Misplaced Pages

Talk:Istanbul: 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 18:43, 10 March 2024 editMrBrandon15 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users724 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 17:34, 17 March 2024 edit undoPoppins Potter (talk | contribs)186 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 149: Line 149:
:::::::::::Perhaps. I am undecided but the is newer. Ask other people. ] ]<sup>/</sup>] 04:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC) :::::::::::Perhaps. I am undecided but the is newer. Ask other people. ] ]<sup>/</sup>] 04:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::: I believe that the current images in the infobox are better. Especially the first picture, the Bosphorus Bridge, shouldn't be changed in any case. But maybe Istiklal Street photo can change, because the photo doesn't reflect the condition of the street very well. ] (]) 18:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC) :::::::::: I believe that the current images in the infobox are better. Especially the first picture, the Bosphorus Bridge, shouldn't be changed in any case. But maybe Istiklal Street photo can change, because the photo doesn't reflect the condition of the street very well. ] (]) 18:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

==Proposal for changes in the infobox==
===İstiklal Avenue's current appearance===
]

The pavement pattern on ] has recently been changed. This image from November 2023 shows the current pavement pattern.

===The view of the Bosphorus Bridge and the modern skyline from Çamlıca Hill (2013) is outdated===
The in the infobox is from 2013 and displays an outdated view of the city's modern skyline. This contains additional buildings. Many new towers will eventually appear in the coming years.

These towers are clearly not among the timeless icons of the city. Very few of them are interesting in terms of design. Many of them will eventually be demolished and replaced by newer ones in the coming decades.

] and ]]]

The ] and in particular ] fortresses can be defined as the beginning point for the "Turkish" city of Constantinople (Istanbul). Rumelihisarı played an important role during the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453. It is one of the timeless icons of the city, definitely more so than Görgüsüz Plaza, Athırsızı Center, Maganda Residence, etc. (you name them...)

My proposal is to replace this outdated image with the historical beauty of Rumelihisarı Fortress, combined with the emerald green hills of the Bosphorus, splendid yalı houses and mansions (such as the ] with its unique design, visible in this image) and the ] in the background, named after ] to whom the Turks owe the privilege of owning what is arguably the world's most interesting city. ] (]) 17:34, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:34, 17 March 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Istanbul 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: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Former featured articleIstanbul is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 23, 2019.
In the news Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 11, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
August 9, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
May 26, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
August 8, 2012Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 19, 2012Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 16, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
December 26, 2020Featured article reviewDemoted
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "In the news" column on October 21, 2018.
Current status: Former featured article
This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconCities: Core
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
Taskforce icon
This article is on the project's core list.
WikiProject iconGreece: Byzantine Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Byzantine world task force.
WikiProject iconFormer countries (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesFormer countries
WikiProject iconTurkey Top‑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
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
          Other talk page banners


FA criteria

The article needs substantial work to meet the FA criteria: better referencing (including citing the uncited content, as well as improving the quality of refs so that promotional claims are cited to independent sources), updating many sections that are out of date. There is also massive overload of images in contrary to MOS:IMAGELOC. (t · c) buidhe 21:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

This article is semi-protected, and I have no intension editing such a page unprompted, so I give my oppinion here
I think an article should start with its formalities and links to other articles close to the subject.
I think the introduction should be:
Istanbul (/ˌɪstænˈbʊl/ IST-an-BUUL, US also /ˈɪstænbʊl/ IST-an-buul; Turkish: İstanbul (About this soundlisten)), formerly known as Constantinople (previous capital of the Ottoman Empire and the Roman/Byzantine Empire and was originally Byzantium an ancient Greek city in classical antiquity, is the largest city in Turkey ...
because very important traces from very important past eras are available in the site (the past cities were not destroyed and there has been a continious development of it). The other eras are described in other articles and so these articles should be linked to immediatly this way.
After the formalities go on and put up history and other aspects of the city. The introduction should be cleaned from history things and put in a history section, becaus eof the subject it must be devided into subsections. The introduction after the first formalities should describe shortly the present city, that is an important commercial centre and large city of Turkey and Europe.
The article should describe the present city and the past eras should mainly be taken care of by links in the formalities and the history section (as they are supposed to be described there). However present day remains (sites, institutions and activeties) from the past history shsould be decribed in the article becauase they are turist attractions of the present and listed in subsections dependent on the era. As a turist I should be able to track the most important present sites dependent on my perspective in the present day city.
--Zzalpha (talk) 22:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
I would like to remove the image of 'Colomn of Constantine', 'Statue of Atatürk in Büyükada' and 'Syrian nationals in districts of Istanbul' and 'Pera Museum in Beyoglu'. I find these ones least relevant to the article. Metuboy (talk) 12:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
It's clear that you are trying to make disinformation nationalism with adding "ancient greek.." bla bla thing. It's not allowed according to any Misplaced Pages policies. Look at the Gdansk article for some education. Old name of the city should be remove.

