User talk:DeliDumrul

Welcome!

Hello, DeliDumrul, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! —Khoikhoi 20:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch! DeliDumrul 20:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bir şey değil. ;) —Khoikhoi 20:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I believe you can do whatever you want with PD images, as they're not copyrighted. —Khoikhoi 00:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not sure if that's necessary, but you might try {{GFDL}} or {{GFDL-self}}. —Khoikhoi 00:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or {{PD-self}}. —Khoikhoi 00:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bizansist touchup.jpg

What, was the sea flooded with macaroni? ;) There are some pretty good images of Turkey in my gallery. My favorite of which is this one:

Yeah, you did a good job, I just thought it was funny. That image is already in the Antalya article btw. —Khoikhoi 04:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like that too—thanks! —Khoikhoi 04:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, cool! Thanks again, it looks great. :) —Khoikhoi 05:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

—Khoikhoi 04:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Bursa Anadolu Gymnasium.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bursa Anadolu Gymnasium.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes

I dunno, you guys don't want the Greek name mentioned AT ALL in the intro, while we want it at the very top—I think it makes a nice compromise. We have the Turkish name at Samothrace for example, what's so bad about that? —Khoikhoi 17:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as you said from the naming conventions, the names that are not relevant should be in a separate section. I believe that the Greek name is, but anyways, you might want to see these articles for example:

Sibiu (IPA [si'biw], German: Hermannstadt, Hungarian: Nagyszeben) -- in Romania
Hrodna (Belarusian: Гро́дна, Го́радня, Гаро́дня; Russian: Гро́дно, Grodno; Polish: Grodno, German: Garten) -- in Belarus

The way that I see it, is that it's good to represent all the history of a place, not just its recent history. There are tons of Turkish city articles that have the Greek, Armenian, etc. names at the top, and I personally think they're helpful for historial reference. For example, if I want to know what modern-day city is "Ancyra", I can just type it in, and clearly see it at the top of the Ankara article.

Anyways, I'm very sorry for being rude (unlike where you are, the whether sucks today, and I guess people get mad when it's 85 degrees F.). I hope the dispute ends soon... :) —Khoikhoi 22:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Placenames

I certainly have nothing personal with you. But as I can see your countributions to Istanbul article have been significant, yet for a strange reason, you dont seem to follow your own remarks regarding alternative names. You add the Turkish name AT THE TOP of Alexandroupoli article but you dont add the Greek name AT THE TOP of Istanbul article. That of course is totally unacceptable. So i ve discussed with other editors one solution: That is to add names in the article and not at the TOP. This solution seems to work. But I, personally, will not tolerate adding Turkish names on Greek places(AT THE TOP) when there is no adding of the Greek name in a place of such importance to Greeks as Istanbul.Regards.Mywayyy 17:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No offence, but you seem to have a problem on adding the Greek name AT THE TOP of the Istanbul article, cause when someone added it you immediately erased it! Besides that, your statement that if we add the Greek name then we should add the Armenian too is not very correct due to the fact that Greeks and Armenians dont have the same historical/cultural significance for Istanbul the same way one could say that Bulgarians dont have the same significance for Alexandroupoli as Turks. Either way, I think the solution I offered you would stop this reverts-war.I think our articles at the moment are just fine. Agreed?Mywayyy 17:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a shame we cannot agree to that. You seem a logical and open-minded kind of person and I really appreciate that. I also cant agree that Greek and Turkish people are friends, though I would like that from the bottom of my heart for the benefit especially of the Turkish people. Unfortunately the situation is more complex than that. And the present situation is NOT due to historical facts as some people wish to think rather than the internal political situation of Turkey and the importance of the Army. For this situation Turkish people are aslo responsible because they tolerate this situation. In Greece if there was a similar situation it is absolutely certain that the public would somehow respond (as in 1974). Greece constanly, and everybody knows that, backs Turkeys effords to become a democratic EU-orriented country plus it tries to maintain a rather calm attitude to various provocations, an attitude many countries wouldnt show and an attitude Greek public opinion is sick and tired (now). So Turkey's policy with the blessings of the Turkish people, since they tolerate it, has achieved (some of) the following:

1. It lags far behind developed countries, beiing a poor country with a medium Human Development Index, a result of stubborn political choices.

