Talk:List of massacres in Turkey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconLaw Enforcement Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconLaw Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Middle East
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion not met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Middle Eastern military history task force

Ancient Anatolia? Byzantine Empire? Not relevant to Turkey...

Ancient Anatolia is not Turkey. Neither is the Byzantine Empire. Turkey is a continuation of the Ottoman Empire and therefore those two may stay. I propose deleting anything before that. Proudbolsahye (talk) 03:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantines were the predecessor of the Ottomans and so was Ancient Anatolia of Byzantines. But are you trying to say that only massacres comitted by Turks may stay and everything except Armenian Genocide should be deleted?DragonTiger23 (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Also, I would like this[1] to be added back to the article, since it occurred within the
Republic of Turkey and its predecessor, the Ottoman Empire.". --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
More nonsense. Dragon Tiger has now added a battle(
coatrack for DragonTiger to label any conflict(anachronistically) as a massacre. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Removed Fall of Smyrna, since Phil Mundt is a retired geologist,[3] not a historian and the Byzantine Empire is not "Turkey". --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:05, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article states: "The following is a list of massacres that have occurred in Turkey and its predecessors (numbers may be approximate, as estimates vary greatly)".

It is really funny, how you are now discrediting the source, it is always the same behavior when

WP:JDLI
. That source is used in the
Ethnic Cleansing article to "prove" [4]that Seljuk Turks ethnically cleansed Greeks. Are you now going to say the same things there and remove it, I don't think so. Besides you did not have to critisize the source, because more sources describe the massacre of Levounion. It is more detailed in its own article Battle of Levounion
.

All these massacres happened in the area of modern Turkey, they are relevant why should it be removed? Lumping Ottoman massacres in the area of modern Turkey together with Modern Turkey is not necessary, than we should better create List of Massacres in the Ottoman Empire.DragonTiger23 (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also I do not understand why you are insisting on adding a massacre in Bulgaria(different country) in the List of Massacres in Turkey article? And for some reason you are in this case not critical to the source at all.DragonTiger23 (talk) 18:52, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1.As I have clearly shown, the two massacres(anachronistic) do not have reliable sources. Your pushing to include any and all "massacres" appear to be linked to Byzantines(ie.Greeks)(anachronistically), whereas you are quick to remove a well sourced massacre by the Ottoman Empire!??
2.If you can not seem to comprehend why the
April Uprising should be listed for the Ottoman Empire
, take your own advice(ie. Battle of Levounion) check the article which has 27 inline citations and the opening sentence, "The April Uprising was an insurrection organised by the Bulgarians in the Ottoman Empire from April to May 1876, which indirectly resulted in the re-establishment of Bulgaria in 1878." It would appear that 27 inline citations is not enough for your opinion. "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?".....
3.You again try to label another editor as biased, with your statement, "Besides you did not have to critisize the source, because more sources describe the massacre of Levounion. It is more detailed in its own article Battle of Levounion.". Yet your "source" is by a Nigerian linguist? I did check the Battle of Levounion, which has 2 inline sources, neither of which references a massacre. So again your statement is refuted.
4.If you believe a "List of massacres in the Ottoman Empire" then clearly "Ancient Anatolia" and "Byzantine Empire" should not be listed here! Odd how you are quick to remove what
you don't like
, but add anachronistic information!
5.And just what the hell does this mean? "It is really funny, how you are now discrediting the source, it is always the same behavior when
Ethnic Cleansing article to "prove" [5]that Seljuk Turks ethnically cleansed Greeks." For one thing, you just added that source[6] today! Are you insinuating I'm a sock? Am I editing Ethnic cleansing on a daily/weekly basis? From what I can tell I have never edited Ethnic cleansing. It would appear either you are unjustly attacking another editor(not commenting on content) or you are accusing me of sockpuppetry. Continue to do so at your own risk. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Now you know about

Ethnic Cleansing, are you going to remove the source in the ethnic cleansing article too?DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Due to your accusation that I have already edited there, no. I have no interest in that article. You can't make your own argument? Besides, for all the historians that have written about that time period, if such "ethnic cleansing" would have occurred surely a modern historian would have written about it! Correct? --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not accuse you of editing there, I wrote that the source you criticise is used in the