78.190.2.75 (talk) 18:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

most visited tourist destination

London has 30m visitors a year. Venice is the same. Istanbul is 20m. Yet the figures in this article say that Istanbul is the most-visited in the world, after London and Dubai? New York City, Paris, Rome, London, Venice all have more visitors. 89.197.164.126 (talk) 16:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Venice doesn't have more visitors than Istanbul, none of the Italian cities in Top 10. Also, this was made according to the new lists. 85.103.228.167 (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi,
If there are reliable sources regarding the statistics you mentioned, let's take action accordingly. Let's revise or remove the information about Istanbul through source comparison. Adem (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Incomplete climate update

Uness232 I've replaced the in-use reference definition you deleted in your recent edit. Was it your intention to completely remove that reference? You also added an invocation of a reference named "WeatherAtlas", but that reference is not defined. I've removed that reference since it adds the topic to an error tracking category. Since your changes are dependent on this reference, you probably want to replace it correctly. -- Mikeblas (talk) 00:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mikeblas Sorry, this is just mistake on my part. I copied the weatherbox sources from the Climate of Istanbul page (since there is a new one now); I should have kept the reference definitions in mind. The climate update is complete, however. Uness232 (talk) 02:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix! When copying within Misplaced Pages, make sure you properly attribute the content that you're copying. You can read more at Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages. -- Mikeblas (talk) 23:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Swap Ortaköy Mosque image with Dolmabahçe Palace image

