Misplaced Pages

Talk:İzmit massacres: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] 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 20:15, 31 July 2014 editIthinkicahn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users23,490 edits Neutrality← Previous edit Revision as of 20:51, 31 July 2014 edit undoHuon (talk | contribs)Administrators51,328 edits Neutrality: replyNext edit →
Line 36: Line 36:


::::::The general tone of this article is blatantly slanted towards one side. Please stop removing the template message to make your page look like it's authoritative. The entire lede right now is one big paragraph of "you killed more than me". And this article only cites sources that claim that the Turks were the chief perpetrators, and ignores the sources that claim that Greeks were the chief perpetrators, such as the one I mentioned, , among others. ] (]) 20:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC) ::::::The general tone of this article is blatantly slanted towards one side. Please stop removing the template message to make your page look like it's authoritative. The entire lede right now is one big paragraph of "you killed more than me". And this article only cites sources that claim that the Turks were the chief perpetrators, and ignores the sources that claim that Greeks were the chief perpetrators, such as the one I mentioned, , among others. ] (]) 20:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

:::::::The general tone of the article, ''particularly'' the lede, is blatantly slanted towards stating what reliable sources report. I do not think a travel guide would be a good source compared to what we cite already. ] (]) 20:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:51, 31 July 2014

WikiProject iconArticles for creation Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Note icon
This article was accepted on 10 June 2014 by reviewer Timtrent (talk · contribs).
WikiProject iconTurkey Start‑class
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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconGreece Start‑class
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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 15 July 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.


The previous version of the article was supposed to present the event as a massacre committed by the Greek army. However, it appears that under this name there were massacres committed by both sides, in the same district under the same time period.Alexikoua (talk) 20:37, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Widescale disruption

A decent explanation is needed for these edits ], for example changing the conclusion of the Allied commission who accepted, as fundamentally true, the Greek claim of 12,000 civilians massacred ] p. 11 "not withstanding a certain amount of exaggeration in the figures".

This part is also confirmed by . In general claiming that the specific sources are unreliable can be considered at least childish as an argument.Alexikoua (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Neutrality

This article seems to have been completely written by two users who have written it blatantly from one POV in an anti-Turkish tone, in an attempt to talk past the other Greek massacres in the region (using less-than signs for numbers killed by the Greeks, etc. other forms of systemic bias). It also ignores clear sources such as this:

which put the blame on the Greek Army. The entire article was written very recently. Unfortunately, mine and another user's edits have been reverted and deleted by these two users. Ithinkicahn (talk) 00:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

For certainty widescale disruption was caused by a blocked wp:spa & his sock accounts. Fortunately this is history. The pov issues have been fixed, and neutrality has been restored, per corespondent report submitted by an Allied commission (which puts the blame mainly to the Turkish side).Alexikoua (talk) 12:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

@Ithinkicahn: You have implied that I have been POV pushing in this article here and here. If I may ask, under what basis to you regard any one of my 6 edits to this article as POV pushing? Here are the diffs: (). Remember that these topics are under arbitration and accusations of POV pushing without any such basis is not WP:CIVIL practice as it ultimately highlights WP:BADFAITH assumptions towards your fellow Misplaced Pages editors. Also, please remember this. Thank you. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
This has nothing to do with the other user. Just because they have been blocked doesn't mean their points don't stand. Also, I have reason to assume bad faith on your part because of my experience with you in the past. Reports by World War I's Allied commission on something allegedly occurring against a member of the Allies by an enemy state don't suddenly have supreme priority over the facts reported in multiple sources disagreeing with the report; I'm sure the Central Powers' commission would disagree with that.
Please remember the warning that you have put on my talk page in the past, in an incident that causes me to have bad faith in you and Alexikoua's edits? In that case, please remember the identical warning that I have put on your page around the same time. Throwing around random WP policy links doesn't help your point or your POV cause in the case of this article.
Also, please don't remove template messages until the issue is resolved, which it definitely isn't. Ithinkicahn (talk) 21:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
@Ithinkicahn: Maybe I wasn't too clear enough or you have misunderstood my point. You've been going around saying that I've been POV pushing in this article. So I'd like to ask you, which of my edits in this article constitute POV pushing? Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:56, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
So far, no pov issues have been addressed. I admit to say that wp:npa violations can't be used as an excuse to place a pov tag. It appears like a disruptive plan B to target this article, after a failed attempt in the afd nomination (not to mention that Ithinc. was the only editor that voted for deletion, generally talking about unrealistic wp:or issues).Alexikoua (talk) 05:29, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
@Ithinkicahn: Also, how do you know what my POV towards this article even consists of? You claim that I am POV pushing in this article. I have provided the diffs for the only edits I have ever done with this article. So please, point to me as to which of my edits to this article constitute POV pushing. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The general tone of this article is blatantly slanted towards one side. Please stop removing the template message to make your page look like it's authoritative. The entire lede right now is one big paragraph of "you killed more than me". And this article only cites sources that claim that the Turks were the chief perpetrators, and ignores the sources that claim that Greeks were the chief perpetrators, such as the one I mentioned, this, among others. Ithinkicahn (talk) 20:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The general tone of the article, particularly the lede, is blatantly slanted towards stating what reliable sources report. I do not think a travel guide would be a good source compared to what we cite already. Huon (talk) 20:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:İzmit massacres: Difference between revisions Add topic