Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:59, 25 March 2006

Turkish Kurdistan and Iranian Kurdistan

Page should be deleted and redirect to Kurds in Turkey etc..

A similar nomination has recently taken place and result was:

The result of the debate was Delete and Redirect. I considered relisting this, but it's had 14 days already and I think on strength of argument (particularly regarding the page's status as a POV fork) there is a consensus to redirect it. I've taken "redirect" to mean in this context "delete and redirect", given that there's no point in just replacing a contentous POV fork with a soft redirect that can be undone with a couple of mouse clicks. kingboyk 13:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

--Cool Cat 22:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. According to Encyclopaedia of Islam, south-eastern parts of Turkey are called Turkish Kurdistan, which covers 17 provinces of Turkey . Heja Helweda 22:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

It is still a pov fork. The question is why should it be separate from Kurds in Turkey--Cool Cat 22:25, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Because the terms listed are in general use. Turkish Kurdistan and Iranian Kurdistan return 27,000 and 80,000 google hits, respectively. The terms are used by many people, not just Kurds. Iranian Kurdistan has been used in numerous sources, such as ,,,,, and in Academic sources such as .Heja Helweda 22:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

That doesnt explain why that can't be done with a redirect. --Cool Cat 22:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, Kurdistan by definition is a geographic region, and it spans several countries. This is different from Kurds here and there, since the term Kurd refers to a group of people not a region. So Turkish Kurdistan which is a region can not be redirected to Kurds in Turkey, a group of people. It's like redirecting apples to oranges.Heja Helweda 23:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete and redirect. I don't think there is much to discuss when we have the Syrian Kurdistan example in front of us. It is the same situation, the same argument and I propose the same solution, delete and redirect to Kurds in Turkey.--Kagan the Barbarian 22:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep until we have a general discussion of how to handle ethic groups, ethnic minorities, separatists or irredentist claims, etc. Problems seem to be endemic in Middle Eastern/Central Asian/South Asian articles, and deserve a broader consideration. I plan to raise the topic at the Village Pump. Handling these matters as a series of pitched battles between proponents of various nationalisms, as edit or AfD wars, leads to constant simmering conflict. Zora 22:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect. As per Cool Cat and Adkagansu. --ManiF 22:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect we can disscuss this ethnic group in kurds of turkey. Kurdistan is just a confusion in minds. since there is no place called kurdistan. Zora, he is just saving mind by sayin keep it until..., it is the second time that I am voting for its deletion.--TuzsuzDeliBekir 22:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or rename them to Northern Kurdistan and Eastern Kurdistan. There is a large Kurdistan according to every encyclopedias and reliable sources but due to anti-Kurdish political reasons these countries are afraid of recognozing these regions; so the terms Northern and Eastern which are non-political and just geographical terms and do not need regognation by any turk seem to be more neutral and proper. Diyako Talk + 22:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  How is the presence of this article "more neutral" when everyone but some Kurds are dening the existance of the regions? There exists a contraversial region known as Kurdistan and it has its own article. The question still is why should Turkish Kurdistan be separate from Kurds in Turkey?

  You are entitled to your POV about countries being afraid. While I dont share the POV, I do not see how that is relevant to this AfD.

  --Cool Cat 23:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  Because people and region are too defferent issues. Diyako Talk + 23:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  But people live in the region. anything relevant to kurdish people in Turkey can be in Kurds in Turkey. Region stuff that is relevant to other people as wellas kurds can go to approporate articles related to Turkey rather than being redundent coppies of information on this article. --Cool Cat 23:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  You are trying to divide Turkey into geopolitical segments that don't exist. There are 15 million Kurds in Turkey spread everywhere in the country, there is a SE region in Turkey where Kurdish population are the majority but there is no such state, province, city as Turkish Kurdistan.--Kagan the Barbarian 23:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  Correction. It has been claimed that way. No census was held establishing ethnicity. --Cool Cat 23:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  True, I don't have any source concerning ethnic population in SE Turkey. It is just general belief.--Kagan the Barbarian 23:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  It is not a city, It is a ethnographic, cultural, and historical...etc region which Turkish governmant politically has not recognized it and this has been clearly stated in the article. It is the same as article Kurdistan but more zoomed. Diyako Talk + 23:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  Thats fascinating. Why is it necesary? Stuff about Kurds in Turekey have its own article.

  Kurdistan is obviously a pov title that may be disputed at least by the United Nations and all member states. One article about Kurdistan is fair enough.

  If it is same as Kurdistan you'd agree at its redundetness, right?

