Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
An editor has been deleting correct content from the article, probably for pov reasons (he likes to eliminate mention of anything non-Turkish in articles connected to Turkey). For the record, the deleted content (to date) is: "Some Hemshinli (both Muslim and Christian) are also expert ]s, ]s, and ]s, and those in ] have a noted expertise in the manufacture of handcrafted ]." ] (]) 16:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
An editor has been deleting correct content from the article, probably for pov reasons (he likes to eliminate mention of anything non-Turkish in articles connected to Turkey). For the record, the deleted content (to date) is: "Some Hemshinli (both Muslim and Christian) are also expert ]s, ]s, and ]s, and those in ] have a noted expertise in the manufacture of handcrafted ]." ] (]) 16:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
:If you don't strike your ] here (there are many others elsewhere that I may show easily) I will have to report your ] and this may also reveal your violation of editing limits in certain area of articles. Regards. --] (]) 16:49, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Revision as of 16:49, 14 September 2014
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hemshin people article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Hemshin people is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (country)Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose - as far as I can tell the most common name is "the Hemshin" not "Hemshinli". Thus "Hemshin peoples" is the best way to describe them, given that there is a disambiguation page at Hemshin - this is also in line with most other articles on ethnic groups which share a title with another topic, for example French people for the French, Herero people for the Herero etc. — Amakuru (talk) 15:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
"as far as I can tell" is not an argument. please provide statistics or something that will back up your argument. --Երևանցի15:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I ran your Google Books test above with just "Hemshin" as the search term. It generates 861 matches. Also not all of the , looking at the first five of your "Hemshinli" book entries above are relevant. For example, the top five:
The book title is: "The Hemshin: History, Society and Identity in the Highlands of Northeast Turkey". It uses the term "Hemshinli" a bit in the pages, but the title uses "Hemshin".
This is a German book, so not relevant.
This one does use "Hemshinli" so that is the one relevant entry in the top (5).
Same text as (3).
"The Hemshin, or Hemshinli,1 though, had been mentioned..."
As the move proposer, it is up to you to provide evidence that the proposed title is significatnly more common than the current one. Me saying "as far as I can tell" is to say that I am not convinced by that argument, so yes it is a valid argument. — Amakuru (talk) 22:17, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Maybe the reason why just "Hemshin" has over 850 matches is because it is also the name of the region (Hemşin) these people are from? Well, we can analyze Google Books results one by one. From all the options it is the most common. "Hemshin peoples" is certainly not what we want. --Երևանցի01:23, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Well according to the article, the Hemshin are not actually a single ethnic group, but rather a set of ethnic groups linked together by the fact that they all live around Hemşin. If that's the case, it would suggest that they are "peoples" (i.e. a set of different ethnicities) rather than a single "people". If in fact the article is wrong, and they are just a single ethnic group then "people" might be more appropriate. Regarding whether the actual term "Hemshin peoples" is in common use, in a sense it doesn't have to be. Per WP:ETHNICGROUP, the "peoples" is there as a disambiguator or placeholder, and when it comes to ethnicities or tribes, the form "X people" is generally preferred to "X (people)" as a natural way to disambiguate. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 16:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
As far as Google can tell, there is only one mention of "Hemshin peoples" in academia. I don't think it's acceptable to use an obscure term as title. "The Hemshin" is acceptable to me and is widely used in academia, but it's like saying "The French". Almost every ethnic groups has major divisions within itself. There is a little connection between Armenians in Lebanon and Armenians in Georgia. These people are also not homogeneous, but that's not a valid reason to use "peoples". I wish more people participated in this discussion so we could have a better understanding. --Երևանցի17:08, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Oppose - this Li on the end is just a Turkic plural suffix, one İngiliz, two İngilizler (Englishmen), there's no benefit to readers from using this and "peoples" is a healthy clear natural disambiguator also communicating that there are several peoples.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
It is generally accepted...
The case is that in the reference given Simonian gives this theory without any references to other author; that's why I wrote "According to Hovann Simonian".
