Misplaced Pages

Talk:Turkish Kurdistan: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:59, 15 January 2016 editWorm That Turned (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators25,701 edits "Borders of historical Kurdistan" map: msg to Bruskom← Previous edit Revision as of 21:37, 25 January 2016 edit undoBeshogur (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users33,400 edits "Borders of historical Kurdistan" map: new sectionNext edit →
Line 214: Line 214:


:], we have multiple editors stating this map is an issue, and none explaining why it should be in the article. You have made approximately 50 reverts to the article in the past month, and 1 edit to the talk page (which was a revert). If you revert again without discussion, I will consider this a slow motion edit war, and block you - per my previous warning. Simply, if you think the map should be in the article, discuss it. That is your only remaining option. Cross posting to this and your talk page, so any other admin can block. ]<sup>TT</sup>(]) 10:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC) :], we have multiple editors stating this map is an issue, and none explaining why it should be in the article. You have made approximately 50 reverts to the article in the past month, and 1 edit to the talk page (which was a revert). If you revert again without discussion, I will consider this a slow motion edit war, and block you - per my previous warning. Simply, if you think the map should be in the article, discuss it. That is your only remaining option. Cross posting to this and your talk page, so any other admin can block. ]<sup>TT</sup>(]) 10:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

== "Borders of historical Kurdistan" map ==

The borders are overrated.

Revision as of 21:37, 25 January 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Turkish Kurdistan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconTurkey Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconKurdistan Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Kurdistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Kurdistan 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.KurdistanWikipedia:WikiProject KurdistanTemplate:WikiProject KurdistanKurdistan
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 2006 March 24. The result of the discussion was keep.

Deleting the page

This page is nothing but a stupid nazi propaganda . wikipedia is not a terorrist supporters or terrorist propaganda website . please report this page to get removed . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.238.50 (talk) 05:24, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Turkish Kurdistan is wrong

Turkish Kurdistan is linguistically wrong and paradoxical. It mean a Kurdistan that is Turkish or of Turkish nature. This needs to be changed to Kurdistan of Turkey at least or if possible simply, Northern Kurdistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrus abdi (talkcontribs) 19:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

lol

QUOTE from the article; "The area covers between 190,000 to 230,000 km² (88,780 sq mi), or nearly a third of Turkey."

LOLOLOL This is why no one will give a damn about any information sourced from Misplaced Pages. Did not read anything after first paragraph. IDIOTS!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.82.243.20 (talk) 06:41, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. Did you also notice that non of them wrote anything about iraqi turkistan or anatolian turkistan .instead, they ve just changed the name of (10 000years old) anatolia to some fake racist nazi name . today, the land of turkey is located on anatolia and thats it . like it or not . go to eastern turkey or western turkey land of anatolia is turkey . you can write down your racist fasictic nazi ideas in wikipedia but anatolia will always be anatolia and that land is now turkey not something else .

asadasd

It is nonsense to cite the names of cities Erzurum,Kars, Erzincan, Elazig in Kurdistan. Turks form the majority in these cities and are mostly nationalist people. Please revise the section where those cities are stated in Kurdistan - a land that never existed, in fact.


Exactly... And Kars and Erzurum are way too north to be called a part of any sort of Kurdistan. If you let nationalist Kurds decide where the borders of "Kurdistan" lies, they'll easily end up somewhere in northern Bulgaria. I know Europe and America have a large bunch of people believing the evil demon Turkey is supressing the poor Kurds but even if you firmly believe in this can still do some very elementary demographic research. Throughout history there has always been more Armenians and Russians is Kars than Kurds (if there were any). And I'm not talking about the largest ethnical group there -the Turks. --Diren Yardimli (talk) 16:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey! Are we trying to learn the truth or write an imagined history here??? This Kurdistan article, particulalry with Erzurum shown in "Kurdistan (!)" is the summary of how American politicians look at the future of Turkey. We the Turks should open our eyes to the widest possible —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.209.221.51 (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

OK - it is official

Articles like that show still Misplaced Pages is an open battlefield of propaganda... pitty for an idealistic knowledge project... I left wikipedia for some months - still the same! Happy new year to all by the way --Gokhan 08:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Says a Turkish ultra-nationalist. Kurdistan has been there for centuries. What do you expect? Closing our eyes the reality of Kurdistan in (nowadays) Turkey? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.82.170 (talk) 23:53, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Why?

If this term is an unofficial name and has no meaning for some, why did you write this article and give permission for discussion in this page? Some users gave "source"s about this term, but i think they are also unobjective resources. Moderators should review this article from the viewpoint of turkish nationalists...