  --Cool Cat 23:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  Probably you should try to remove Kurdistan article altogether. If there is Kurdistan page, then there can be articles about its different parts.Heja Helweda 23:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  I dont follow that logic. If there is an article about Albert Einstein (which no one disputes his existance) does that mean there can be articles about parts of Albert Einstein? --Cool Cat 23:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  What about Turkistan? I don't see Uzbek Turkistan, Kazakh Turkistan or Turkmen Turkistan? Even Chinese Turkistan redirects to Xinjiang.--Kagan the Barbarian 23:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Diyako, Kurdish ethnicity and culture are everywhere in Turkey. Except for the Black Sea region, there is hardly any city in Turkey without a Kurdish population. There are more Kurds in Istanbul, Izmir, Ankara combined than in whole SE Turkey. You are promoting seperatist undertones in Misplaced Pages. There is no good faith to assume.--Kagan the Barbarian 23:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete and redirect.It looks like it returns 27000 results but if you go to the last page of results you'll see that actual count is around 600, rest being repetitions of it on the same site. And most of them are Kurdish sources. Sites like kurdistan.org, kurdistan bloggers, etc. have high repeat count of it. It is just a term made up. --levent 23:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

NO what 600? more, you spelled it with small numbers!!! Heja helweda is right: 27000 also yahoo hits these without repetition. Diyako Talk + 01:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

These sources are using the term Turkish Kurdistan, and they are obviously not Kurdish: Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research, Institute on Southeastern Europe, Al-Ahram Newspaper(Egypt), Marco Cavallini, Anitwar.com, Eurasia Research, , New Dawn Magazine, Christian Science Monitor, World History Archives, Planetware.com, United Press International, Le Monde Diplomatique, The Nation, Council on Foreign Relations, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Encyclopaedia Iranica, Jewish Encyclopaedia, Assyrian International News Agency, The Jamestown Foundation Prism, German Cinema, United Nations Commission on Human Rights, ABC Australia, Global Defense Review, Z Magazine, The Boston Globe, Turkish Weekly, Corriere della Sera, Universtity of Stockholm (Department of Linguistics), World Music Institute, The Guardian. Heja Helweda 00:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Look, you have a Kurdistan and a Kurds in Turkey article, more than enough for you to cover everything there is to say. We redirect Turkish Kurdistan to Kurds in Turkey and people still get the information they need. I very well know why you are stuck with names, that's the exact same reason I want this article to be deleted.--Kagan the Barbarian 00:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep with all the critics presented of course. This is a place for sharing knowledge - also about terms that some may find unpleasant. Bertilvidet 00:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

  I agree Misplaced Pages is for information and I understand where you are coming but we already have a Kurds in Turkey article, there is no need for this. I am asking for deletion and redirect, not to silence them eternally.--Kagan the Barbarian 00:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Kurdistan is a geographic place. Tazmaniacs 01:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Valid encyclopaedic topic. --Mais oui! 01:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Valid topic. It's obvious that bias is involved in this nomination and the delete votes. Scranchuse 01:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep This is becoming pathologic, and POV pushers don't expect me to even answer. Turkish Kurdistan is an accepted term, it IS an encyclopedic term, it is a term which has been used for quite some time, just like terms 'Ottoman Armenia' or 'Russian Armenia.' And for those googlers that relies on google to establish the notability of a term, Lord Kinross, which Turkish nationalists like to quote in every given occasion that Ataturk is cricised DO call it such, a discussion published in The Geographical Journal Vol. 122, No. 2 (June., 1956) p. 166, Lake Van and Turkish Kurdistan: A Botanical Journey: Discussion by James Marshall-Cornwall; Lord Kinross attest to that. This Misplaced Pages-wide Turkish ultranationalism is really becoming a disease. Just recently Smyrnas material allegedly under the pretext of dumping it to be merged on Izmir, ended up as a pretext to DELETE the entire section regarding the fire. That they have sliced the criticism on Ataturk pages, that they have gotten parasitically involved in Greek, Armenian and Kurdish matters as far as screwing and scrapping the Armenian genocide article is not enought, they even had to recruit ultranationalists. BTW Coolcat, you were right on one thing, you indeed were not Karabekir, your alter ego Tommiks was, the Tommiks who rearranged, sliced and screwed the entire integrity of the Ottoman Empire related articles and who worked in tandem with you. As for my ranting, sorry, I can't help it, after what I have learned in those two days about the 'Call for Turks' in the 10s Febuary, 2006, to invade those articles made my two days(I have my sources). Also, if I were you, I would start accumulating the evidences, since right now, I have 14 pages of evidences that would discredit you, Tommiks, Ottomanreference, Karabekir and some I'd like to not name here right now, for good..., so it would be a good idea for you to stop requesting Kurdish related articles deletions and start accumulating evidences against me, sine in few days my research will be completed Fad (ix) 01:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)