Dolmabahçe Palace is more known, significant, important. Ortaköy Mosque is not very special compared to the Dolmabahçe Palace, the palace of the great Atatürk. Youprayteas (t c) 21:06, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Youprayteas You're right that in its function the Dolmabahçe Palace is more unique and special. However, uniqueness of function should not be our only consideration here; while Dolmabahçe is nowhere near not famous, Ortaköy Mosque, especially in architectural form, is so recognizable that it is everywhere. A simple Google search of the word "Istanbul" also reveals this fact; Dolmabahçe is hard to find near the top images, while Ortaköy Mosque is everywhere. Uness232 (talk) 21:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The first pop-up and I realized I completely forgot about the Topkapı Palace, more famous than Ortaköy Mosque. Why fill up the photos with mosques anyway? One is well enough. Topkapı Palace, Dolmabahçe Palace, even Rumelihisarı is more appropriate. Youprayteas (t c) 06:00, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
@Youprayteas
I still fail to see the reason why any of these changes are needed. I don't think 2 photos of religious buildings (out of 7) for a city famed for its religious architecture is inappropriate.
Topkapı Palace is a better choice compared to Dolmabahçe, but I am not sure whether it is Ortaköy Mosque that it would have to be replaced with, if anything is going to be replaced. Again, a simple Google search of "Istanbul" will reveal how ubiquitous photos of the Ortaköy Mosque are. If such a change is really necessary (I don't think it is), Levent (or İstiklal if judging purely based on photo composition) could be the one to go in my opinion. Uness232 (talk) 02:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
I think Levent can stay as it shows the urban and more modern side of Istanbul. İstiklal is incredibly important, it HAS to stay. Ortaköy Mosque is not reslly that popular, or historic, or important. Youprayteas 07:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
@Youprayteas
Importance was not my argument about İstiklal, photo composition was.
Care to elaborate on why Ortaköy Mosque is not that popular, or historic, or important? You have been leading with this assertion again and again, and I don't see any argument for it. Uness232 (talk) 21:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
I am a local in Turkey and you can ask other people too, they will say my other choices are better for the comp Youprayteas 04:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
@Youprayteas You are indeed free to ask other people, through an RfC, or through any other means. As for me, you have still not brought forth any evidence for Ortaköy Mosque's lack of historical value or importance, and therefore I can not say I see any reason to change my view on this. Uness232 (talk) 05:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to improve Istanbul article for a long time, but didn't have the chance to get around to it. First of all, the lead is so bad, and doesn't cover most of the article. But now that you are talking about the infobox images, I think I'll start from there. I checked several cities and they all seem to use their very best images. The current images in the infobox are not that good. So I checked the page history to see why they were added, to see if there was a big consensus. The top image seems to have been changed here by a sock . The Levent pic was also added by the same sock . I think if someone tries to use those pics again, there would be a good chance of sockpuppetry. I'm going to go ahead and change those pics. I think this one should be the top image . It gives the best overview of Istanbul, with Fatih (historic core), Bosporus, Golden Horn, and showing both European and Asian sides. I'm going to change Levent pic with a much newer pic . Istanbul Finance Center is also on the Asian side and there was little coverage of the Asian side in the infobox. Bogazicili (talk) 14:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I also changed the Hagia Sophia picture, since Hagia Sophia is now in the top image. Used an image of Topkapi Palace . It is a quality image and also shows Golden Horn and iconic Istanbul ferries. Bogazicili (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
I checked Level 3 vital articles for cities, Misplaced Pages:Vital_articles#Cities. There are no FA ones, but there are Good Articles: Mumbai, London, and Paris. They all use 1-3-2-1 format in the infobox (top and bottom large image, 3 images in second row, 2 images in 3rd row). I think we should switch to same format as well. Here's my suggestion: User:Bogazicili/sandbox. I added a large image of Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge to the bottom. I think bridges are symbols of Istanbul. And the top image shows historic areas, the bottom one shows newer areas. It keeps Ortakoy Mosque and Istiklal Avenue. Although we might consider a different picture for Istiklal Avenue. Bogazicili (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
I also updated the Maiden's Tower and İstiklal Avenue pictures here: User:Bogazicili/sandbox. The suggested ones are newer pictures. We have enough day-time pictures, so the İstiklal picture is a night-time picture. People's faces seem blurry too in case anyone minds being shown in a Misplaced Pages page with high traffic. Maiden's Tower picture shows a bit of Dolmabahçe Palace. Bogazicili (talk) 16:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Any comments about the last version of infobox images here User:Bogazicili/sandbox? Otherwise I'm going to make the change. Bogazicili (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Do it. Youprayteas 12:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, the old photos in the information box were better. It's a complete mess right now, as if it was created by an amateur user. The new photos may be more recent, but the previous photos were much better in terms of quality. MrBrandon15 (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I would have to kind of agree with this, especially the business district photo looks bad compared to the superior, old one. Youprayteas 18:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I restored the Levent picture. I am definitely against this one . It's almost 11 years old, the area looks different now. Also the lighting is so bad. It also looks like there was fog or something, the picture makes it look like the air was very polluted. This is a much better picture . The drone shot is also very common if you google Istanbul. Even Britannica has a similar picture . We also need a bridge picture. This one shows both a bridge and Bosporus, which is one of the main features of Istanbul. It also shows Maslak in distance. So I definitely want these 2: . Except those, I'm very open to suggestions. Should we change the Maiden's Tower one to the old one? Bogazicili (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
@Bogazicili I agree with MrBrandon15 that basically all the newer photos look worse lighting and composition-wise; the only exception I could think of to this is the historic peninsula one, which is okay all around.
For the Bosphorus Bridge photo, I understand your concern about age, but as the landmarks are still recognizable, I don't see age as our biggest concern. I don't see any of the problems you see with lighting; I think the photo fits in well with the rest of the old infobox, and the air is not polluted; the haze is just the work of Lodos, which is altogether too common to dismiss as anomalous (See here for confirmation of Lodos that day). The alternative FSM photo is not of good quality or composition.
Similar issues are prevalent in most of your new infobox photos; especially those of İstiklal and the Maiden's Tower.
I would in fact be glad if the infobox was left alone; it was a stable version for a reason. Uness232 (talk) 21:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
To people unaware of Lodos in Istanbul (which would be majority of viewers of English-language Misplaced Pages), this picture looks polluted af. It was also added by a long-term sock. I'll restore Maiden's Tower and wait for further comments. I like that the new İstiklal picture shows an actual crowd, which is representative of that street, whereas the old pic (from 2007) just shows a tram. The colors in the pic look also artificially altered Bogazicili (talk) 21:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Also see alternative placement of Topkapı Palace and Maiden's Tower here: User:Bogazicili/sandbox Bogazicili (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
@Bogazicili Whether it looks polluted or not, it is how Istanbul looks a good 30 percent of the year. I also find it to be a much better photo than your alternative.
Point taken on the colors of the tram photo. I've reverted the person who added the filter to the tram photo about a year ago, so it should now look unaltered.
Looking at the state of this discussion, I will be reverting to the old infobox per WP:QUO as there does not seem to be any consensus on these changes yet; and while we can continue discussing here, I would think that an WP:RfC is in order to get some wider community feedback. Uness232 (talk) 23:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
@Uness232: Not enough discussion before RFC yet. Previous version was added without consensus or a previous RFC. See: WP:RFCBEFORE. You seem opposed to any change from your above responses. See Misplaced Pages:Status quo stonewalling. Any substantial reason why you prefer an old image added by a long term sock? Bogazicili (talk) 23:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
@Bogazicili Point taken on an RfC I suppose, though I don't see how our differing aesthetic tastes can be resolved without wider community consensus.
For the stonewalling comment: Indeed, I am opposed to both of the proposed changes; though I believe I have given clear reasoning in each case. I have never refused to take part in this discussion, neither have I resorted to methods which make changing the status quo impossible, and I am also not the sole editor who has voiced concerns about the recent changes. I don't see how this -- especially reverting until discussion ends, a standard practice -- would be stonewalling.
For your last question; as I have said before, my substantive reason is that I think the alternative image you put forward is inferior in both quality and composition, and I think the new infobox photos you have organized are not cohesive. Uness232 (talk) 00:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
@Uness232: You completely ignored my comments about 1-3-2-1 format and that this is a quality image. You ignored that Youprayteas was ok with some of the changes . You seem to be doing the bare minimum just so you can revert. Given the poor quality state this article is currently in, I am actually surprised you are so motivated to maintain status quo. Bogazicili (talk) 17:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
@Bogazicili I am not motivated to 'maintain the status quo'; I simply dislike the proposed photos, which you are somehow interpreting as stonewalling.
I also did not ignore your comments on the 1-3-2-1 format, because I did not oppose the 1-3-2-1 format. I opposed the new photos, though I also do not see a 1-3-2-1 format as necessary.
My problem with the Topkapı photo was largely cohesion with the other photos (though I admittedly did forget that it was a quality photo). I do not know what Youprayteas' comments have to do with my opinion, but the other user I mentioned was MrBrandon15, not Youprayteas. Uness232 (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
MrBrandon15 and Youprayteas, what do you think of the images here User:Bogazicili/sandbox? Bogazicili (talk) 17:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
İstiklal Avenue photo is bad imo. Topkapı image, I can't see the building. The Bosphorus photo seems unnecesarry, you can just do just 1-3-2 perhaps. I would also reccomend adding some place from the Asian side. Youprayteas 19:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
@Youprayteas: so you prefer this to this , right? MrBrandon15, any preference among those 2 pics? Bogazicili (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps. I am undecided but the is newer. Ask other people. Youprayteas 04:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe that the current images in the infobox are better. Especially the first picture, the Bosphorus Bridge, shouldn't be changed in any case. But maybe Istiklal Street photo can change, because the photo doesn't reflect the condition of the street very well. MrBrandon15 (talk) 18:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Proposal for changes in the infobox