2. It starts pissing off ,other than Greece, European partners because they see no progress but a I-dont-give-a-shit attitude.

3. It starts pissing off Greek public opinion (Greeks 2 years ago were split evenly to whether they support an EU Turkey- now 68% is against).

So you see Greeks and Turkish people are not so friends after all, although I wish someday to become.RegardsMywayyy 19:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turkic peoples

I still think there should be a section about Pan-Turkism, as it's a closely-related subject. Let's call it an overview, then. It doesn't necessarily have to be a "summary", per se. —Khoikhoi 19:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The section should still remain, you can reduce it to a small stub if you want until it is expanded.

As for Ararat, you can just add {{fact}} tags for things that need sources. I think information about the people that lived near the mountain past and present is totally relevant. Mount Everest mentions the Sherpas, why can't this article talk about the Armenians and Kurds? When you say "contraversial and disputed pages", do you mean the Armenian Genocide article? No one disputes that Armenians lived in Eastern Anatolia before 1915, it's just what happened to them that remains debated. I also see no reason why you deleted the exernal link about Kurds, I personally found it to be interesting. —Khoikhoi 19:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, how about we create a new "People" section and talk about the historical and present demographics? I see what you're saying for the crescent, however (you can remove that). As for the Kurds, I don't think the name of the website has anything to do with calling the Kurds "bastards", that's just their name. —Khoikhoi 19:55, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, how does this look? BTW, I found some interesting pictures of the Ottoman Empire here and one of Turkey here. Let me know if I should upload any of them. —Khoikhoi 20:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, no problem. :) —Khoikhoi 20:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, I bet they're all PD, I'll upload them sometime, but I'm too lazy right now. —Khoikhoi 20:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, but you're aware that there already is one, right? —Khoikhoi 21:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I'm looking foward to seeing how it looks! I had Photoshop briefly once, and I was amazed at how much you can do with it. How long does it usually take to colorize an image? —Khoikhoi 21:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well...have fun then. ;) —Khoikhoi 21:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that looks pretty good! ~~What article do you think it should go in?~~ Ooops, kinda obvious. —Khoikhoi 22:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any difference yet... I guess we need to wait awhile. —Khoikhoi 22:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see it now. Alright then! —Khoikhoi 22:39, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmm...

The recent move you made to İshak Paşa Sarayı is against Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). That's why we have the page at Mehmed Talat Pasha, not Mehmet Talat Paşa. —Khoikhoi 23:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the original name is fine. There's an interesting debate going on over at Talk:Imbros and Tenedos btw. —Khoikhoi 23:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I meant the name before you changed it. ;) —Khoikhoi 23:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Istanbul images

I just saw your comment. I see you've figured out how to create categories, the name is fine. I would prefer "Images of Istanbul", but it doesn't make much of a difference. I'm not sure if there is a tag for images of Turkey, but you might try uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons next time so that all Wikipedias (including the Turkish one, Vikipedi) can use them. Cheers! —Khoikhoi 02:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Friendship

DeliDumrul, you know it wasnt my intend to offend you or destroy anything. Since you ve lived in the U.S Canada and Europe you would know what I m talking about. Also, all you need to do in order to see that i m not offending anybody is to check per capita incomes in EU or US or Canada and compare it with that of Turkey. You believe that a HDI that places Turkey in no 75 behind Sri Lanka is something to be proud of? All I wanted to stress is that Turkish people, if they realize the situation and not close their eyes at it, can find the power to change things. And maybe then we can say to the world that Greeks and Turks are friends for the good of the whole region. My best regards.Mywayyy 05:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]