Talk:Tzachas

Tzachas has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 20, 2015. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tzachas article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: Biography / Maritime / Balkan / European / Roman & Byzantine / Medieval / Early Muslim

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	European military history task force
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

Turkey Low‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece: Byzantine Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Byzantine world task force.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per request. - GTBacchus^(talk) 16:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chaka Bey → Tzachas – per WP:COMMONNAME

There is no historical source in Turkish language about "Tzachas", and the name «Çaka» («Çaka Bey») prevailed especially in Turkey, because Akdes Nimet Kurat used the name "Çaka" in his work "Çaka: Orta Zamanda İzmir ve Yakınındaki Adaların Türk Hakimi", İstanbul, 1936.^[1]

This situation is same as names of Achaemenid people.

If "Chaka Bey" were common name of this person, we could (maybe must) chose "Chaka Bey". But it is clear that the common name of this person is not "Chaka"/"Chaka Bey"/"Chaka Beg" but "Tzachas" in English historiography.

Tzachas -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 352
Smyrna Tzachas -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 54
"Chaka Bey" -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 3
"Chaka Beg" -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 2
"Chakan Bey" -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 0
"Chakan Beg" -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 2
"Cakan Bey" -Llc 1, in Turkish language
"Cakan Beg" -Llc 0
"Caka Beg" -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 7
"Caka Bey" -Llc (1980-2011, minimum) 54, but 22 of 54 are English text.

-- Takabeg (talk) 03:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

^ ... yüksek siyasî ve askerî görüş sahibi olarak büyük önem taşıyan bu bey'in adının gerçek söylenişi henüz tamamen kesinliğe kavuşmuş değildir. Bu hususta şimdiye kadar üç ihtimal ileri sürülmüştür: Çaka, Çağa, Çakan. AN Kurat'ın bunu «Çaka» kabûl ederek eserini de «Çaka Bey» diye adlandırması, özellikle memleketimizde Çaka şeklinin yaygınlaşmasına yol açmıştır denebilir., Tarih Dergisi, Cilt 20, İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi, p. 56.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not a good decision. First, "Tzachas" is the Greek form of the name, and this is about a Turkish ruler, where the native form would be preferable. Second, the above results are questionable, because they included "bey/beg" as an integral part of the name, when it is merely a title: Chaka Turkish brings 410 results, and "caka" turkish, i.e. the Turkish spelling, brings a few dozen results as well (if some irrelevant results are discounted). Constantine ✍ 16:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I'm sorry you only arrived after I'd moved the page. Before moving it any more, I'd like to get input from more editors, and be sure that we're getting the right title. I've left notes at 1 2 3 4 WikiProjects just now requesting input, so let's see what others have to say. -GTBacchus^(talk) 17:35, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Tzachas" was recorded only in historical documents written in Greek language. The Turkish forms of the name (Çaka, Çağa, Çakan ) were nothing but assumption, hypothesis etc. And at present, these "assumed" names (Chaka, Chagha, Chakan, Çaka, Çağa, Çakan ) are not common names of this person. Takabeg (talk) 02:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, that is a good point. I've checked my own sources, and indeed, Tzachas was recorded only in Greek histories. So I agree with the present state of affairs. Constantine ✍ 12:01, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe too late for the comment, but anyway. The problem is with the pronunciation. There is no standard pronunciation rule for foreign names in English. How do you pronounce "Tzachas" ? I don't know any Turkic or Islamic name beginning with Tz. (Ç in Çaka is pronunced like ch in the word chalk.) So I don't agree with the above move. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 06:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tzachas/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomandjerry211 (talk · contribs) 21:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a little time to go over the article.--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 21:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	First paragraph in the body should be a note. What does 1090/1091 mean. 1090 or 1091, 1090 and 1091 or maybe something else? It is unecessary to put the same citations over and over again right next themselves in the article. Should the infobox be Infobox military person? One dead link in the article, using the Checklinks tool.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Only one section, which ~~needs~~maybe to be split.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Is there a reference for the fact that he was an Oghuz Turk?
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	~~Only three sources listed. I found a couple other sources.~~
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Hi User:Tomandjerry211, sorry for the delay, I only just now saw your review. On the points you raised:

"First paragraph in the body should be a note." I disagree, it discusses the sources on his life, and is directly pertinent to the "Life" section.
"1090/91" means in 1090 or 1091, it is a common shorthand e.g. in the case of the sources using the Islamic calendar, where years do not coincide with the Western calendar. 1090 and 1091 would be 1090–91, which is how I've denoted the regnal dates.
"It is unecessary to put the same citations over and over again right next themselves in the article" I am not sure what you mean
- I mean some thing like this: "The T30 HMC served in World War II.^[1] It later served in the First Indochina War.^[1]", this is unecessary to do.--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 10:53, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh, you mean in the second paragraph. You're right, I've removed the one redundant set. Constantine ✍ 12:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, I mean it could, but there is no firm rule. I prefer to keep it simple with this one.
Fixed dead link, Brill keeps moving its articles around.
On splitting the article, there is really not that much info for it to be necessary. Having one-paragraph sections merely to have sections is rather beside the point.
All Anatolian Turks were Oghuz Turks.

Thanks for taking the time to review this, I am awaiting further feedback. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 09:04, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- Passing, Well done!--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 14:48, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^ ^a ^b Zaloga, Steven M3 Infantry Half-track, pp. 36–37

[1] ... yüksek siyasî ve askerî görüş sahibi olarak büyük önem taşıyan bu bey'in adının gerçek söylenişi henüz tamamen kesinliğe kavuşmuş değildir. Bu hususta şimdiye kadar üç ihtimal ileri sürülmüştür: Çaka, Çağa, Çakan. AN Kurat'ın bunu «Çaka» kabûl ederek eserini de «Çaka Bey» diye adlandırması, özellikle memleketimizde Çaka şeklinin yaygınlaşmasına yol açmıştır denebilir., Tarih Dergisi, Cilt 20, İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi, p. 56.

[Zaloga36-2] Zaloga, Steven M3 Infantry Half-track, pp. 36–37

[1]

[1]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions