Misplaced Pages

Talk:Turkey: 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 23:15, 3 February 2014 editLord of Rivendell (talk | contribs)1,252 edits Comparing Turkey with its equivalents← Previous edit Revision as of 23:18, 3 February 2014 edit undoUnderlying lk (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors53,685 edits Comparing Turkey with its equivalentsNext edit →
Line 150: Line 150:
:::::::Nope, ''I restored them'', what you did was reverting every other change, without explanation, despite the abundant consensus that changes are required.--] (]) 23:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC) :::::::Nope, ''I restored them'', what you did was reverting every other change, without explanation, despite the abundant consensus that changes are required.--] (]) 23:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
::::::::Sorry, I missed two citation tags: One in the intro section, one in the Etymology section. Now they are all complete. (This was your only objection that made sense. Your other deletions saved less than 1K: From 173K to 172K, including the restored citations.) ] (]) 23:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC) ::::::::Sorry, I missed two citation tags: One in the intro section, one in the Etymology section. Now they are all complete. (This was your only objection that made sense. Your other deletions saved less than 1K: From 173K to 172K, including the restored citations.) ] (]) 23:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::You obviously did not even check what you were editing, you are offering no explanation for your reverts (while I abundantly motivated my every change) and saying "your only objection that made sense" is a taunt, not a reason.--] (]) 23:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:18, 3 February 2014

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Turkey 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, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42Auto-archiving period: 2 months 

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Turkey 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, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42Auto-archiving period: 2 months 

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
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.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconCountries
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry
WikiProject Countries to-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconWestern Asia Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia
TopThis article has been rated as Top-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 iconEurope High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Misplaced Pages.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope
HighThis article has been rated as High-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 iconAssyria High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Assyria, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Assyrian-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.AssyriaWikipedia:WikiProject AssyriaTemplate:WikiProject AssyriaAssyrian
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Template:WP1.0
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on October 29, 2005, October 29, 2011, October 29, 2012, and October 29, 2013.
Former featured articleTurkey 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 March 4, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 18, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 21, 2006Good article nomineeListed
January 9, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
December 20, 2011Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

To-do list for Turkey: edit·history·watch·refresh· Updated 2024-09-25

Guidelines for editing the Turkey article
  • Units in metric Manual of Style.
  • Only external links pertaining to Turkey as a whole, or official government of Turkey links are solicited on this page. Please add other links in their respective articles. For further information, please see Misplaced Pages guidelines on External links and Conflict of interest.
  • Please provide references when adding new information.
  • Please use the correct citation format when adding references. If you are not sure which one is appropriate, please see WP:CITE for a list of available citation templates.

Edit reguest regarding GINI-index

According to the figures by The World Bank, the actual Gini Coefficient rate in Turkey was 39 for 2008, not 40. Please change, no need for it to be higher than it is.
In the most recent survey it was 40: GINI World BankPqnlrn (talk) 04:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Photos conflict

Your last edits about wide panoramic photos, I am evaluating the scope of the WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT also, I didn't see any satisfactory explanation . Such large panoramic photographs show only article more crowded and chaotic. Please take a look to the featured country articles : Germany, Japan, India, Rwanda and other advanced arts. France, United Kingdom, Iran and etc. There is no any wide panoromic image! Also, It's runs contrary to the criteria of featured article. Other disputed picture on Sport, I think, we must be objective about this. Turkey has three major sports club and dozens. Instead of a single reserve sport club on the section; a national approach, may be more constructive. Yes, footballers does not represent the current squad but the date was specified on the caption. Examples: Germany, Brazil. Maurice07 (talk) 21:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

The problem here is not "scientific facts" deleting or biodiversity issues. Problem is large-scale panoramic photographs take place in the main article. I removed "Fatih Sultam Mehmet bridge" photo with Northern Anatolian Mounts. You have praised photo uploaded contrary to the Misplaced Pages image use policy. It's probably non-free content. Hopefully, you specify your opinions on the talk page instead of edit summary! Maurice07 (talk) 11:42, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Motto

The site referenced for the motto says "Egemenlik, kayıtsız şartsız Milletindir" is the beginning of chapter six of the Turkish constitution, the chapter dealing with sovereignty. It doesn't say anywhere it is the nation's motto.
In the Turkish article's talk page Qwl confirms this is the correct motto. However the reference ought to be changed. Pqnlrn (talk) 01:23, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

about my changes

I am adding main sectors of economy and other subtitles to 'culture' sections(why there was an only subtitle 'sports' anyway). Check these countries about my changes,in those pages more than two subtitles for economy and culture are used; Japan, Denmark,Spain,Greece,S.Korea. KazekageTR (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kazakage. Thank you for your contributions to Turkey article. The opening new sections on the article, necessary and essential for the development. However; currently, there is an extreme image density on the article. Image dimensions is above the standards and for the appearance of the article seems negative. Also, I think large panoramic pictures should be removed. Maurice07 (talk) 14:04, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I didint know that there was an actual image dimension standart thanks for saying that. The one in the biodiverstiy section is useless and we could remove one of two panoramic pics in the economics section. KazekageTR (talk) 14:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Recent expansion of the article

This article has been carelessly expanded of late, and the end result is not at all positive. Images have been added everywhere without the slightest concern for layout or proportion, and the culture section alone more than tripled in size in the last few months. The article currently has 12,118 words, which would take over an hour to read at average speed. Good or featured articles are never that long: Germany was 5354 words when promoted, 7825 words on the latest Featured article review; Japan, 4643 words at promotion, 6010 words at the last FAR; Australia, 4221 words when promoted, 6555 words on the last FAR; Canada, 4623 words when promoted, 7081 words on the last FAR; India, 2285 words when promoted, 7637 words on the last FAR; Indonesia, 4311 words when promoted, 4346 words on the last FAR. Not one of them comes close to the current size of this article, and it's easy to see why: excessively large articles tend to have a poor layout, and are harder to check for accuracy or vandalism, and rapidly decline in quality as a consequence. If we want this article to be featured again one day, our top priority should be to make it readable again, by moving all the content in excess to sub-articles, per the Article Size and Summary Style guidelines.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 16:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I care about layout and i agree with you that there are lots of unneeded pictures and texts but my edits on rearrengements(for a better layout) of pictures are getting reverted by the user Lord of Rivendell. And he adds texts without concern as you can noticed, when i revert those changes he starts an edit war with me, in order to stay out of trouble i keep his changes and re-do my rearrengements( you can notice that i've always added 'for your pleasement' - referring to him- on my edit summarys.). Anyways i'll gladly help you but the users keep violate Misplaced Pages:Ownership of articles. If you help me out with that problem, we can work together.KazekageTR (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I counted 57 images, and that is excluding images from the infobox or templates so the sheer number of them is problematic, not least because they can't possibly all be relevant to the article's core topic. What's more, the images have been added without any concern for the MOS:IMAGELOCATION guideline, so that the text is often 'sandwiched' between images. The article is in very poor structural condition, so I much appreciate your offer to work together. @Lord of Rivendell:, since he made most of the rencent changes, we should discuss the matter together and reach a consensus on how to improve it.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Whoa Lord of Rivendell is on an edit spree again. We shoulds sort it out right now. KazekageTR (talk) 08:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I agree with you, User:Underlying lk. Article has been expanded as cursory in very short time by User:Lord of Rivendell. Unnecessary details, repeated internal links, non encyclopedic info, wide panoramic images, unrelated photos on sections, photo size... Unfortunately, there is WP:OWN here by Lord of Rivendell. There is no way to negotiate and compromise him in any way. We should work together to improve it. Maurice07 (talk) 12:27, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
My proposal is that we should first decide on an appropriate prose size for the article (which is not the wikicode size that is displayed in the history page, but is calculated using this script), an appropriate number of images and then work together to decide what should be left in the article, and what should be eventually moved to sub-articles like Music of Turkey. Personally I think we should try to bring it down to 7,000 words or so, which would be in line with most country-level featured articles, and no more images than could fit in without violating the the MOS:IMAGELOCATION guideline. I left Rivendell a message on his talk page, and I hope he will decide to participate to the debate.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
It was KazekageTR's idea to expand the Turkey article in the first place. Originally, I and other users (such as EtienneDolet) tried to stop him, but he simply "copy-pasted" loads of paragraphs and images (without copyedit check) from articles like Economy of Turkey, Culture of Turkey, etc, into the Turkey article. Now, he is complaining just because of his "feud" against me. The user Maurice07 didn't miss the occasion to put the blame on me, because he was blocked for 3 weeks due to edit-warring in the same article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 17:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I will gladly revert the article back to the "pre-KazekageTR expansion" version, i.e. before he started to "copy-paste" (without copyedit check) entire paragraphs and images from articles like Economy of Turkey, Culture of Turkey, etc, and literally "dumped" them into the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this article has been abused by various users that have been guided under their WP:OWN like edits. I don't want to blame specific users. I would like this article to be fixed however. It has now become an excessively long article and needs a massive cleanup. I will now add a {{cleanup-rewrite}} tag to garner more editors and have a broader discussion over the matter. Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:23, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
It's got completely out of hand. 178kb is way too big. Too many pics and the bloated Culture section stand out. DeCausa (talk) 19:39, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Etienne and DeCausa. We can see very clearly from the Revision Statistics (scroll down for the "Article size over time" section) that there was a recent, massive spike in the article's size, and that the quality of the article has gravely deteriorated as a consequence. Can we try to agree on a 'target' size for the article, before deciding what should be included and what should not be? I already suggested a limit of about 7,000 words (calculated using this script), based on the average of featured articles about countries at the time when they were promoted.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 20:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