İstiklal Avenue's current appearance

A view of İstiklal Avenue in 2023, with the current pavement pattern

The pavement pattern on Istiklal Avenue has recently been changed. This image from November 2023 shows the current pavement pattern.

The view of the Bosphorus Bridge and the modern skyline from Çamlıca Hill (2013) is outdated

The current Bosphorus Bridge image in the infobox is from 2013 and displays an outdated view of the city's modern skyline. This image from 2022 contains additional buildings. Many new towers will eventually appear in the coming years.

These towers are clearly not among the timeless icons of the city. Very few of them are interesting in terms of design. Many of them will eventually be demolished and replaced by newer ones in the coming decades.

Rumelihisarı and Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge

The Anadoluhisarı and in particular Rumelihisarı fortresses can be defined as the beginning point for the "Turkish" city of Constantinople (Istanbul). Rumelihisarı played an important role during the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453. It is one of the timeless icons of the city, definitely more so than Görgüsüz Plaza, Athırsızı Center, Maganda Residence, etc. (you name them...)

My proposal is to replace this outdated image with the historical beauty of Rumelihisarı Fortress, combined with the emerald green hills of the Bosphorus, splendid yalı houses and mansions (such as the Yusuf Ziya Pasha Mansion with its unique design, visible in this image) and the Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge in the background, named after the person to whom the Turks owe the privilege of owning what is arguably the world's most interesting city. Poppins Potter (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Categories: