Jump to content

Talk:Middle East: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 274: Line 274:


That map is showing countries with '''some or all''' territory in the Middle East, in the case of Turkey, Eastern Thrace is European Turkey and therefore not Middle Eastern. Not sure what your point about Africa is. If this area I've described is not known under the name Middle East, then somebody tell me the name of this distinct area. [[Special:Contributions/90.193.39.114|90.193.39.114]] ([[User talk:90.193.39.114|talk]]) 13:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
That map is showing countries with '''some or all''' territory in the Middle East, in the case of Turkey, Eastern Thrace is European Turkey and therefore not Middle Eastern. Not sure what your point about Africa is. If this area I've described is not known under the name Middle East, then somebody tell me the name of this distinct area. [[Special:Contributions/90.193.39.114|90.193.39.114]] ([[User talk:90.193.39.114|talk]]) 13:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to add to my point, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Iran and Azerbaijan are the countries that are not wholly Middle Eastern, In the case of Greece, only the Eastern Aegean islands are Middle Eastern, Like Rhodes. In the case of Turkey, Eastern Thrace is not Middle Eastern, In the case of Egypt, only Sinai is Middle Eastern, In the case of Iran, only western Iran is Middle Eastern, In the case of Azerbaijan, only the parts in South Caucasus are Middle Eastern. [[Special:Contributions/90.193.39.114|90.193.39.114]] ([[User talk:90.193.39.114|talk]]) 13:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


The reason for the confusion is too many people are ignorant or unlearned in geography and add language, religion and culture into the equation. [[Special:Contributions/90.193.39.114|90.193.39.114]] ([[User talk:90.193.39.114|talk]]) 13:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
The reason for the confusion is too many people are ignorant or unlearned in geography and add language, religion and culture into the equation. [[Special:Contributions/90.193.39.114|90.193.39.114]] ([[User talk:90.193.39.114|talk]]) 13:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:46, 2 February 2009

Template:WP1.0

WikiProject iconVital Articles
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Vital Articles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of vital articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and work together to increase the quality of Wikipedia's essential articles.

Iran part of "Traditional definition of Middle East"

Either this has been a deliberate attempt at revisionism but

Iran is part of the Traditional definition of the Middle East, ever since this region was given this name by the Britons. It is absolutely ridiculous to put it in a category by the name of "Persian Plateau", since it has absolutely no association with Afghanistan when it comes to the original designation of this region.

The ancient Persian Empire has absolutely nothing to do with this name,

Iran is included in every map that has "Middle East" on it throughout history.

Some facts from Dan Brown's "State of the Middle East, atlas of conflict and resolution"

- Iran is not included in "The Near East" (British usage) - It is included in "The Middle East" (British usage, early 20th century, excluding Pakistan, Afghanistan, but including Turkey) - It is included in "Countries included in the National Geographic Atlas of the Middle East" (excluding Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.) -It is included in "The Middle East, when speaking of State of the Middle East" (including North africa, excluding Turkey, Pakistan and Afghanistan.)


It is unimaginable to exclude Iran from the traditional view of Middle East because Iran is shaped to be in it geographically, whoever made this graphic must change it immediately, it looks ridiculous. The fact that it is "Persian" speaking has nothing to do with a geographical designation.

Deleting graphic until corrected. --Paradoxic (talk) 21:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop removing Pakistan and Turkey from Middle east

can someone please put these countries back because they are part of middle east —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugamuto (talkcontribs) 20:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have put the following countries back as they are included in the Middle East when looked at the majority of World Atlas. Turkeey lies on Anatonlia while Afghanistan and Pakistan lie on the Persian Plateau —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugamuto (talkcontribs) 20:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Provide an academic source (ex: A University's Middle Eastern studies department putting Pakistan as a core part of the ME, not just the Greater ME). Please consult WP:OR. Your reverts are based of original research, not academic authorities. I am reverting your edits and if you keep making them and you do not provide a range of sources, I will continue to revert them. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most Atlases I've seen generally include Turkey in the Middle East. Pakistan is a different story though. It is more usually considered part of South Asia than the Middle East. --Tsourkpk (talk) 12:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Atlas inclusions of Turkey are ambiguous, it also crops up with Europe. Looking at where academic studies of Turkey occur, one finds quite a bit of variation. Sometimes in Middle East studies (which always include North Africa...) sometimes Central Asia, etc. There is a solid argument for Turkey being mentioned with the caveat that its position is amibiguous. Pakistan seems rather rarer, indeed almost never included with MENA in academic studies - unless the study group is "all islamic world" or the like. collounsbury (talk) 13:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, just because it sometimes crops up in Europe or Central Asia has nothing to do with this article. As long as it appears as part of the Middle East at least some of the time, then it should be included in this article in some form. Whatever the details, I think we can all agree on that there is no argument for systematically removing EVERY mention of Turkey in this article, like some people are doing. --Tsourkpk (talk) 17:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is rather more than sometimes, most modern MENA studies seem to exclude Turkey. I do agree that systematically removing all reference to Turkey is overdone, but it would seem prudent in mentioning Turkey to note that in modern contexts, Turkey is less often included as part of the Middle EAst / MENA region. (whether right or wrong that seems to be general). collounsbury (talk) 18:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just to make it clear, anything that I did to Turkey was unintentional. My primary intention was to remove Pakistan (whose placement is atrociously misguided).—Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegreyanomaly (talkcontribs) 18:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)(sorry, I have been uncharacteristically bad at remembering to ~~~~ these days Thegreyanomaly (talk) 07:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]
No worries, there is clear consensus Pakistan shouldn't be there. collounsbury (talk) 12:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Iran and Turkey are practically always included in the Middle East proper, but North Africa and Pakistan are not, and shouldn't be here. FunkMonk (talk) 18:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That statement is false on its face. Virtually all Middle East studies cover North Africa, the differentiation between North Africa and the Middle East being something that seems to be growing but is hardly a rule. As for Turkey, that depends on whether one is speaking for historical situations or modern studies. collounsbury (talk) 12:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
North Africa as a whole is part of the "Greater Middle East", rarely of the Middle East in general. FunkMonk (talk) 14:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever, certainly that is one approach, in fact the approach I favour. It is not, however, the sole operational definition. collounsbury (talk) 15:20, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Collounsbury, you raise an interesting point. That being that the very concept changes over time. For instance, there is a growing movement in academia to separate North Africa, minus Egypt perhaps, from the very definition of "Middle East". Turkey and the Caucasus region are another example of such changing movement. They are increasingly seen as literally "European". Interestingly enough, I do expect within the next few decades for Iran to be seen as part of a "Central Asian" definition, more than anything else. This notion has also started, though rather meekly, to gain ground in academia, but the geopolitics of are current world preclude such a notion from growing in the near future. Talk, just for now. Interesting, none the less. The Scythian 09:09, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

North Africa is greater Middle east, if your putting that there you might aswell put Pakistan, Afghanistan aswell as they are greater middle east —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.65.226 (talk) 19:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, I am an actual real live specialist in the region, I am based in it. I don't need someone telling me Greater Middle East or whatever. Now, as it happens I like the North Africa - Middle East break out and am not arguing for any bloody damned inclusion. But the matter stands that in journalistic and even some academic usage, Middle East has been roughly coterminous with the core Arab lands, MENA if you will. Greater Middle East is a grand new concept. Merely making assertions like this is fucking stupid, the better argument to make is not mere endless assertion, but to say that Middle East as thus defined is clearer, and the older usage should be laid aside. collounsbury (talk) 23:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Arguments like "I'm an expert" are rather futile on Wikipedia, especially because it can't be proven, and because Wikipedia editors are notorious for lying about their credentials. What matters is sources, not our claims. I'm an expert on the Moon, by the way, I'm based in it. FunkMonk (talk) 16:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the article back to normal as we are talking about the entire definition of Middle east in general. That Is why North African countries in the west and Afghanistan and Pakistan in the east are included. This covers the entire Middle east including GME, that is why there are North African Countries. Source: http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/world.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugamuto (talkcontribs) 19:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is why we place the countries like this: Middle East Bahrain · Egypt · Gaza Strip · Iraq · Iran · Israel · Jordan · Kuwait · Lebanon · Oman · Qatar · Saudi Arabia · Syria · United Arab Emirates · West Bank · Yemen

Greater Middle East Afghanistan · Algeria · Cyprus · Djibouti · Eritrea · Libya · Morocco · Northern Cyprus1 · Pakistan · Somalia · Sudan · Tunisia · Turkey · Western Sahara (SADR) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugamuto (talkcontribs) 19:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the article on the GME. If it were than Pakistan would be appropriate.

I have been telling you we need an academic source, but you have produced nothing. Give an academic organization. Like Middle Eastern Studies departments. You have provided me one atlas, emphasis on 1, and I don't even think an atlas counts as an academic source Thegreyanomaly (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


To reiterate. I am uncaring on whether Turkey stays or goes on the page. I just tried to undo anything I may have possibly done to Turkey. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 20:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but Pakistan is included in the persian plateau which is an area in Middle East. If you want to remove Afghanistan and Pakistan you might aswell remove all the north african countries. Can you please list a source where North Africa is called "Middle East". Also majority of worldwide international consumer product sites place Pakistan and Afghanistan in Middle East of there sections eg: Sony Ericcson, Hyundai International etc Are you right or are those multi-national corperations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugamuto (talkcontribs) 22:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corporations are not academic. BBC places Pakistan and Afghanistan in South Asia, but we don't pay attention to that fact. You need academic sources, and you fail to provide them. You don't even provide sources for your corporation data.

Bottom line is, unless you provide academic sources, Pakistan will be kept out. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pakistan is regarded by some as part of the Middle East, thus should be included in the list of Greater Middle Eastern countries, regardless of whether or not we can find academic sources (though it'd be preferred). Turkey is transcontinental - it is located in Thrace, which is in Europe, and the Anatolian peninsula, which is the westernmost part of Asia and is regarded as part of The Middle East. For the most part, The Airline map is quite accurate in its definition of the Middle East and the countries it encompasses. I don't see how any country besides Egypt or Libya (or possibly Northern Sudan) in northern Africa can be seen as part of the Middle East, as they are not even "east". Greater Middle East, perhaps, but just being part of the Arab community in Africa and Asia doesn't automatically make a country Middle Eastern. I recommend we specify that the "Middle East" is generally regarded as the area south of the Caucasus Mountains, west of the Himalaya, and spans Southwestern Asia and Northeastern Africa - this is the general understanding of the Middle East in the modern world. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan is South Asia and GME, not ME. It is properly included in GME. This is the page for ME not GME. People may often confuse Pakistan as part of the ME, but that does not make it MEern. No academic sources call it MEern. It is fair to comment that it is often mistaken as MEern on the page, but it is not proper to downright say it is and deeply integrate into the page.

Here is an extensive list of academic sources that call Afghanistan and Pakistan South Asian before someone asks. I pulled it straight off of South Asia's sources for Afghanistan and Tibet, so some comments regarding Tibet are still left. [1][2] [3][4][5][6][1][2][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

  1. ^ a b South Asia: Data, Projects, and Research [1]
  2. ^ a b MAPS SHOWING GEOLOGY, OIL AND GAS FIELDS AND GEOLOGICAL PROVINCES OF SOUTH ASIA [2] Includes Afghanistan and Pakistan in entirety
  3. ^ CIA world factbook, Afghanistan - Geography (Location: Southern Asia)
  4. ^ Center for South Asia Studies: University of California, Berkeley [3]
  5. ^ Center for South Asia Outreach UW-Madison [4]
  6. ^ Department of South Asia Studies: University of Pennsylvania [5]
  7. ^ Afghanistan-Tajikistan Bridge Links Central, South Asia [6] Refers to Afghanistan as South Asian and Tajikistan as Central Asian
  8. ^ University of Washington Jackson School of International Studies: The South Asia Center http://jsis.washington.edu/advise/catalog/soasia-b.html
  9. ^ Syracruse University: The South Asia Center http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/moynihan/programs/sac/
  10. ^ Center for South Asian Studies
  11. ^ http://www.brandeis.edu/registrar/catalog/one-subject.php?subject_id=6550 this sources admits in certain contexts that Tibet and Afghanistan are South Asian
  12. ^ http://www.britac.ac.uk/institutes/SSAS/about.htm Tibetan and Afghan flag shown
  13. ^ Organization - Center for South Asian Studies - Oscar
  14. ^ University of Hawaii at Manoa | South Asia Collection
  15. ^ Rutgers, SAS South Asian Studies: - Home
  16. ^ http://www.international.ucla.edu/idps/southasia/ UCLA South Asian Studies
  17. ^ South Asian Studies at Emory
  • Nice set of refs. I agree entirely with you regarding Pakistan. Turkey, however, is a different matter. A huge chunk of it is located in the Middle East, therefore should be included, perhaps specifying Anatolia. I stand by my suggestion above - "I recommend we specify that the "Middle East" is generally regarded as the area south of the Caucasus Mountains, west of the Himalaya, and spans Southwestern Asia and Northeastern Africa - this is the general understanding of the Middle East in the modern world." Master&Expert (Talk) 02:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thus far, Afghanistan has not been at issue here. Are you now trying to state that Afghanistan is in fact in South Asia? That raises and entirely different issue than the earlier debate over Pakistan.The Scythian 07:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on Turkey. Any edits I make to Turkey on the article are unintentional. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 02:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed.
What's wrong with the above image? Despite the fact that it isn't Academic, it's quite accurate. Master&Expert (Talk) 02:55, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^I am not trying to raise anything specific to Afghanistan. Afghanistan is the crossroads of ME, CA, and SA so it rightfully belongs on all three articles. I was providing sources for Pakistan as South Asia. I copied all those sources off of the Afg. and Tibet justifications from South Asa, I just failed to clean out the notes pertaining to them that were attached. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 08:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Likewise, I am not in favor at all of including Pakistan in the definition of the "Middle East", as it is not. My inclusion of Pakistan(partly), related solely to the geographic spread of the Iranian Plateau, itself extending into parts of modern day Pakistan. That is not a political or cultural reference, but only geographic one, relating to a certain geographic feature. The Scythian 08:38, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But it should most definitely be included in Greater Middle East, regardless of whether or not it's considered part of the Middle East or not. It's oftentimes considered as a section of the Middle East and that alone is worth mentioning. Master&Expert (Talk) 08:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion (which I've boldly done), is to split the list of countries into the "Middle East" (with a more narrow, and broadly agreed-upon definition) and the "Greater Middle East".

  • From what I've seen in various scholarly sources, the Middle East includes Egypt, but not all of North Africa. A different regional definition that does include North Africa would be the Arab World or "Middle East and North Africa" (MENA). So, I suggest splitting off the rest of Africa into a broader category, Greater Middle East.
  • I also don't see Afghanistan as part of the Middle East, but rather part of South Asia. The regional definition, Southwest Asia, is also used sometimes, and that definition does include Afghanistan and Pakistan. I suggest omitting both Pakistan and Afghanistan from the Greater Middle East, or including both. Including one but not the other is odd.
    • I disagree, bigtime. Afghanistan is sometimes lumped into either the Middle East, Central Asia or South Asia. As a result, it must be counted in this article. Afghanistan has most in common, and is closely related to such nations as Iran, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and the NWFP and Baluchistan provinces of Pakistan. Beyond such, any connection is really just conjecture. In other words, how you personally see Afghanistan must comply with both cited sources and majority consensus. The Scythian 08:10, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ WorldBank
  2. ^ Defining a linguistic area: South Asia, By Colin P. Masica
  3. ^ Roots of Confrontation: in South Asia: Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and the superpowers. Stanley Wolpert, Oxford University Press
  4. ^ South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
  5. ^ UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office
  6. ^ United Nations - Millennium Goals
  7. ^ South Asia: Trends to 2020 - U.S. Directorate of National Intelligence
  8. ^ Unicef
  9. ^ Syracuse University - South Asia Center
  10. ^ University of Michigan - Center for South Asian Studies
  11. ^ University of Texas - Department of Asia Studies / South Asia Institute
  12. ^ Brookings Institution
  13. ^ Council on Foreign Relations
  14. ^ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  15. ^ Johns Hopkins University - SAIS - South Asia Program
  16. ^ Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy, by Sugata Bose, Ayesha Jalal. Routledge
  17. ^ Birds of South Asia. The Ripley Guide
  18. ^ Burden of infectious diseases in South Asia
  19. ^ State Department Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs
  20. ^ Library of Congress (considers Afghanistan as part of Central Asia), no mention of Middle East
  21. ^ University of California - Berkeley, South/Southeast Asia Library
  22. ^ CIA World Factbook (Afghanistan is located in southern Asia)
  23. ^ Middle East Patterns: Places, Peoples, and Politics
  • I would go ahead and include Turkey, as part of the Middle East. I think it's more traditionally been included as part of the Near East, and the Middle East region generally includes what was/is the Near East.

How I've split the table is based on the definition used in Middle East Patterns: Places, Peoples, and Politics. The other thing to do is to improve the subarticle, Regions of the Middle East, which is only a stub. It could go into more detailed discussion of the various terms and regional definitions. --Aude (talk) 23:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that I have the ability to redo any of the maps in this article, which should probably be done anyway so they are in svg format. If we want to revise the "Greater Middle East" map, let's decide what we want. --Aude (talk) 23:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan and Afghanistan are certainly part of the Middle East, which is more of a geopolitical designation than a geographical one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.130.45 (talk) 09:55, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greater ME yes, real ME no. No academic sources mark Pakistan as being part of the regular ME, and relatively few sources consider Afghanistan as being part of the regular ME when compared to sources calling Afghanistan as part of South/Central Asia. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 06:00, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

City January
(Low)
January
(High)
July
(Low)
July
(High)
Amman 4°C 12°C 18°C 32°C
Baghdad 0°C 16°C 24°C 43°C
Cairo 8°C 18°C 21°C 36°C
Damascus 0°C 12°C 16°C 36°C
Dubai 15°C 23°C 30°C 39°C
Jerusalem 5°C 13°C 17°C 31°C
Riyadh 8°C 21°C 26°C 42°C
Tehran -3°C 7°C 22°C 37°C
Sources: BBC Weather and Weather.com

We have a climate table - {{Climate in Middle East cities}} - which I made a while ago, during the Wikipedia:Table namespace experiment. I think the table layout/colors needs some adjustment, before using it anywhere. Right now, the table is orphaned and not used. --Aude (talk) 00:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. I didn't even know we had something like that. Come to think of it, I wasn't even thinking of the climate of the Middle East until you brought it up. And we need a section regarding the climate.
How did you make that? Master&Expert (Talk) 04:56, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's just a table, like the list of countries tables. But, it's put in a template so the wiki code is separate and can be transcluded into the article. The idea of separating tables was that if newbies come and click "edit", and see messy wiki code like infoboxes and tables, they might not be comfortable or able to figure out how to edit the page. --Aude (talk) 05:07, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added it to the article. For now, I think it'll do, at least until we can expand that section. Master&Expert (Talk) 06:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I REALLY wanted to edit this table, which is what brought me here. Right now, the table tells the "low" and "low" temperatures in July instead of "high" and "low". PLEASE fix this!!! It's locked!!! 129.171.251.141 (talk) 02:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's fixed now. --Aude (talk) 03:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The table is nice, it makes our Middle East article look better. AdjustShift (talk) 15:48, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great news

I received the book "A History of Islamic Societies". It should have large amounts of information regarding The Middle East. Looks like it will be a reliable source of references. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:48, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A History of Islamic Societies looks like a good book.[7] AdjustShift (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I no longer have it, unfortunately. Master&Expert (Talk) 22:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Turkey

Universally accepted borders of the middle east do not include Turkey. In this article we can mention Turkey being sometimes included in the middle east, but we cannot include it in the traditional borders map since the name first used for the gulf states and was later enlarged to include arab states. Where you can obviously include nations like Turkey, Armenia and Cyprus is the Greater Middle East section. Even only taking the airlines definition of the middle east is enough for that. The universal definition of the middle east goes like this again:

Middle East: Bahrain · Egypt · Gaza Strip · Iraq · Iran · Israel · Jordan · Kuwait · Lebanon · Oman · Qatar · Saudi Arabia · Syria · United Arab Emirates · West Bank · Yemen

Greater Middle East: Afghanistan · Algeria · Cyprus · Djibouti · Eritrea · Libya · Morocco · Northern Cyprus1 · Pakistan · Somalia · Sudan · Tunisia · Turkey · Western Sahara (SADR)

Please somebody remind Tsourkpk about this definition. Elmalili (talk) 18:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's just your opinion. You don't provide a single source. Wikipedia works with sources. Please come back when you have some. --Tsourkpk (talk) 17:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


You made edits that made it seem that Afghanistan and Pakistan seem like they are within the traditional boundaries Line 482/492 and Line 493/503,[]

Ex.: "The two lowest ranking countries in the Middle East, in terms of per capita income (PPP) are Afghanistan ($1,000) and the autonomous Palestinian Authority of Gaza and the West Bank ($1,100)." Since Afghanistan does not fit the definition of the traditional definition of the ME that is referred to on the page, this sentence was incorrect and fixed, but you still reverted it. You are concerned about Turkey doesn't mean you can trample over valid edits I made. Be consistent in your edits, reverting Afg and Pak edits twice shows that you are inconsistent. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 03:24, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling of Russian Translation of "Middle East"

The second word in the Russian translation of Middle East should be "Восток", meaning "East". 71.251.46.136 (talk) 17:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey

Recently, a newish user has been very insistently trying to remove Turkey from the article. Since i can see this leading to an edit war, I have started a discussion to settle this issue. The way I see it, this is a no-brainer. An image search on google for "Middle East" [8] reveals that every single map of the Middle East generally includes Turkey, and there appears to be a consensus among world atlases on this. Weasel-wording of the kind "Usually considered Middle Eastern" has no place in Wikipedia. --Tsourkpk (talk) 17:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. I never removed Turkey from the article. You are lying.

2. That wording is not mine, I took it from "Regions of Middle East" article. If it's left to me, I'd list all those countries as Middle East with a message like "Middle East has a unclear/controversial definition"

3. You are a hypocrite with an obvious agenda. First you were arguing that Anatolia was geographically Middle Eastern, but when confronted about the location of Cyprus you just said "Cyprus is culturally European". Then you realized that's nonsensical and said "Okay, add Cyprus if you want, but don't remove Turkey". I guess you sacrificed Cyprus to keep Turkey in Middle East :D It's clear that you don't have genuine interest in improving this article, you are just pushing your agenda.

4. The thing is, Turkey is sometimes considered in Middle East, and sometimes not. It's the same with Cyprus and Transcaucasian countries. Syria or Isreal, on the other hand, are always considered in Middle East. Thus Turkey is to be lumped together with the former three.--Mttll (talk) 18:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopædia Britannica, one of the most respected encyclopedias in the world and certainly very relevant, says:
the lands around the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, extending from Morocco to the Arabian Peninsula and Iran and sometimes beyond. The central part of this general area was formerly called the Near East, a name given to it by some of the first modern Western geographers and historians, who tended to divide the Orient into three regions. Near East applied to the region nearest Europe, extending from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf; Middle East, from the Gulf to Southeast Asia; and Far East, those regions facing the Pacific Ocean.
The change in usage began to evolve prior to World War II and tended to be confirmed during that war, when the term Middle East was given to the British military command in Egypt. Thus defined, the Middle East consisted of the states or territories of Turkey, Cyprus, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Palestine (now Israel), Jordan, Egypt, The Sudan, Libya, and the various states of Arabia proper (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, and the Trucial States, or Trucial Oman [now United Arab Emirates]. Subsequent events have tended, in loose usage, to enlarge the number of lands included in the definition. The three North African countries of Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco are closely connected in sentiment and foreign policy with the Arab states. In addition, geographic factors often require statesmen and others to take account of Afghanistan and Pakistan in connection with the affairs of the Middle East.
Occasionally Greece is included in the compass of the Middle East because the Middle Eastern (then Near Eastern) question in its modern form first became apparent when the Greeks rose in rebellion to assert their independence of the Ottoman Empire in 1821 (see Eastern Question). Turkey and Greece, together with the predominantly Arabic-speaking lands around the eastern end of the Mediterranean, were also formerly known as the Levant.
Use of the term Middle East, nonetheless, remains unsettled, and some agencies (notably the United States State Department and certain bodies of the United Nations) still employ the term Near East. See the source.
It's a fairly usual procedure on Wikipedia to take Britannica into account. There are literally thousands of articles on Wikipedia that explicitly use Britannica as a source, it is probably the most common source in all of Wikipedia. Here is a list to the articles sourcing them here.
Mttll, if you believe that Turkey is not always condidered to be located the Middle East, please provide a (reliable, of course) definition of the Middle East that explicitely excludes Turkey.--Olahus (talk) 18:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what counts as a reliable source, but here is something:

The term MENA, for "Middle East and North Africa", is an acronym often used in academic and business writing. The term generally covers an extensive region, extending from Morocco in northwest Africa to Iran in southwest Asia. It generally includes all the Arab Middle East and North Africa countries, as well as Iran and Israel but not Turkey. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MENA) (I know Wikipedia can't refer to itself, that's not the point, please do not repeat codewords like that.

Worldbank defines a Middle East. It doesn't include Turkey.

[9]

Mttll, as usual you are only providing your opinion. Your opinion, however, is irrelevant here. Wikipedia works on consensus. There is a general consensus among map-makers that Turkey is part of the Middle East. I have provided sources to back my point. You have not. Everything else is irrelevant, especially your opinion and personal attacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsourkpk (talkcontribs)

I'm still waiting for an explanation, how can Middle East (based on geography) can include Turkey and exclude Cyprus at the same time.--Mttll (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Stop trying to confuse the issue by mentioning Cyprus. That is not a valid argument. --Tsourkpk (talk) 18:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Middle East, not Turkey. You focusing on Turkey and ignoring & dismissing everything else tells a lot about your intentions.--Mttll (talk) 18:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And the international consensus on the Middle East (backed by references) is quite clear: Turkey is part of the Middle East. Don't like it? Deal with it. --Tsourkpk (talk) 18:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the context. That's what I have been telling all along. Turkey (along with others including Cyprus) is sometimes considered in Middle East, sometimes not. Saudi Arabia and Israel are on the other hand is always considered in Middle East. Therefore I say Turkey should be lumped with Cyprus and the others, not Saudia Arabia or Israel.

By the way, this essential definition from your source...

the lands around the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, extending from Morocco to the Arabian Peninsula and Iran and sometimes beyond

excludes Turkey because it borders the Mediterranean Sea from the north. It also says Greece had been considered in Middle East, but you haven't addressed that yet oddly enough.

And from the article (did you even read it?):

The first official use of the term "Middle East" by the United States government was in the 1957 Eisenhower Doctrine, which pertained to the Suez Crisis. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles defined the Middle East as "the area lying between and including Libya on the west and Pakistan on the east, Syria and Iraq on the North and the Arabian peninsula to the south, plus the Sudan and Ethiopia."[9] In 1958, the State Department explained that the terms "Near East" and "Middle East" were interchangeable, and defined the region as including only Egypt, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar.--Mttll (talk) 19:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Mttll, where do you see a definition of the Middle East in the page of the World bank? MENA is an acronym, not a definition of the terms "Middle East and North Africa". I give you a neutral example: the Afro-Asiatic languages - denotes a language family spoken in Africa and Asia. But those languages are not spoken in entire Asia and also not in entire Africa. According to your thinking, Congo in not an African state and China is not an Asian state. Mttll, I repeat what I already have written above: show me a definition of the Middle East that explicitely excludes Turkey.--Olahus (talk) 19:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a map from Wikipedia that excludes Turkey and includes Cyprus (vice versa is of course not possible due to geographical realities :D) [10]

By the way, why isn't Tsourkpk being questioned about his inconsistent behavior so far about Cyprus?--Mttll (talk) 19:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Turkey is not Cyprus, so let's ignore Cyprus for a minute. Turkey is practically always considered part of the Middle East, geographically as well as culturally, I've never seen anything which excluded it, unless there was some kind of political/nationalistic agenda behind it. FunkMonk (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will not forget Cyprus (or any other country which has the slightest association with Middle East) for a minute, this article is about Middle East, not Turkey.--Mttll (talk) 19:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@Mttll: Do you mean this map? Well, look at the source of the map presented in the file description ([11]). See also the file history. Actually, the map was initially uploaded as the original one [12], but it was later modified by the Turkish user Zaparojdik - he excluded Turkey without any explanation. --Olahus (talk) 19:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The original map[13] seems to include entire Bulgaria (which is odd), Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus. Not quite the argument in favor of Tsourkpk.