WP:LIKE
(?). DragonTiger23 (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2013 (UTC) You could google search it instead of denying it instantly, here a source for Levounioun,[1]DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow more accusations. Now I'm not an honest person? You insinuate I am editing at
Ethnic Cleansing article to "prove" [7]that Seljuk Turks ethnically cleansed Greeks.". Final warning. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
If a
reliable source can be found, then it belongs under "List of massacres in the Byzantine Empire", not "Turkey" as you have so clearly pointed out(see below). --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

I never said that you edited ethnic cleansing. I informed you that the book of the Nigerian linguist (which you criticised as unreliable) is used[8] by others on the

Ethnic Cleansing article to prove an ethnic cleansing. So if the source is unreliable than it also should be removed from there. I do not personally attack you I am just amazed.DragonTiger23 (talk) 07:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

I'm amazed you continue to add massacres to the article without sources[9][10]. I am equally amazed by your hypocrisy, since you were fine using that source here,
yet you were adamant against someone else using the same source(at Ethnic cleansing) for their information. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

I am amazed again, those massacres have their own wiki articles with sources so instead of calling them unreliable you could read them. The Nigerian linguist source was first used on the

Ethnic Cleansing article, nobody called it unreliable then, but when I used the same source to add info about a massacre here, you anounced it was unreliable.DragonTiger23 (talk) 21:17, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Yet again, you completely ignore the fact that I have never edited on the
Ethnic Cleansing
article. I gave information showing that a Nigerian linguist has no qualifications as a historian for that time period. Where was your information showing otherwise?? Undoubtedly you were to "amazed" to do the proper work.
Instead of "being amazed" you should take the time to check your sources. Try focusing on content not the editor(s). Your continued rhetoric just proves how desperate you are to
"run off" other editors. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Please no

WP:JDLIDragonTiger23 (talk) 09:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

April Uprising is in Bulgaria, all the other massacres of the Ottoman Empire are in their relevant countries articles, check the article, list of massacres in Greece, in Ottoman syria and so on.DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then this article needs to be renamed, "List of massacres in the Republic of Turkey". --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe that is better, what do other users think?DragonTiger23 (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to keep the name of the article as is since the general consensus in Wikipedia is that the Republic of Turkey is a successive state of the Ottoman Empire (see Turkey article). Therefore, massacres of both the Ottoman Empire and Republic of Turkey may be included into one article. I would also like to mention that the massacres done during the Greco-Turkish war should not be placed separately since the motivations and context of these massacres are all the same. For example, the Salihli and Usak massacres are under the same context, background and intent. Above all, these are villages that are very near each other. What's the point of expanding it as such? It is like placing the massacres that happened in Bingol and Mush separately even when it is under the broader context of the Armenian Genocide. I propose combining all those massacres under the Greco-Turkish war and list them under civilian casualties or mutual massacres of that sort. Proudbolsahye (talk) 05:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Most important the Salihli and the Usak massacres are not even sourced as massacres and they should go. If a part of the town's buildings faced destruction during warfare (that's what is sourced here) this isn't defined as massacre. Thus,
wp:rs is needed.Alexikoua (talk) 07:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
I have to agree per Proudbolsahye, all similar events should be combined in presented under a general event (Armenian Genocide, Massacres during Greek-Turkish War, Gree Geonice etc.). Details can be found in these article, without making it hard for the reader.Alexikoua (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose such a decision, remember this is a list and it has the space to list every event seperate. I find this yet another attempt to deny, censor or minimise the sufferings of Turkish/Muslim people of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish republic. This is a list of massacres not total war casualties, so instead of collective numbers of the Armenian/Greek genocide we should list the seperate massacres in these events.