"The term has no administrative basis and is very open to controversy. Some sources claim that this region is the larger and northern part of the greater cultural and geographical area in the Middle East known as Kurdistan." (from main article)

It does not need to be official. The subject just needs to be notable. If it is not notable, we can delete the article. denizC 19:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
In order to see whether it is notable or not, I suggest check out books.google.com with 623 citations and also scholar.google.com with 206 citations . This shows the frequent use of this term in academic circles, hence such a notable subject can not be deleted.Heja Helweda 21:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
It should be noted that terms like Southeast Anatolia gets citations on a broad range of topics while Turkish Kurdistan is almost exclusively cited in a specific context which happens to be largely political oriented. Sorry for the awkward analogy but I must add that there are certain widely used definitions for genitals on adult content sites but that does not make them notable. Also worth noting is the political nature of this article which is much more pronounced than its informative aspect; checking the history of this text reveals a coincidence with other politically oriented texts that are especially active since 2006. Political edits in this discussion are notable as well. Therefore, Encyclopedia claim of Misplaced Pages requires that this 3-years-active political content should either be deleted or merged into Kurdistan and correct definition of area should be better stressed. user:Alfaarti 23:40, November 23, 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC).
google books: "turkish kurdistan": 651, "southeast turkey": 671, google scholar, "turkish kurdistan":326, "southeast turkey" 1,450. Souhteast anatolia (the correct geographic name) gets even more. It is ridiculous claiming that this absurd word "turkish kurdistan" is more frequently in use that southeast turkey. Not scientist - except for one specialized in kurdish history - would use this abstract neologism. 84.30.86.91 (talk) 09:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I think I was talking generally DenizC 16:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Why is this called 'Turkish Kurdistan' when 'Syrian Kurdistan' redirects to Kurds in Syria? Shouldn't we have some sort of consensus on these article names? 155.188.183.5 19:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
You have a good point there. You can start a merger proposal if you want to. If we assume good faith, it might be that the term Turkish Kurdistan is used common enough, whereas Syrian Kurdistan is not. DenizC 19:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Deniz, it's something that has been discussed before (check the archives). Basically, the idea of a "Turkish Kurdistan" is well enough used and clearly enough defined that it's a notable concept. It doesn't mean that we approve or disapprove of it, but it's significant enough that it's worth documenting who uses it, what it means and why it's used. -- ChrisO 22:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the range of this article? I am not sure the content of section "Modern history" fits here, it needs to be rewritten. Also something historical becomes suddenly something modern. DenizC 07:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Another fact pointing to the political nature of this article is some certain users' contributions to this and other articles. One specific user claims to contribute to many articles, almost all of which represent a certain political view. More edits to come when I have time to investigate the situation. user:Alfaarti 23:50, November 23, 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 21:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC).

Merging

I don't believe it's necessary to merge the "History of the Region" and "Modern History" sections into other articles. Losing the two sections would not benefit this article. Both appear to give an adequate summary overview of the subjects and each links to a longer article. They could probably be condensed a little, but otherwise they seem to be an appropriate use of a spinout summary - see WP:SPINOUT for guidance. -- ChrisO 09:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC) There is no Turkish Kurdistan in Turkey or in the world. Turkish Kurds are a small tribe living in Turkey like Zazas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayhan62 (talkcontribs) 13:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Erzurum-Kars??

Erzurum-Kars and kurds? Come on...

Impact of Kosovo independence over the Turkish Kurdistan

It will be interesting to have an insight analysis related to the impact of Kosovo secession from Serbia on Kurdistan. Now, the Kurds in Turkey are having THE precedent and the Turkish Government just recognized that precedent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.105.123.228 (talk) 20:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Kurdistan is the homeland of the kurds. Why call it turkish Kurdistan, iranian Kurdistan, syrien Kurdistan or iraqi Kurdistan? Kurds speak kurdish, not turkish, perssian or arabic. In north Kurdistan the kurds speak kurdish kirmanji, in south sorani, badini and faili, in east sorani, zazai, lak and faili, in west kirmanji and sorani. Therefore the the right name is Kurdistan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.221.143.8 (talk) 22:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Another successful case of self-determination has occurred in recent times. Southern Sudan has voted overwhelmingly to separate from the despotic tyranny that the Bashir regime sought to impose on it.

Belgium may be moving towards a split into into two separate countries also.