A target size would be idealistic. However, due to the recent tensions over the content matter, I think it will spark a feud and perhaps even bigger problems. The target size needs a lot of planning and consensus. I think we need to have these tensions subside just a bit before moving forward too quickly. Basically, we need immediate planning and some sort of maintenance over the content. Therefore, I propose to request page protection. I think that will lead to more discussion in the talk page and draw a consensus over the content matter. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I am also worried that drastically reducing the size of this article may cause as many, if not, more problems than it would have during the recent excessive expansion. Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Here, there is great need to consensus. But I'm pessimistic about it, since the opening of this section, 72 changes has been edited by User:Lord of Rivendell, (within the last 24 hours, 38 edits) without any negotiation !!! The sole purpose of this user, accuse me and User:KazekageTR. On 24 December 2013 He/She blocked with me due to edit war. Firstly, I think he/she should be topic banned on the Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/EnforcementMaurice07 (talk) 01:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I just finished a section-by-section review of the article, comparing it to an earlier stable version. The most remarkable thing is that despite the spike in editing activity, most of the article has remained relatively stable. The major changes which caused the recent deterioration are concentrated in the following sections:
  • Economy, where three more sub-sections (Tourism, Infrastructure, Science and technology) have been added to an already large section: the word count rose from 914 to 1905 words;
  • Culture (including sports), where again lots of sections were added, greatly contributing to the overall bloating of the article: the word count went from a relatively moderate 1054 to a whopping 3336 words.
It's fairly obvious that any attempt to salvage the article will have to focus on these two sections, which are badly in need of summarisation.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 15:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Well here is User:Lord of Rivendell again. He blames User:Maurice07 and me for expansion??? Well we've stopped adding additional texts after we've agreed each other in talk page. And like i said in my last edit, he frequently goes on an edit spree(check the history page he is on an edit spree again, oh my god!). Lastly without taking any steps, we should make a plan and apply it. But we wont be good partners with Lord of Rivendell(i assume Maurice07 wont be a good partner too by the way). Thank you for you interference cause it was not going to solve itself(because of Lord of Rivendell of course).KazekageTR (talk) 18:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The Germany article (which has an FA star) is currently 161K, while the Turkey article is 172K. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The India article is currently 170K, almost exactly the same with the Turkey article which is 172K. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Croatia article is 174K, almost exactly the same with the Turkey article which is 172K. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Italy article is 174K, almost exactly the same with the Turkey article which is 172K. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Sweden article is 176K, slightly larger than the Turkey article which is 172K. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Taiwan article is 176K, slightly larger than the Turkey article which is 172K. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Australia article is 186K, larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Mexico article is 187K, larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Brazil article is 190K, larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The China article is 191K, larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:28, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Russia article is 192K, larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Greece article is 193K, larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Portugal article is 202K, 30K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:55, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Poland article is 218K, 46K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 08:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Ukraine article is 222K, 50K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 09:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The Israel article is 224K, 52K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 09:00, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The France article is 226K, 54K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:23, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The United Kingdom article is 251K, almost 80K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
The United States article is 267K, almost 100K larger than the Turkey article. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 07:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
So what? See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. There are guidelines about article size, the fact that some articles don't respect them is no reason to ignore them. Plus, there is clear consensus from the talk page that the current version is unacceptably bloated.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 11:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Indeed. WP:SIZE is key. It's also worth keeping in mind that total article size is very different from the size of the prose, as it included references and images and hidden links etc. India, the FA above which is longer than this page, has a prose size of only 52kB, much shorter than Turkey's 72kB. Germany's is 63kB, only just above recommended minimum size. CMD (talk) 12:53, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
If someone breaks the rule, that doesn't gives you the right to break the rule.WP:SIZE is the main rule for articles and after finishing Turkey, you might want to edit all those countries instead of giving examples. Like i said Lord of Rivendell is not a person that you can cooperate easily.KazekageTR (talk) 14:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Uppss..It's quite a long staircase, really :) I am in favor featured article of Japan as a reference. Instead of completely remove sections, may be shortened. (For example, Culture of Japan) All sub-titles (Art, Sport, Music, Cuisine, Literature) can be mentioned as short paragraphs. It's also quite successful in a photo layout. Actually, my favorites Canada and IndiaMaurice (talk) 16:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
In common law legal systems, a Precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. The general principle in common law legal systems is that similar cases should be decided so as to give similar and predictable outcomes, and the principle of precedent is the mechanism by which that goal is attained. This is the reason why I listed the size of other country articles. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 17:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Chipmunkdavis (talk · contribs) and Underlying lk (talk · contribs). Things that must be fixed in my opinion: A music section with an unnecessary long list of musicians/artists. A literature section with an unnecessarily long list of writers/poets. A sports section that talks about ethnic Turks playing the in the NBA. All of the aforementioned long list of people in fact belongs to the Turkish people article, not an article about a country. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I am going to attempt a section-by-section review of the whole article, to restore material which might have been added or removed without sufficient oversight and to remedy the generalised state of neglect of this article. I will purposefully leave untouched the economics and culture sections for now, so that we may first find sufficient consensus on how to best summarise them.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Note: Lord of Rivendell just reverted my changes in their entirety, offering no better explanation than this edit summary: "After a massive removal spree of factual and visual content, you arrived back to 172K. Bravo...". And this is despite my decision to avoid edits to the most contentious sections like culture, for now. This is not how we discuss on Misplaced Pages and this continued imposition of revisions without discussion is unacceptable.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 22:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Comparing Turkey with its equivalents