I don't care and believe in what Turkish Nationalist propaganda says or believes; as I know how absurd theories they can try to prove. But even there are others like Bert Vaux, Selim Deringil, Anthony Bryer, A. E. Redgate support this theory; it cannot be said that "it is generally accepted". Something like "One of the popular theories supported by Bert Vaux, Selim Deringil, Anthony Bryer, A. E. Redgate, Hovann Simonian" is much more acceptable. Because when you see something saying "It is generally accepted..." with only one author, who is just PhD candidate and an Armenian and no other references given, it looks like a hoax trying to support Armenian point-of-view. So my offer is somehow to improve the given claim. Bests, Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 10:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't think describing their point of view as a "theory" at this point is appropriate. A theory suggests something that has yet to gain circulation and might be just an idea that has little support. Simonian's work seems to be the most accessible to the public, as it is available online, but the position he takes is merely that of the current consensus. There is still a lot of mystery surrounding the history of the Hamshen but they have been a fascinating topic of study for more than a century now in works published in Armenian, German and other languages. There are still adherents to M. Fahrettin Kırzıoğlu's extravagant theories (I use that in its full sense here) but they belong to a fringe minority.
And why are you stressing Simonian's Armenian heritage as a possible obstacle? Are you meaning to suggest his ethnicity somehow impairs his objectivity and he might be less inclined to write so because of it (or any other Armenian in that case)?--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:30, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually I don't have any objections against Simonian or his works about the Hemshin people and their history. I started to read about Hemshin people several years ago - as you can see my areas of interest if you opened my user page - and I find his work quite comprehensive. I just wanted to show how a person with a neutral point-of-view can see it (as I impertinently consider myself so). If you have any difficulties in finding any other sources/papers on THIS topic, maybe I can help you. Just write here the author, and the name of the work. But still I don't think that the phrase It is generally accepted... is suitable for the case, as even Simonian in his "Hamshen Before Hemshin" paper gives several theories about their ethnogenesis. One of the popular points-of-view or smth alike - it doesn't matter - reflects the case better. Something generally accepted implies that very few people (if any) has doubt in it. Besides, adding new references will only better the article. Bests, Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 19:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm still not getting what is objectionable about the usage of generally. It does convey that there are other theories, however fanciful. Simonian's book is actually an edited compilation of articles and studies by many scholars from a variety of disciplines and ethnic backgrounds and Simonian himself refers to the Hemshin as "Hamshen Armenians" in the chapter you brought up. He is in fact critical of the theory that they were an Armenianized native population. Other papers on this topic (in English, at least) will be very difficult to find indeed–until the publication of the Simonian, the Hemshin were very much un(der)studied. What kind of "new references" would you suggest adding? Jackal15:50, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
It is, of course, principally open to discussion under what conditions a statement can be qualified to be “generally accepted”.
The present discussion obviously however takes place due to the insertion of the sentence in the lead..The reference indicated there does not include a statement that "It is generally accepted that they were "Armenian" in origin" to start with. Hence the ongoing discussion about the usage of the term "generally accepted" seems to me without basis here.Omer182 (talk) 19:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
I had stated above some time ago that the recently inserted sentence is not included or indicated in the reference provided. So far there has been no responses. The recently inserted sentence, therefore, needs to be removed due to reference issues.Omer182 (talk) 07:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
"Generally accepted" would denote that it is an opinion held by the vast majority of people. There may be a handful here and there who would reject it but they would be in the minority. This can be applied to the Hamshen, who are believed by most scholars to be of Armenian extraction. There are people like Kırzıoğlu, for whom the idea of anything in Anatolia being of non-Turkish origin was abhorrent, who came and muddied the waters in the 20th century with his pseudo-scientific theories. But other than that, I have yet to see one serious scholar recently question the Armenian hypothesis.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Marshall please note the following:
The reference given in the statement does not validate the statement itself. Nowhere in the source can one see a statement that indicates that "It is generally accepted that they were "Armenian" in origin". Thus, the statement is not referenced as it stands.
Whether or not the unreferenced statement in question ("it is generally accepted that...") is true or not requires a discussion on its own right. That discussion needs to be made here, abiding by the policies of Misplaced Pages which discourage original research. Omer182 (talk) 14:58, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Deletions by an editor
An editor has been deleting correct content from the article, probably for pov reasons (he likes to eliminate mention of anything non-Turkish in articles connected to Turkey). For the record, the deleted content (to date) is: "Some Hemshinli (both Muslim and Christian) are also expert bakers, restaurateurs, and transporters, and those in Turkey have a noted expertise in the manufacture of handcrafted handguns." Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