There are other maps. Do I have to post every single one of them? [14] [15] (not that I agree with these)

Olahus, do you have something to say about Cyprus and Tsourkpk?--Mttll (talk) 19:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mttll, where is the text for those maps? What does the maps represent?
Cyprus is located in the Middle East, Encyclopaedia Britannica already confirms this (see my posting above). --Olahus (talk) 20:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It says Middle East in the names of the files. Hey, googleing for Middle East maps was not my idea. And here is another one with a text. [16]

I don't think "Cyprus is located in the Middle East" is 100% correct. The only thing we can say for Middle East is that it's a perception, not a well defined location. Cyprus (and Turkey, Trancaucasia, Maghreb etc) are sometimes included, not sometimes not. Levant and Arabia are, on the other hand, always included.--Mttll (talk) 20:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't see a definition, Mttll. The site lonelyplanet includes Turkey in Europe, but does it mea that lonelyplanet is able to define weather Turkey is European or not? We can put Turkey maybe in the category "sometimes not included in the Middle East", by surely not in the category "sometimes included in the Middle East". --Olahus (talk) 20:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some changes. What do you think?--Mttll (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've reverted the map back to the original one which included Turkey, it can now be re added. FunkMonk (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for U.N. definition of "Middle East" as "Western Asia"

This is marked as "citation needed" in the main text of the article.

The relevant U.N. document is the United Nations Statistical office "Composition of macro geographical (continental) regions, geographical sub-regions, and selected economic and other groupings" at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm as of today's date

Jmyii (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Above issues

This map?

I was browsing through the wiki when I came across the argument above, and it inspired me to make an account. Perhaps it would be better to use the image provided in this thread I am giving. There appear to be plenty of sources associated Turkey with the middle east, but there are also numerous ones that associate it with Europe too. It would be best to explain this in the article. Panlatdelkwa (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Middle East

Speaking Arabic or being Muslim does not make something Middle Eastern. If you look at a map you can clearly see the Middle East demarcated from Europe, Asia and Africa by the Black Sea, Caucasus Mountains, Caspian Sea, Iranian Plateau, Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Sinai Peninsula, Mediterranean Sea and Aegean Sea. It is almost an island and has more claim to being a seperate continent than Europe or the Indian subcontinent. The Middle East is from the Greek islands in the Aegean to central Iran and from Georgia to the Sinai to Yemen. This is the Middle East —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.39.114 (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing we can agree about Middle East is that it's an ambiguous and controversial concept. Look at your map, it overlaps with national borders. It can't be about geography. Then what's the rationale?--Mttll (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not ambiguous at all, it's very simple. It's a (eurocentric and innacurate) geographic name for the subcontinent you see in this map.

What "subcontinent" ? Why is Eastern Thrace a part of Middle Eastern subcontinent while Western and Northern Thrace are not? What seperates African territories of Egypt from the Maghreb or Sudan? Middle East is certainly not a subcontinent, it's hardly a geographic term.--Mttll (talk) 13:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What subcontinent? The one that is clearly demarcated from Europe, Asia and Africa clockwise by the Caucasus Mountains, Caspian Sea, Iranian Plateau, Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Sinai Peninsula, Mediterranean Sea, Aegean Sea and Black Sea. It lies mostly (though not wholly) on it's own tectonic plate and has as much claim to being a continent as Europe has or being a subcontinent as the Indian subcontinent has.

That map is showing countries with some or all territory in the Middle East, in the case of Turkey, Eastern Thrace is European Turkey and therefore not Middle Eastern. Not sure what your point about Africa is. If this area I've described is not known under the name Middle East, then somebody tell me the name of this distinct area. 90.193.39.114 (talk) 13:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add to my point, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Iran and Azerbaijan are the countries that are not wholly Middle Eastern, In the case of Greece, only the Eastern Aegean islands are Middle Eastern, Like Rhodes. In the case of Turkey, Eastern Thrace is not Middle Eastern, In the case of Egypt, only Sinai is Middle Eastern, In the case of Iran, only western Iran is Middle Eastern, In the case of Azerbaijan, only the parts in South Caucasus are Middle Eastern. 90.193.39.114 (talk) 13:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the confusion is too many people are ignorant or unlearned in geography and add language, religion and culture into the equation. 90.193.39.114 (talk) 13:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]