Turkey (172K) is a much larger and more ancient country (with a more complicated history and culture) than Croatia (174K), Sweden (176K), Taiwan (176K), Portugal (202K), Poland (218K), Ukraine (222K), or Israel (224K). Lord of Rivendell (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
India (170K), Italy (174K), China (191K) and Greece (193K) can be seen as ideal equivalents of Turkey (172K) in terms of history, culture, art, architecture, etc; so I think the article size and the amount of details are fair enough. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Clogging the talk page with this drivel won't fix the article.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
At least I reduced the article size from 178K to 172K with summary edits, while all you guys did was to chat. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 21:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that is the idea, to reach a consensus before carrying out changes. If everyone attempts to unilaterally impose its preferred revision, an edit war is all you get. You cite India as an example, but the India article is 8228 words long. What matters towards the end of WP:ARTICLESIZE is the prose size, i.e. the readable text, not the wikicode. An article of 170kb of 15,000 words and few references is not the same as an article of 170kb but with 8,000 words and many references, qualitatively speaking.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
I restored all the citation tags (page number needed, verification failed, etc.) for your information. Lord of Rivendell (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Nope, I restored them, what you did was reverting every other change, without explanation, despite the abundant consensus that changes are required.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 23:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed two citation tags: One in the intro section, one in the Etymology section. Now they are all complete. (This was your only objection that made sense. Your other deletions saved less than 1K: From 173K to 172K, including the restored citations.) Lord of Rivendell (talk) 23:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
You obviously did not even check what you were editing, you are offering no explanation for your reverts (while I abundantly motivated my every change) and saying "your only objection that made sense" is a taunt, not a reason.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 23:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Categories: