Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:58, 23 February 2014

Archives

1

Welcome to The Misplaced Pages Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Misplaced Pages Adventure Start Page
• The Misplaced Pages Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Misplaced Pages Help pages

-- 14:57, Monday, January 6, 2025 (UTC)

Committee of Union and Progress and The Young Turks

Your recent reversions of additions I've made to both of the articles involving these topics only helps racist denialists of the Armenian Holocaust. The CUP were the fundamental political group that carried out the killings and therefore their article MUST be a part of the series of "persecution of Armenians." I'm going to revert it back.

I'm not sure what the problem was with the changes to the Young Turks article. I deleted a single useless sentence that spoke of some new "meaning" to the words that have zero to do with the pan-Turkist/genocidal party in question. I will revert it back. Let me know what problems you have before making changes. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.119.138.205 (talk) 11:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your additions are not constructive. You're adding infoboxes to the articles that are meant for other articles. These articles are already in a series of articles relating to the Armenian Genocide. The sentence you deleted is also not a "new meaning", as you say, but an established one. It is sourced. Don't remove sourced content. Your edits seem to be extremely POV and biased, as well as not encyclopedic. That's the problem. Ithinkicahn (talk) 18:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

What's POV? Your deletion of the link of the Young Turks party to the Armenian Genocide is extremely POV. The Young Turks article is a fundamental part of the series of the persecution of the Armenians. This MUST be noted boldly. The main reason anyone even visits that page is in regards to the Armenian Genocide. You try to break a link between the Nazis and the holocaust would you? As to the deletion of hte sentence, that sentence is often used by Armenian Genocide deniers to paint the Young Turks in a favorable light. As far as the Young Turks as a term being used to mean progressives, that is a relatively new phenomenon and doesn't have anything to do with the genocidal Young Turks political party of the 20th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.119.138.205 (talk) 11:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I would advise you to check out the Talk pages before doing something like that, since you were simply copying and pasting an infobox not meant for that article. And no, changing the title of the infobox to the article name doesn't constitute a good infobox. The Armenian thing is already mentioned very heavily throughout the article. Your claims about the Young Turks not being a progressive movement before WWI is also an unsupported view and completely POV. You can, however, mention suggestions for improvements on the Talk page (there is now a discussion) instead of making unconstructive edits and removing sourced content to push a certain POV. Cheers. Ithinkicahn (talk) 15:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I have mentioned it in the talk page. Interesting use of "Armenian thing" too. Shows your NPOV....--68.119.138.205 (talk) 10:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Safiye Sultan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• </ref>) née ''Sofia Bellicui Baffo'', was the favourite consort and later wife of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:53, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Progressive Republican Party (Turkey), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mustafa Kemal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Secularism in Turkey

Please be careful with your reverts at Secularism in Turkey. I know you believe you're reverting vandalism, but next time, unless it's a clear case of vandalism (see WP:VANDTYPES), be patient and wait for another editor to come along and make the second revert within such a short space of time. Ping me at my talk page, if it's taking too long for another editor to notice. Thanks, Ruby Murray 11:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Yep, I was wondering if he'd get up to 3RR again. Notice I've only made 2, to see if he would counter, and it seems like he did. I wonder if I should make another noticeboard report? Ithinkicahn (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I should be careful about raising a new report if I were you, since you've both only just come out of a block for edit warring. There are many eyes on both of those articles now, and any large scale deletions or POV additions won't last long. Ruby Murray 16:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Good advice. Hopefully someone will come along on the Secularism in Turkey article sometime soon. Ithinkicahn (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Kind regards, Afro-Eurasian (talk) 02:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much. Although we do our best, we still need more editors contribute to WP Turkey and WP Ottoman Empire. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Committee of Union and Progress

Would you be interested in joining a discussion about this article? --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I definitely would; both the Committee of Union and Progress article and the Young Turks one. Ithinkicahn (talk) 06:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Ottoman governors

Hello! I've begun creating some categories for the governors of some of the major Ottoman provinces. The typical format is "Governors of XXX Eyalet" or "Ottoman governors of XXX", with the latter for cases like Bosnia and Crete where there is a distinctive region with more or less stable boundaries, both pre- and ante-dating Ottoman rule. Anyhow, in two cases, namely Rumelia and Anatolia, I was wondering if maybe the better term would be "Beylerbeys of Rumelia" rather than "Governors of the Rumelia Eyalet", since governor would imply a wali, and these two were the first and IIRC longest where the title of "beylerbey" was used. I am not sure, however, what the proper title of the Rumelia and Anatolia governors was in the 17th-19th centuries, and whether or not it changed to wali as well. Can you perhaps help? Constantine ✍ 18:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment on dichotomy between the two "Governor" category formats. In any case, I think the "Governors of ..." format is better than the "Beylerbeys of ..." and "Walis of ..." formats, since the research I've done on, for example, Egypt Eyalet, indicate that "Beylerbey" (a specific, flowery, occasional title) and "Wali" (just literally "governor" in Turkish) were pretty interchangeable. I think with all the various references to the same figures as "viceroys" and "governors" and "governor-generals" and "beylerbeys" in English sources as well as in native Turkish sources, especially, it's just better to refer to them as "Governor" in context of Misplaced Pages. It's extremely difficult to get a straight answer from the historical sources, probably showing that it wasn't an exactly-determined title for most provinces, including Rumelia and Anatolia Eyalets. So I think the general and fitting term "Governor" is both accurate and all-encompassing for all of the provincial governor titles. I appreciate you for the category creations! Ithinkicahn (talk) 23:09, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Koca Ragıp Pasha (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Koca

The Imam's Army (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Justice and Development Party

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the "Justice and Development Party (Turkey)" article: your help needed

Hi there Ithinkicahn. In the AKP article, recent changes by another user have led to the inclusion of Neo-Ottomanism under the ideologies heading of the party's infobox. I'd like to know your position on this matter. Should it be removed, given that the AKP officially rejects this characterization? --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 15:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it should be included, since it's a very loaded term and has been rejected by the party itself quite strongly. However, I'm not staunchly against it, if other editors have the opposite idea and including it would be in line with past examples, then I'd say fine. Still, once again, it's a loaded term, but not quite as loaded as, say, including "American imperialism" under the ideology of the U.S. Republican Party. It's a concept more than an insulting term. I'd say there should be a discussion on this somewhere so consensus can be reached, but it's up to you. Cheers! Ithinkicahn (talk) 20:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Machine elf for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Machine elf is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Machine elf until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:53, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

2011 Turkish sports corruption scandal article

Hello. The reason of writing this to you is to clarify my situation about the article and also wanted to explain what I wrote to the page protection request.Rivaner (talk) 09:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC) I opened a case about this article to dispute noticeboard but it was denied on the grounds that it was already on the neutral point of view noticeboard. This was what I wrote there and hopefully will help you understand my situation anout this article.

This article lacks a neutral point of view, I have already made my cae to the neutral point of view noticeboard (https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) 11 days ago but today, things became really frustrating for me. Some IP adressed users are attacking the article using my edits, I know it is not the right way to do things but the reason for that is they finally found a voice in wikipedia. You can see all the reasons for my edits from one of the inolved users talk page;(https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:LardoBalsamico#2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) which really sumarizes my siutation. I can understand the users attacking but don't accept their ways. As you can see from here (https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:93.115.94.149#About_2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) I have did the best I can to calm the situation.

Hope this helps and thanks for you concern about the article.Rivaner (talk) 08:29, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hey Rivaner, I have no dog in the fight, I was just worried about the repeated vandalism of the page by anonymous IPs, not your edits. I haven't read the article, so hopefully the NPOV process works out for everyone in the end. Good luck! Ithinkicahn (talk) 21:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Siege of Rhodes (1522), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Webb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

AA2 reminder

Template:Armenia-Azerbaijan enforcement Just reminding you about WP:AA2. I found this edit to be rather problematic since the paragraph was actually cited by several sources. I nevertheless hope we can work together to build a bigger and better encyclopedia and have more constructive discussions. Thanks, Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:58, 23 February 2014 (UTC)