 77.3.103.210 ( talk) 16:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Should reliably sourced economic predictions [7] be included in the economy section and/or lead in Turkey. Many countries do have such info in their economy sections (e.g., Brazil#Economy, China#Economy). Cavann ( talk) 19:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add "founder of the republic" to infobox, because it is the reason of the government. History cannot be denied.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Kemal_Atat%C3%BCrk Jpn zhr ( talk) 16:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) valuation of country GDP (Current international dollar) These data form the basis for the country weights used to generate the World Economic Outlook country group composites for the domestic economy.
The IMF is not a primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. WEO weights have been created from primary sources and are used solely for purposes of generating country group composites. For primary source information, please refer to one of the following sources: the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank, or the Penn World Tables.
For further information see Box A2 in the April 2004 World Economic Outlook, Box 1.2 in the September 2003 World Economic Outlook for a discussion on the measurement of global growth and Box A.1 in the May 2000 World Economic Outlook for a summary of the revised PPP-based weights, and Annex IV of the May 1993 World Economic Outlook. See also Anne Marie Gulde and Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, Purchasing Power Parity Based Weights for the World Economic Outlook, in Staff Studies for the World Economic Outlook (Washington: IMF, December 1993), pp. 106-23.
Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita GDP (Current international dollar) Expressed in GDP in PPP dollars per person. Data are derived by dividing GDP in PPP dollars by total population. These data form the basis for the country weights used to generate the World Economic Outlook country group composites for the domestic economy.
The IMF is not a primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. WEO weights have been created from primary sources and are used solely for purposes of generating country group composites. For primary source information, please refer to one of the following sources: the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank, or the Penn World Tables.
For further information see Box A2 in the April 2004 World Economic Outlook, Box 1.2 in the September 2003 World Economic Outlook for a discussion on the measurement of global growth and Box A.1 in the May 2000 World Economic Outlook for a summary of the revised PPP-based weights, and Annex IV of the May 1993 World Economic Outlook. See also Anne Marie Gulde and Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, Purchasing Power Parity Based Weights for the World Economic Outlook, in Staff Studies for the World Economic Outlook (Washington: IMF, December 1993), pp. 106-23.
Link: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/01/weodata/weoselser.aspx?c=512%2c666%2c914%2c668%2c612%2c672%2c614%2c946%2c311%2c137%2c213%2c962%2c911%2c674%2c193%2c676%2c122%2c548%2c912%2c556%2c313%2c678%2c419%2c181%2c513%2c867%2c316%2c682%2c913%2c684%2c124%2c273%2c339%2c868%2c638%2c921%2c514%2c948%2c218%2c943%2c963%2c686%2c616%2c688%2c223%2c518%2c516%2c728%2c918%2c558%2c748%2c138%2c618%2c196%2c522%2c278%2c622%2c692%2c156%2c694%2c624%2c142%2c626%2c449%2c628%2c564%2c228%2c283%2c924%2c853%2c233%2c288%2c632%2c293%2c636%2c566%2c634%2c964%2c238%2c182%2c662%2c453%2c960%2c968%2c423%2c922%2c935%2c714%2c128%2c862%2c611%2c135%2c321%2c716%2c243%2c456%2c248%2c722%2c469%2c942%2c253%2c718%2c642%2c724%2c643%2c576%2c939%2c936%2c644%2c961%2c819%2c813%2c172%2c199%2c132%2c733%2c646%2c184%2c648%2c524%2c915%2c361%2c134%2c362%2c652%2c364%2c174%2c732%2c328%2c366%2c258%2c734%2c656%2c144%2c654%2c146%2c336%2c463%2c263%2c528%2c268%2c923%2c532%2c738%2c944%2c578%2c176%2c537%2c534%2c742%2c536%2c866%2c429%2c369%2c433%2c744%2c178%2c186%2c436%2c925%2c136%2c869%2c343%2c746%2c158%2c926%2c439%2c466%2c916%2c112%2c664%2c111%2c826%2c298%2c542%2c927%2c967%2c846%2c443%2c299%2c917%2c582%2c544%2c474%2c941%2c754%2c446%2c698&t=188 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokturkk ( talk • contribs) 06:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
The article states: "Turkey is a democratic, secular, ... republic ..... " This statement is probably false because: 1- The state pays the salaries and pensions of the sunni islamic clergymen (imams) while no stipend is awarded to the religious representatives of shias, christians and other religions. 2- ID cards must have the religion of the holder printed clearly and atheism is not acceptable as an option. 3- Religious education to underage youth is promoted actively and financed directly by the state at the detriment of regular secular education.
Therefore basic state activities are not independent of religion and Turkey cannot be considered to be secular. And this, in spite of article 2 in the constitution of the Turkish republic where secularism is claimed. [3]
It seems to me this adjective (secular) must be removed for the sake of truthfulness to actual facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reasonandtruth ( talk • contribs) 00:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
This is mentioned so far: "In 2013, widespread protests erupted in many Turkish provinces, sparked by a plan to demolish Gezi Park but growing into general anti-government dissent." News to add: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57589533/mayhem-in-istanbul-hotel-as-protesters-seek-refuge/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.153.230.50 ( talk) 08:33, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Germany, 5354 words when promoted, 7825 words on the latest Featured article review; Japan, 4643 words at promotion, 6010 words at the last FAR; Australia, 4221 words when promoted, 6555 words on the last FAR; Canada, 4623 words when promoted, 7081 words on the last FAR; India, 2285 words when promoted, 7637 words on the last FAR; Indonesia, 4311 words when promoted, 4346 words on the last FAR. So, even if we consider only the size when they were last checked for FA status, the average size is 6500 words. The article currently has 8100 words, so it would be wise to cut it down a little further. -- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 19:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
One source uses IMF data, the other uses World Bank data. This looks inconsistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oxr033 ( talk • contribs) 14:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
The IMF is not a primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokturkk ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 29 May 2013 (UTC) Read! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Turkey#IMF_and_WB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokturkk ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Link? WB link Gross domestic product 2012, PPP "15 Turkey 1,306,155" http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP_PPP.pdf
WB link GDP per capita, PPP 2012 "Turkey 17,651" http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?order=wbapi_data_value_2012+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.215.81 ( talk) 19:27, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
The current version of the article links to this page, giving it the misleading title of "Motto". In reality, the word 'motto' is not even mentioned there. From this page, also from the ministry of culture, the motto is given equal space, along with Peace at home, peace in the world: "Sovereignty unconditionally belongs to Nation and Peace at home, peace in the world are the raising fundamentals of the Turkish Republic". Peace at Home, Peace in the World is used much more often as Turkey's motto, though never by official sources.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 13:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Peace at Home, Peace in the World is a policy in foreign relations . Because of that you can hear about this in international meetings.
Overall, Turkey conducts a foreign policy guided by the principle of “Peace at Home, Peace in the World” as set out by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk http://www.mfa.gov.tr/synopsis-of-the-turkish-foreign-policy.en.mfa
But
Sovereignty unconditionally belongs to the Nation is motto of founding and governance. if you can check the link you will see that principle is always written on the wall behind the chairman of the General Assembly Hall in the
Grand National Assembly and in Turkish constitutions.--
Qwl (
talk) 08:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Don't use Wikipedia talk pages for expressing personal views. Kavas ( talk) 13:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Firstly, Alevism is not a separate religious belief! It is a different sect of Islam like Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Jaafari. Besides, Cemevi officialy is not an alternative to a mosque because of not been adopted as a place of worship. 2.6 million Alevis live in Syria but there is no icon about cemevi in this chapter. This article is not the place of propaganda a specific opinion! Maurice07 ( talk) 08:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change needed for false information on this page, Politics section.
"According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, the AKP government has waged one of the world's biggest crackdowns on press freedoms.[73] A large number of journalists have been arrested using charges of "terrorism" and "anti-state activities" such as the Ergenekon and Balyoz cases, while thousands have been investigated on charges such as "denigrating Turkishness" or "insulting Islam" in an effort to sow self-censorship.[73] In 2012, the CPJ identified 76 jailed journalists in Turkey, including 61 directly held for their published work, more than in Iran, Eritrea or China.[73] A former U.S. State Department spokesman, Philip J. Crowley, said that the United States had "broad concerns about trends involving intimidation of journalists in Turkey."[74]"
This information is false. It should be replaced with "According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, the AKP government has waged one of the world's biggest crackdowns on press freedoms.[73]But the government claims "Journalists are not arrested because they are journalists, but because there are serious claims, some were accepted by courts, like the attempts made to overthrow the government." There are always such atrocious propogandas against the government, and mentioned articles in the report are altered or basically changed/are being planned to be changed."
Purple phenomenon ( talk) 13:24, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. You have provided no sources for your view that the information on the number of journalists jailed is false, and also no sources for the government quote.