By the way using harsh and/or restrictive methods to repress identity does not destroy separatist movements. Sudan might have remained one country had rational policies been pursued from the origin of that state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.115.144 (talk) 19:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Bold text (unoffical)

Hello. Could you please write "unoffical" word in bold text at Turkish Kurdistan page.Srhat (talk) 12:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

PKK in Irak

is it taboo to write about the PKK militants being pursued into Irak by the turkish army ? Hope&Act3! (talk) 23:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Kurdish Majority and Transition Zones

The word Turkish Kurdistan can be used to refer to regions in Turkey where Kurds form the majority, however, one must pay careful attention to the fact that Kurdish nationalism claims right on non-Majority-Kurdish regions and even non Kurdish territories in many cases. That is why cover word Kurdistan cannot be applied to some places where Wiki writes as part of Kurdistan. Ardahan, Kars, Iğdır Erzurum, Erzincan, Malatya, Adıyaman, Gaziantep have never been Kurdish majority cities or districts. In those cities Kurds are either newcomers or old minorities. So, that Republican era Turkey witnesses Kurdish immigration to those cities and districts does not make these cities Kurdish. Labelling them as Kurdish is a historical distortion. Even in the present time, these cities have Turkish majority.

And in many places you refer as Kurdistan, Turks who once formed majority decreased to be a minority. And this cannot make those places Kurdistan. So Misplaced Pages should be careful about this, even if you will determinedly refer these areas as Kurdistan, you have to write that a considerable Turkish population exists there and they are natives of those places. And you should say that once back in the time these places were not Kurdish at all. If you claim neutrality.

Yes you are right, these places (Ardahan, Kars, Iğdır Erzurum, Erzincan...ETC) are part of great Armenia, Kurds only become majority after the Armenian Massacre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.73.78.62 (talk) 07:25, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Ardahan, Erzurum, Erzincan... Kürtler bu şehirlerde çoğunluk filan değiller. Katliamdan önce de çoğunlukta değillerdi, sonra da çoğunluğa erişemediler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Çatalyürek (talkcontribs) 12:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Can someone who is familiar with wikipedia edit this article

This article contains so many factual errors but unfortunately i am not able to fix. İ have tried to find and contact someone responsible of taking care of this kind of issues but i couldn't. So i would be grateful to whomever edits this nonsense article or even erase it completely. since wikipedia is not controlled by itself, in this case us Turkish users should be careful about such propaganda and speculations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.36.213 (talk) 20:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

It might help those interested in factual accuracy if you could list lines you perceive to be biased? References showing them to be not factual would also help. IRWolfie- (talk) 20:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

fake page

This informations and map is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torul (talkcontribs) 18:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

PKK - Terrorist organization, not militant separatists

PKK is a terrorist organization which has deliberately targeted civilians and/or non-combatants with the aim of creating fear. PKK is also known to be involved in drug trafficking and smuggling, both of which constitute a great source of PKK's funding. It is largely disputed that the primary reason for PKK's current existence is controlling of smuggling and drug trafficking gateways, as opposed to the separatist claims in the past. Therefore, this distorted identification of "militant separatists", however small, should be corrected as "terrorist organization". ] --Alfaarti (talk) 23:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Terrorist is a contentious label and as such a word to avoid IRWolfie- (talk) 18:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

% s are so funny only in siwas malatya are kurds not so in majorty

% s are so funny only in siwas malatya are kurds not in majorty ,there are asimiletd kurds. but in bitlis bingol diyarbakir ,tunceli ,urfa ,its 91% ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.182.39.112 (talk) 09:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Kurds008.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kurds008.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Misplaced Pages (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kurds008.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Northern Kurdistan another name for "turkish Kurdistan"

Among KUrds and democratic people that know the history of the Kurdistanian people that know that the Kurds have lived in this region for nearly 5,000 years, called the hand-made division of Kurdistan by: Northern-, Western-, Southern- and Eastern Kurdistan. Among all Kurdistanians, we called the occupied part of Kurdistan for "Northern Kurdistan", in Iraq "Southern Kurdistan", in Iran "Western Kurdistan" and in Syria for "Western Kurdistan". That is the really in all Kurdish media and among those people that believe in humanity and the rights of human being, that God or whoever created human beings with their own language, geography and culture and no one can deny something that already exists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.195.195.205 (talk) 11:28, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Immediate modifications need to be made to this page

If Kurdistan is an ethnographic region then why is Kars, Ardahan, Erzurum, Malatya, Marash, Gaziantep, Kilis, Erzinjan and Elazig a part of this region. These regions have been predominantly Turkish since the late Seljuk period. There is absolutely no evidence that points to a sizable Kurdish population in this region let alone a majority. In fact, surveys point to them being predominantly Turkish. Whoever has this page locked needs to immediately remove such baseless maps. Please do not allow Kurdish ultra nationalists to contribute to any pages related to Turkey.