Besides the Republic of Turkey can be the successor of the Ottomans yet they are still very different, there are some authors who argue that the Ottomans were a successor state to the Byzantine Empire. So it was wrong to censor Byzantine massacres and remove it from here. While no one here has ever denied the sufferings of Christians/Greeks or Armenians I found it very sad that people who accuse Turks of that behavior show it themselves. Besides the listed events are not that long either. If you insist on censoring Turkish suffering I will take it to admin level.DragonTiger23 (talk) 08:59, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestion is a quite reasonable one, especially if the article is flooded with poorly sourced or even completely unsourced cases. Unfortunately personal attacking is the only argument provided against this proposal. Something that should be avoided. Also this is the epitomy of dirsuption: [[11]] and clearly proves that the user rejects any kind of discussion (the civilized sequence would be first to provide a decent citation which proves it was a massacre per comments kindly added in the dubious tag and then remove it).Alexikoua (talk) 09:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All events that I added are sourced, why are you still adding

WP:JDLI
but nobody has ever criticised what you added. See [[12]].DragonTiger23 (talk) 09:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to read wp:citation, simply a snippet link doesn't prove we have wp:rs.Alexikoua (talk) 09:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How strange, you used a snippet source here to prove ethnic cleansing[13]. The burning of Turkish cities by retreating Greek troops is documented in numerous Western/Greek and Turkish sources, they were deliberate and accompanied by massacres and rape, the number of 200 killed is given by that source. There is no question that the city was burned and local population killed but still you are adding dubious and full citations to sourced content. So please avoid

WP:JDLI.DragonTiger23 (talk) 09:59, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

(ignore trolling) This [[14]] is properly cited per wp:citation, while this [[15]] doesn't give the slightest information about the source (not even author). Once more, you need to read carefully wp:citation, but considering you just found a snippet and nothing more I suppose it's impossible to find something more, and unfortunately it has be removed sooner or latter.Alexikoua (talk) 10:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, if we take into account several academic sources, for example this one [[16]], it appears that the 1919-1922 section should include at least 32 more cases. Another argument to remove all these events and present them under a general category.Alexikoua (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no harm in adding more sourced reliable information about massacres to the list,

WP:JDLI is wrong.DragonTiger23 (talk) 11:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Approximately 90 percent of the Armenians of Erzurum province were killed

This is not demographically possible according to the Ottoman population census. Those show the total Armenian population of Erzurum city and the province to have grown till 1914. They give 108k Armenian in 1893 and 135k in 1914. If there were 60k killed than that would mean that the Armenian population of the entire

Erzurum Vilayet(Province) in 1894 was 168k and the loss would be 36% for the entire Vilayet. According to Ottoman sources the district (Kaza) of Erzurum city had 11k Armenians in 1882. [1] There still was an Armenian population in 1915 which was deported. Can someone check the source critically.DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:28, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

However the Ottoman census gives the Armenian population in Erzurum province as 116k in 1906, if these were the surviving 10% than the pre-massacre Armenian population of Erzurum should be 1,16 million and the death toll 1 million.DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman census is unreliable. The Ottoman government is notorious for skewing numbers. We need third party sources on the population. Proudbolsahye (talk) 05:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument makes no sense, have you even read what I wrote? If the Ottoman census is wrong then there should be 1 million Armenians killed in Erzerum province alone in 1895. So instead of repeating your

wp:like
it. We have to be neutral.

Furthermore Ottoman census are reliable, all other western sources and estimates are based upon them. The Ottomans were the only ones to have the means to count their own population. However there is some minor under counting of children and women. But generally they are reliable.DragonTiger23 (talk) 08:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have only showed the Ottoman census. You haven't confirmed it with third party survey records. That is why the Ottoman census alone is not reliable. Especially when there are plenty of third party sources that have deemed the Ottoman census records as unreliable. Proudbolsahye (talk) 06:57, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vital Cuinet, French geographer, gives 134,967 Armenians for Erzurum Vilayet in 1896. Source: "La Turquie d'Asie; géographie administrative, statistique" If this was the surviving 10% Armenian population then the casualties of 1894 would be 135k x 10 - 135k = 1,215 million killed. DragonTiger23 (talk) 11:40, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre of March 16 ?

The source seems to be quite tenuous. The accusation made by Kamil Tekin Sürek, a murder witness and lawyer, does not appear to have any real evidence. I see no mention of the

reliable sourcing guidelines. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Unexplained manipulation of sourced content

It appears that a number of recent edit are pushing a specific pro-Turkish pov, although not a single additional source is presented so far, to justify some of the manipulation of sourced date. To sum up:

  • [[17]] Aydin: perpetrators and victims from Turks&Greeks became simply mixed.
  • Smyrna Catastrophe: The responsible part from Turks became unknown (?), although this isn't about by the fire, but the massacre itself. Also the word "Turkish forces" became "outraged mob" without nationality.
  • Istanbul riots: the perpetrator from Turkish government became Turkish nationalist [[18]] and then simply Nationalists"[[19]
    ] (without mentioning their nationality).
  • [[20]] The Massacres in the vilayet of Mamuretülaziz was removed, although per previous discussion in this talkpage, there was no consensus to summarize massacres in wider articles (i.e. in genocide if they can included).
  • In Ayvalik the number was dropped from 2,977 to hundreds [[21]], although by doing the math [[22]] the number is still 2,977 (by checking the source the "hundreds" claim is about the inhabitants of Cunda not Ayvalik).

In case no real arguments are presented with reliable data to support the above adjustments, it can be easy concluded that this is nothing more than manipulation of sourced content and the previous version (on the above mentioned occasions) should be restored.Alexikoua (talk) 17:23, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent weird additions

The Greco-Turkish War section was subject to a massive wave of additions, most of them were poorly sourced (either poor citationss without author, url or using pov sources such as the Ataturk foundation) or the specific sources were cherry picked.Alexikoua (talk) 20:06, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

During the war (1919-1922) nearly 1.2 million Muslims in western Anatolia had died

It appears that this piece of info can't be confirmed by any detailed report. In fact the total number of Muslims in the wider

1,119,000
, according to the pro-Turkish Ottoman statistics. This means slighlty more victims than the total number...

On the contrary the specific information is rejected by several schoolar, who point out that the Turkish (Muslim according to Ottoman millet system) victims during the Greek-Turkish War were possibly "more the 15,000" [[23]][[24]].Alexikoua (talk) 13:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Removed.
talk) 17:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
What's most important on this, it's that even if the claimed number wouldn't exceed the total population, this isn't confirmed by any genocide scholar or scholar in general. The diferrence with the 15k claim, which is well exmplained in the above link is astronomical indeed.Alexikoua (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Aidin_Vilayet =/= All of Western Anatolia. Learn geography. Cavann (talk) 19:48, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
For sure Aidin Vilaiet incorporates also region of interior Anatolia. This makes the specific claim even more fictious.Alexikoua (talk) 19:52, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anything west of Adana would be Western Anatolia, especially if it is a bi-sectional division (east and west). This is why it is not up to you to question reliable sources. Cavann (talk) 19:56, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've placed both theories, but the claim about the 1,3 mil. victims just in 3 years, needs some serious backing. On which data is the author based in order to claim that a genocide happenned against the speicifc ethnic group? So far it seems that the number was picked at random, without even adding a secondary source. In general a genocide needs serious bibliography to be supported, not just random numbers of a single work (at least a research, publisher, institute).Alexikoua (talk) 20:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You can go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for input, if you think this source is not reliable. Until then, it is a source published by Cambridge University Press and it is not up to you to question it. You may add other opposing sources, however. FYI, Chatty is a Professor of Anthropology and Forced Migration in Oxford University [25]. Cavann (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems you can't get it. The questions are quite simply: From where is Chatty basing a 1,3 million dead genocide? (When someone mentions a number at random, whithout the slightest detail, this does not confirm a genocide) Plz provide
  • at least relevant link of the research it was done (if it happenned in that scale there will be for sure tons of books claiming that ca. 1+ million Muslim Turks died in 1919-1822)
  • the participating institute(s),
  • and the authors, from which Chatty is based. In general such genocides based on a single number and nothing more, are something that need to go from wiki, per
    Wikipedia:EXCEPTIONALAlexikoua (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Can you not read bibliography? p. 87:
"These figures are derived from McCarthy (1983).
By 1920, Muslims comprised only 14 per cent of the population (also see Karpat 1985:50—51; Rothschild 1974:327)."
Cavann (talk) 20:57, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, she does not use the word "genocide." I am done discussing this with you. As I said, if you think the source is exceptional or not reliable, go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. I cannot waste my time looking up bibliography for you. Cavann (talk) 20:58, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. So it appears that this claim is completely science fiction. Mccarthy (who is in general pro-Turkish and questioned in his research, but let's leave it for now) says: the Muslim population of the area invaded by Greece was 1.2 million smaller than in 1913, before the wars. Incredible numbers had died.. Bingo, this number isn't limited to the specific war, while more important it is about the region controlled by the Greek Army, i.e. west of Ankara & north of Menderes river. Moreover, by checking Chatty again, he doesn't limit the time period from 1919 to 1922, as DTiger wrongly suggested too. So the number concerns the period from 1913 to 1922 (according to Mccarthy, who is by the way a Armenian genocide denialist)Alexikoua (talk) 21:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This argument makes sense (unlike subjective definitions of Western Anatolia), and I'll add the qualifiers into the article. Cavann (talk) 21:29, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is isn't the article to discuss this issue, nor is it possible to do so given the article format. This issue is simply too complicated to be discussed in a series of table footnotes. I am removing all footnotes.

talk) 07:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Wikipedia is not here for you to promote your
WP:NPOV. All these issues are very complex, yet it is presented in a simple table here. Cavann (talk) 19:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Furthermore, the purported ethnic cleansing of "millions" of Muslims from the Balkans and Caucausus took place...in the Balkans and Caucasus, not Turkey. As the article shows, in the period 1821-1918, all the massacres in turkey was carried out by Muslims/Turks. All the incidents in the first two tables refer to massacres where the victims were Christian, there is not one massacre of Turks. Hence, including in the footnotes McCarthy's claim of the ethnic cleansing of millions of Muslims is even more off-topic, and even more tendentious.

talk) 07:36, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

I have serious doubt about the neutrality of the specific claim. But the main point here is that this claim isn't limited in the 1919-22 period, so it can't stay as a note in this section.Alexikoua (talk) 10:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Athenean, can you not read? "The following is a list of massacres that have occurred in Turkey and its predecessors." Ottoman Empire was Turkey's predecessor. Plus, some events, like
Armenian Genocide, happened outside today's Turkey's border at least partially. Are you gonna divide those events to include casualties that happened only in today's Turkey's borders? This blatant disregard for reliable sources and inclusion of relevant material must stop. And it is ridiculous you are the one accusing me of nationalistic POV. LOL. Cavann (talk) 19:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
@Cavann, you need to explain why you reverted the Smyrna landing (1919) addition [[26]], by removing the citation and leaving the entire part uncited. Another point is why an estimate of a 1913-1922 period should be part of the Greek-Turkish War (1919-1922) (apart from the questioned neutrality of the source as mentioned by Athenean). Since a wrong edit summary has been used, I can only assume that it was just another blind revert.Alexikoua (talk) 19:30, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to add it back, I just reverted deletion of 5000 bytes. And that is the most appropriate section, since info about 1913-1922 should be presented in the most recent relevant section. Given the qualifiers about the period (1913-1922), deleting this cause it includes multiple periods as presented in the article seems like another nonsensical excuse such as coming up with blatantly false definitions of Western Anatolia. This must stop. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion, as in ignoring relevant and reliably sourced material to push your POV. Cavann (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The purported ethnic cleansing of the Balkan muslims is completely off-topic for this article, because this is a list of massacres in Turkey. Doesn't matter how many bytes of text it is, or how reliable McCarthy is, this has simply no place in the article, period. It has nothing to do with source reliability. Similarly, the issue of casualties during the war is far too complex to be discussed in a series of table footnotes. I have removed Rummel as well as McCarthy. There are many scholars and many estimates, are to include them all? Nonsense. This is just meant to be a list, leave it at that.
talk) 20:21, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Parts of Turkey is in Balkans, and you also deleted claims about deaths in Western Anatolia -which is in Turkey,- while maintaining events that happened partially outside Turkey's modern borders. This double standard is a POV. Cavann (talk) 20:28, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No double standard whatsoever. I removed all footnotes, end of story. Also, no turks were cleansed from Eastern Thrace (the tiny bit of Turkey still in the Balkans). Those Turks that left were from what is now the former yugoslavia, greece, bulgaria, etc...Whereas the Armenian genocide overwhelmingly took place in what is now Turkey. That is why there are no Armenians left in those places, after all.
talk) 20:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
I know geography is not your forte, but if you are gonna claim no double standards, then remove all events and casualties that happened outside today's Turkey's borders. Then add back claims about Western Anatolia. Cavann (talk) 20:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, we are not going to discuss the incredibly complex issue of casualties of the Greco-Turkish war in a series of table footnotes. But feel free to remove any events that did not occur inside the borders of today's Turkey.
talk) 20:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Isn't that ridiculous? Various complex issues are presented in simple table format, yet you are against footnotes. Cavann (talk) 21:02, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Whole books have been written on the issue. We are not going to summarize it in a series of table footnotes.
talk) 21:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
LOL. And whole books haven't been written about other events in tables? Yet they are summaried in one row. Cavann (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just be aware that the Armenian and Assyrian genocides, as well as the Hamidian massacres took place mostly in what is now Turkey, so don't even think of removing those.
talk) 20:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Unlike you, I do not push my POV to abuse Wikipedia articles. Relevant material should be in the relevant article. Cavann (talk) 21:02, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not honoring that with a response. Have a nice day.
talk) 21:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Wikipedia:Content forking

If this article is going to list massacres in modern Turkey's borders, then it doesn't make sense to include events before 1923. The article is a POV fork at the moment. I am not even talking about frivolous excuse Athenean came up with to remove notes. Cavann (talk) 16:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understand what a content fork is. What article is this a fork of. The pseudo-issue you mention can be simply addressed by modifying the first sentence of the article to "This is a list of massacres that have occurred on the territory of modern-day Turkey". By the way, I remember you saying that the article contained massacres that had occurred outside of the territory of modern-day Turkey and that you would remove them. Well? Did you find any?

talk) 19:36, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

You need to go over each line and remove casualties/events that happened outside Turkey and adjust numbers. I'm not doing your homework for you. Cavann (talk) 19:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Which events? As far as I can tell all events happened inside the borders of what is now Turkey. And which article is this a fork of? Answer the question.
talk) 19:42, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Are you really that geography illiterate? You think Deir ez-Zor is in Turkey? Cavann (talk) 19:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC) Eg:[reply]
The overwhelming majority of Armenian victims of the genocide lived within the current borders of the Republic of Turkey. --
talk 19:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
It would be the content fork of relevant articles such as Ottoman_casualties_of_World_War_I. Cavann (talk) 19:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deir ez-Zor does not have its own entry, it is only mentioned in relation to the Armenian Genocide, which occurred largely on the territory of what is now Turkey.
talk) 19:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
"which occurred largely on the territory of what is now Turkey" Source? Then find the number, and use that number, instead of overall number, if you want to apply a geographical standard. Cavann (talk) 19:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Source? Start with the ones listed in
talk) 19:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
I am not doing your homework as I said. Currently, the number listed is the overall number, not the number of casualties that happened inside modern Turkey's borders. Cavann (talk) 19:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the one who needs to do some homework is you, namely regarding some reading up on the Armenian Genocide and where it occurred.
talk) 20:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

@Cavann: There is no way one can calculate the number of Armenian killed within Turkey's current borders. Historians can't even agree on the overall number of the genocide victims. --

talk 20:02, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

So you agree a strict geographical standard to limit content is nonsensical? Maybe we should also limit content based on a legal standard and exclude everything before 1923 from this article, since Turkey did not exist as a legal entity before 1923. Cavann (talk) 20:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Read my comment instead assuming stuff. I don't care if you and other users agree to limit the massacres within the current Turkish borders or not. My point is, most of the atrocities happened within the current borders and it's impossible to calculate (and no historian has ever calcualted), the number of the victims with the existing borders. You can add a note saying that the Armenian Genocide partly occurred outside of modern Turkey. --
talk 20:33, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
None of this is an excuse to include the completely irrelevant subject of the Balkan Muslims.
talk) 20:34, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Those massacres happened during the Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. Hence, including Muslim casualties as a footnote during this period is relevant, given these issues are at least partially connected. Cavann (talk) 20:42, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The excuse keeps changing. First it was content forking, then some nonsense about the Armenian genocide, now this. Forget it. This is just nationalist POV-pushing, nothing more.
talk) 20:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
"nationalist POV-pushing" is funny coming from you to me. Also, if you are going to warn me about being civil, do not forget to contain yourself first. Cavann (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

McCarthy's reliability

talk 19:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Totally agree. He is in the pay of the Turkish government, and he has been the recipient of a huge amount of criticism by the academic community.
talk) 19:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Multiple sources use same figures, including Chatty. Go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cavann (talk) 20:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Start by reading the "Criticism" section of
talk) 20:36, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Agree too. He belongs to a tiny minority of scholars that support fringe theories. Not to mention that the specific data is completely problematic in the specific article: complete geographic (Balkans are also included in the numbers) and chronological (in the Greco-Turkish War the number of victims incorporates a wider 1913-1922 time period) incosistency in order to overinflate the numbers and emphasize on the pro-Turkish pov. To sum we have a weird compination of wp:synth, wp:pov, wp:fringe.Alexikoua (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We are using his statistics, which are used by other sources, not his conclusions with respect to events. Differentiate what is being cited to support what. Cavann (talk) 20:44, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Start by reading the "Criticism" section of Justin McCarthy (American historian)]. - I did; it provides zero information that would allow me to actually form an opinion about the content and merits of his scholarship. Podiaebba (talk) 00:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Lewis has been accused of "denialism" in the matter as well. I'd love to see you fellas blacklist him from Wikipedia as a fringe nutcase. :) --Mttll (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then read it again, until you understand what it says.
talk) 06:26, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
You should use sources from academic publishers that have gone through
weight to assign these views. TFD (talk) 18:18, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
The article must be in line with the general consensus of Wikipedia which presents the Armenian Genocide as fact. Just like any other story, there may be two-sides, however, the side that presents it as fact has been the one adopted by the Wikipedia community through a consensus, while the other side, a minority position pushed by the Government of Turkey, has not. Take a glance at the article Armenian Genocide for example, it is not called the "So-called Armenian Genocide" or "Armenian Genocide allegations" and etc. All denialist articles and opinons are held seperate from any article related to the Genocide and that ANY denialist source is considered unreliable. The problem here is that certain users are presenting Justin McCarthys' arguments as fact, even when they are denialist in nature. McCarthy pushes a minority view which has not been adopted by Wikipedia and is utimately considered unreliable data by
Denial of Armenian Genocide article but never into Armenian Genocide/Holocaust related articles. Arbcom takes the position seriously, see Admin Sandstein's remark here. The user was formally warned for his constant assertion of denialist information and sources and as of this point may be banned if he/she continues. Proudbolsahye (talk) 23:32, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Didn't read that giant paragraph after the first sentence. McCarthy's source was used to cite Turkish casualty statistics, and is repeated by other sources. McCarthy's source was NOT BEING used to cite anything with respect to Armenian Genocide. Cavann (talk) 03:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What don't you understand? The others sources who cite McCarthy don't "legitimatize" him. Azerbaijan claims that 20% of its territory is occupied by Armenia. It is often repeated by Western sources, when in fact only 13-14% of Azeri territory is under Armenian control. See
talk 04:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Massacres in the Çoruh River valley

The only source given for this is by Uğur Ümit Üngör. No problem here, he seems to be a reliable author. The problem is that online version of his book doesn't say where exactly the massacres took place and when they took place.

  • The first phase of Armenian revenge was executed under the Russian occupation of Eastern Anatolia. We can assume that those massacres took place after or in 1915, but definitely not in 1914, because Russia didn't occupy parts of eastern Anatolia until mid-1915 and
    early 1916
    .
  • The second issue is the location. The source says "the valley of the Corukh river in the South-West Caucasus". That is too generic.
    talk 02:05, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Problems fixed

I'm happy to report I've fixed most of the persitent problems this article has been having, including putting all the post World War deaths together instead of in single regions, which made it unreadably wrong. I've also removed the so called massacres without any sources that vandals have continued to put up. In addition, I have removed everything that isn't called a massacre and has no reason being here. This article had heavily lost its objective and became a gallery for small events with few credibility, usually made up by propagandists. This is not a gallery, only events that are massacres go here. For example, neither the

Boston Marathon bombings or 2013 Los Angeles International Airport shooting go on List of massacres in the United States. HouseOfArtaxiad (talk) 16:21, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

As for the Greek-Turkish War 1919-1922 case, it appears we have consensus now. Everyone agreed that the section should be trimmed and details should be included in the specific article.Alexikoua (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (
    WP:ARBAA2, another reason for me to avoid the conflict as much as possible. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 19:26, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
    ]

1919-1922

Each case about the Greek-Turkish war (1919-1922) is mentioned in the correspondent article with a link just under the head of the section. I can't see a decent argument to repeat the same content here too, (it describes events of the same war, almost a journal style day by day account) apart from a summarize of the total victims from each side.Alexikoua (talk) 12:02, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No words for ethnic minorities in modern Turkey apart from Greeks and Kurds

Turkey had done a good job covering all of its atrocities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.180.20.251 (talk) 14:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Article is not neutral its one sided and mostly anti-Turkish. Has very few massacres comitted on Turks. Incorrectly lists the total death toll of wars as massacre. Uses inflated numbers. Should be improved and problems fixed. Till then adding pov tag. DragonTiger23 (talk) 10:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Negative propaganda

Those events described here the Ottoman Empire, has experienced some period of the Republic of Turkey. Political currents in these incidents, terrorist groups, insurgents have a great influence.

The events that a lot of riots and massacres took place in the country's history are the facts. Here defame Turkey to humiliate think much exaggerated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.178.59.85 (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mongol invasions of Anatolia

I wanted to add

talk) 06:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Not a case of serial killing

I just reverted an edit which attempted to connect this historical article with the subject of

serial killers, on the basis of that set of individuals being also known as "mass murderers." Sorry, Dude, but mass murder by one group committed on another group does not follow the paradigm of one serial killer sequentially killing people, generally one or two at a time, and the connection is sick and in bad taste.--Quisqualis (talk) 08:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

I didn't say that; you've misunderstood me. The Serial Killer Project also covers mass murders - read its banner. That's why this talk page has the SKP banner on it. Jim Michael (talk) 12:10, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of massacres in Turkey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of massacres in Turkey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of List of massacres in Turkey

A tag has been placed on List of massacres in Turkey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

many so-called massacres have no sources, Turkey didnt exist before 1923 and thus %99 of massacres listed in this article couldn't have been committed in Turkey and this article is overall a huge mess

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

here. 78.174.41.81 (talk) 11:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

Contested deletion

Speedy deletion nomination of List of massacres in Turkey

A tag has been placed on List of massacres in Turkey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

many so-called massacres have no sources, Turkey didnt exist before 1923 and thus %99 of massacres listed in this article couldn't have been committed in Turkey and this article is overall a huge mess

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

here. 185.185.40.79 (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

About what is this article? about massacres or bombings?

I've seen that the page is filled with bombings of any kind. They can go into a Category about terrorist attacks, but this is an article about massacres. Like an enormous amount of force of strength attacking an unprepared minority. The Hamidian massacres are given as an example at the Massacre page. I'd like to take the bombings out of this article if no one opposes reasonably.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed split

As the Republic of Turkey is only a century old, I propose retaining this article for the massacres of the last 100 years and moving the others into List of massacres of the Ottoman Empire etc.

"second most"? re Armenian genocide 1918

"It is the second most publicised case of genocide after the Holocaust." Should we presume this should read "It is the most publicised case of genocide after the Holocaust" or, "It is the second most publicised case of genocide, after the Holocaust."? --2607:FEA8:D5DF:1AF0:DBD:BB97:BC27:B922 (talk) 12:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant historical flow

When quickly checking the historical perspectives of similar pages, I couldn't find such a large historical time frame in any list of massacre list. These massacres could be listed as 'Massacres in Anatolia,' not as 'Turkey.' In this way, Turkey seems like the world's oldest and only country up until the 13th century which we all can imagine only reflects some sort of hostility and childish stupidity. This page appears to be prepared with defamation and negative propaganda purposes. I request a quick edit; otherwise, I will take the issue to the relevant administrators, demanding the removal of the editors who prepared/initiated this page from the platform. What you are doing goes against the rules of the platform. And this platform is not your child`s play. 2003:D4:772B:82FD:853C:C32C:C3EF:F457 (talk) 22:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_massacres_in_Turkey&oldid=1207397131"