Dana boomer (
talk) 18:58, 15 September 2013 (UTC)What info should go in the section and what in the article? Jzlcdh ( talk) 18:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Not Turkey.Turkey is old name.That must be Turkei (in Turkish Türkiye) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.8.177.235 ( talk) 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The specific text that should be removed; "During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were deported and exterminated in the Armenian Genocide.[46][47] The Turkish government denies that there was an Armenian Genocide and claims that Armenians were only relocated from the eastern war zone.[48] Large scale massacres were also committed against the empire's other minority groups such as the Greeks and Assyrians.[49][50][51]" because the sources that are cited are not academically reliable nor variable. In order to be objective the text should also mention that Armenians reject to open their National Archives about the "so called genocide" issue. There is a vast difference between history written to defend one-sided nationalist convictions and real accounts of history. Also ignore the fact that the Armenians who were most under Ottoman control, those in Western cities such as Izmir, Istanbul, and Edirne, were neither deported nor molested, presumably because they were not a threat. If genocide is to be considered, however, then the murders of Turks and Kurds in 1915 and 1916 must be included in the calculation of blame. The Armenian molestations and massacres in Cilicia, deplored even by their French and British allies, must be judged. And the exile or death of two-thirds of the Turks of Erivan Province, the Armenian Republic, during the war must be remembered. Any civil war will appear to be a genocide if only the dead of one side are counted. Their writings would be far more accurate, and would tell a very different story, if they included facts such as the deaths of nearly two-thirds of the Muslims of Van Vilayeti, deaths caused by the Russians and Armenians. Histories that strive for accuracy must include all the facts, and the deaths of millions of Muslims is surely a fact that deserves mention.
Please change this "During the war, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were deported and exterminated in the Armenian Genocide.[46][47] The Turkish government denies that there was an Armenian Genocide and claims that Armenians were only relocated from the eastern war zone.Large scale massacres were also committed against the empire's other minority groups such as the Greeks and Assyrians.[49][50][51]"
to During the war, an estimated between 125,000 and 150,000 Armenians emigrated from Ottoman Anatolia to Erivan and other parts of the Russian southern Caucasus. One of-the many forced migration was the organized expulsion of Armenians from much of Anatolia by the Ottoman government. In light of the history and the events of this war, it is true that the Ottomans had obvious reason to fear the Armenians, and that forced migration was an age-old tool in Middle Eastern and Balkan conflicts. It is also true that while its troops were fighting the Russians and Armenians, the Ottoman Government could not and did not properly protect the Armenian migrants. Nevertheless, more than 200,000 of the deported Armenians reached Greater Syria and survived. (Some estimate that as many as two-thirds of the deportees survived.)Popular opinion today knows of only one set of deportations, more properly called forced migrations, in Anatolia, the deportation of the Armenians. There were in fact many forced migrations. For the Armenians, the worst forced migrations came when they accompanied their own armies in retreat. Starvation and disease killed great numbers of both, far more than fell to enemies' bullets. Turkish Republic propose to the Armenian Republic that a joint commission be established, its members selected by scholarly academies in both countries. All archives should be opened to the commission -- not only the Ottoman Archives, but the archives of Armenia and of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. (The call is often made for the Turkish Archives to be opened completely. It is time to demand that Armenians do likewise.) I have been told that the Armenians will never agree to this, but how can anyone know unless they try? In any case, refusal to fairly and honestly consider this question would in itself be evidence that the accusations against the Turks are political, not scholarly." Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims at the end of the Empire, Justin McCarthy, 1997 Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
http://wilson.engr.wisc.edu/Armenia/mccarthy.html
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
71.145.243.67 (
talk •
contribs) 04:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. --
N
Y
Kevin 03:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)In the citation number 3, there is a reference to Turkstat, but no link to the actual report that says the population estimate for Turkey in 2013. 163.117.203.65 ( talk) 12:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Your last edits about wide panoramic photos, I am evaluating the scope of the WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT also, I didn't see any satisfactory explanation [12]. Such large panoramic photographs show only article more crowded and chaotic. Please take a look to the featured country articles : Germany, Japan, India, Rwanda and other advanced arts. France, United Kingdom, Iran and etc. There is no any wide panoromic image! Also, It's runs contrary to the criteria of featured article. Other disputed picture on Sport, I think, we must be objective about this. Turkey has three major sports club and dozens. Instead of a single reserve sport club on the section; a national approach, may be more constructive. Yes, footballers does not represent the current squad but the date was specified on the caption. Examples: Germany, Brazil. Maurice07 ( talk) 21:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
According to the figures by The World Bank, the actual Gini Coefficient rate in Turkey was 39 for 2008, not 40. Please change, no need for it to be higher than it is.
In the most recent survey it was 40:
GINI World Bank
Pqnlrn (
talk) 04:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
I am adding main sectors of economy and other subtitles to 'culture' sections(why there was an only subtitle 'sports' anyway). Check these countries about my changes,in those pages more than two subtitles for economy and culture are used; Japan, Denmark,Spain,Greece,S.Korea. KazekageTR ( talk) 14:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
I didint know that there was an actual image dimension standart thanks for saying that. The one in the biodiverstiy section is useless and we could remove one of two panoramic pics in the economics section. KazekageTR ( talk) 14:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)