Also the sources are dead and unreliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozan192 (talkcontribs) 01:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you be a little more specific about the problematic sources? The BBC, Encyclopedia Britannica, the British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, a book published by Oxford University Press - those look exceptionally reliable to me. The map is based on the Encyclopedia of Islam, which also seems reliable enough. Huon (talk) 20:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Nonsense map

The history/demographics sections of the articles of Kars, Erzurum, Ardahan, Marash, Malatya, İgdir Elazig make no mention of their being a significant historic Kurdish presence/rule in the reqion.

its interesting that the most ridiculous, oversized, expantionist, nationalist, irredentist map is being used. Way to go for objectivity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.242.206.86 (talkcontribs) 12:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Which map are you talking about? Yes, the cities Elazig and Malatya aren't Kurdish, but huge parts of the provinces are.--Ahmetyal (talk) 17:05, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect Title, the correct term is South-East Anatolia

This is an incorrect term for this article. The correct neutral title of this area is South-East Anatolia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.75.32.124 (talkcontribs) 20:14, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of the map of Kurdish speaking area according to census 1965

The map is not correct, therefore i deleted and i nomiated for deletion on commons. There is such a map, too. But According to census in 1965 we cant get an exact result. Because most of Kurds were afraid of being killed and the government has never showed the exact number of Kurdish population.--Gomada (talk) 17:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

  • We are talking about an official, nation-wide census in Turkey. Its merits a place in Misplaced Pages regardless of how accurate it results were. If you find published critiques of it from reliable sources, feel free to add them as well. --Mttll (talk) 09:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

For the love of God, remove the part about Erdogan calling the area 'Kurdistan'. It is 100% WRONG. Don't do this to make the Wiki page look good.

Have you even READ the articles cited? He didn't call Northern Kurdistan by it's name, but the Kurdish areas in Iraq. In Northern Iraq, NOT TURKEY. --Jeff350 (talk) 16:21, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Please relax, there's no need to for shouting. Upon closer inspection of the sources, you are correct and it seems that whoever put those sources in originally may have goofed and didn't read them. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | 9 Adar 5775 16:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (There is no such country or region. Is not recognized by anyone. I'm opening my article here saying I found a country? Seriousness little please...) --Erlik.khan (talk) 20:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Wait, what? You put up a tag for it to be deleted and it's something you don't want? Anyway...

Does this article even have a single source to justify its existence under this title? A single credible source that uses the term "Turkish Kurdistan" The article itself only uses it four times, two of those being its title. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:52, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Just made a Google Scholar search. There is more than enough credible sources to justify an article with this name

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --109.102.18.90 (talk) 12:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)If a term exists on the level of public speech, it exists as a term. It is not a country, not even an officially recognized region of Turkey, it is an expression only, but as an expression, it exists. The article should be completed with the Turkish official attitude, but I think that the explanation for the expression itself has its place in the Misplaced Pages. And I am nor Turkish, nor Kurd. I am neutral.

So, so wrong Kurdish populated map.

Erzincan,Erzurum,Kars,Ardahan,Kahramanmaraş,Gaziantep,Kilis,Hatay,Malatya,Elazığ provinces have absolute Turkish majority. Please edit this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yabgu Turk (talkcontribs) 12:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

He is right - File:Türkiyeetnikharitası.JPG - The map is propered by German objectively. Original one is "https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Ethnic_Groups_Turkey_Dutch.jpg"Antmqr (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Worm That Turned - Please check this Antmqr (talk) 20:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

The border of Kurdistan

Border of Kurdistan is unclear. The studies on this is so limited. We can use just a few source as CIA, Turkish general election, November 2015, Some ethnicity map to estimate the border of Turkish Kurdistan.

Turkish General Election, November 2015. Purple area shows majority votes of HDP (pro-Kurdish party)
CIA Map
Ethnic Map of Turkey - The map is propered by German objectively. Original one is "https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Ethnic_Groups_Turkey_Dutch.jpg"

We have to add this informations to identify the border of Turkish Kurdistan.Antmqr (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Let's find an external source that attempts to surmise where Kurds live in Turkey from HDP votes, otherwise this is borderline original research. --Mttll (talk) 23:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

"Borders of historical Kurdistan" map

This map is just nonsensical. There is obviously no version of a historical Kurdistan that somehow 100% overlaps with the borders of officially-defined administrative provinces of modern Turkey. The map seems like the work of maximalist Kurdish nationalists in Misplaced Pages who try to have places with less 10% Kurdish population in their version of Kurdistan. User:Bruskom, I'm asking you to stop pushing your agenda by edit warring and explain yourself here. --Mttll (talk) 11:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Bruskom, we have multiple editors stating this map is an issue, and none explaining why it should be in the article. You have made approximately 50 reverts to the article in the past month, and 1 edit to the talk page (which was a revert). If you revert again without discussion, I will consider this a slow motion edit war, and block you - per my previous warning. Simply, if you think the map should be in the article, discuss it. That is your only remaining option. Cross posting to this and your talk page, so any other admin can block. Worm(talk) 10:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

"Borders of historical Kurdistan" map

The borders are overrated.

Categories: