Merhaba benim viki hakkinda fazla bilgim yok ama buradaki şovenizmi gordukten sonra uye olmaya karar verdim ozellikle turk devletleri isimlerine "persian,perslesmis"" gibi ibareler koyuyorlar.tamam perslestigimiz ve bunlarin cogunun devlete sizdiklari dogru ama pers devleti olarak degistirmeleri insana dokunuyor.sizin bu konuda yapabileceginiz bir sey var mi kusura bakmayin eski uyelerden oldugunuz icin... Dengesizz (talk) 22:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Üyeliğiniz memnuniyetle karşılıyorum.Maalesef WP de çok az sesimiz çıkıyor. Bir çok karar oy çokluğu ile alındığı için hep yetersiz kalıyoruz. Mesela Tenedos adası ismini Bozcaada'ya çevirmek için iki defa mücadele ettim ve her ikisinde de başarısızlığa uğradım. Hoşgeldiniz. WP konusunda ben de uzman sayılmam ama teredüt ettiğiniz konularda bana danışabilirsiniz. İyi günler Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Above discussion in Turkish is about foreknowledge for a new editor.
Merhabalar...ben ustteki kullaniciyim.Sizden yardim isteyecektim,"listofiraniandynasties....." diye birsayfa acmışlar ve bu sayfada Osmanlı Devletini Farslasmis olarak gosteriyorlar.Kac defa silsemde hatta bunlarin moderatorleriyle konusmaya calissamda beni blockladilar.Bu konuda sizi bilgilendireyim dedim.Bunları Turk tarih kurumuna sikayet etmek yeterlimi sizce? HistoryofTurks (talk) 23:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Benim yaptığım değişikliği de geri aldılar. Uzun boylu bir tartışma için Osmanlılar'da Fars etkisinin ne olduğu yolunda kaynak bulmak lazım. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:15, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ben kansasbearla tartistim bana cambridge yi gosterdi ama oyle bi kitapta gecen kisim,bende site olarak kaynak istedim.Sonra beni blockladi.ustteki hesaptan baska 4 hesap actim,bunun disinda hep guest olarak yazdim olmadi.hepsinde ban attilar.bence bundan sonrasi Turk Tarih Kurumuna kalmis.ilginize tesekkur ederim... HistoryofTurks (talk) 16:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Since Dengesizz(z) has decided to violate his ban. If said banned editor wishes to speak of another editor, at least have the courage to use English, since this is English Wikipedia and where I edit.
Dengesizz did not have a discussion, but posted a sarcastic remark on LouisAragon's talk page:
"Ill talk about "...iranian dynasties..." look it was only claim.okey ghaznavid,seljuks..... were cultural persianised but ottomans never using persian.please dont add this. Dengesizzz (talk) 17:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)"[reply]
My response:
"*"The Ottomans patronized Persian literature for five and a half centuries.[...] Unlike Iran they[Ottomans] gradually shed some of their Persianate qualities: they were the first of the gunpowder empires to give up Persian as the court language, using instead Turkish - that is, the vernacular of the western Turks..." -- Canfield, Turko-Persia in Historical Perspective, page 19."
His pedantic response was a continuation of his own "lack of knowledge"
"Academic???Which universty?When?Tehran universty or other Iranian universty?can you give to Oxford referance?i can give this and believe me only "Bogazici" is better than all iranian universities.AND you was block me.Its mynew account.... Dengesizzz (talk) 18:09, 12 June 2016 (UTC)"[reply]
Not sure what the "Tehran university", "Iranian university" or ""Bogazici" is better than all iranian universities" nonsense was supposed to mean. It sounds like this person thinks I am located in Iran. Undoubtedly they failed geography.
As for List of Iranian dynasties and countries, I have edited it once.
FYI, what Dengesizz(z) has done here is canvassed you to do their editing. Which is disruptive editing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hey it seems a discussion is going on in my personal page. Well I haven't searched the history of the article yet but I think there is a misunderstanding. Ottomans never spoke Persian. But in poetry they used an artificial language with extensive borrowings from Arabic and Persian. (This language was not used in speech and was quite unintelligible for most of the population.) The style of the poetry also resembled that of Persian. But other than that there was no Persian influence on Ottoman culture. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 18:45, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No offense, but I found these sources:
"The style of the poetry also resembled that of Persian. But other than that there was no Persian influence on Ottoman culture."
Ottoman Turkish: Written language and Scribal Practice, 13th to 20th Centuries, Linda T. Darling, Literacy in the Persianate World:Writing and the Social Order, ed. Brian Spooner and William L. Hanaway, page 171, "In contrast, the interesting thing about Ottoman written culture is that although Ottoman Turkish was intimately linked with Persian throughout its existence, although Ottoman scribes based their organization and culture on that of Persian scribes, and although Persian literature and documents formed the most important models for those of the Ottomans, the Ottoman written language was not at all stable or unchanging."
M. Sukru Hanioglu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, page 35, "In a way, Ottoman resembled Latin as used in medieval or early modern Europe. It supplanted Persian, which had served as the literary language of the cultured upper classes during the first three centuries of the empire."
"The style of the poetry also resembled that of Persian."
Bertold Spuler, Persian Historiography & Geography, page 68-69, "However, Persian maintained its position also during the early Ottoman period in the composition of histories, and even Sultan Salim I(r.1512-20), a bitter enemy of Iran and the Shi'ites, wrote poetry in Persian."
Sounds like it was Persian. Also, Idris Bidlisi's "Hasht Bihist" or "Seven Paradises", requested by Sultan Bayazid II, which covers the first eight Ottoman rulers was written in Persian(Spuler, page 69). --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well Except for a few educated people Ottomans didn't know Persian (Farisi). However Persian was the lingua franca of the Islamic World. But this does not mean that the Ottomans were a Persianate sociaty. Kepler wrote Harmonices Mundi and Isaac Newton wrote Principia Mathematica, two works of upmost importance. Do you think British Empire or Holy Roman Empire were Latinized societies? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See, that's just it. It does not matter what I think, believe or know, it only matters what reliable secondary sources state. AND, if I can find this information, you can bet others can find this information.
As for Kepler and Newton, Latin was the recognized language for science.(Communication: Diversity and Change, ed. Marlis Hellinger, Anne Pauwels, page 539.) --Kansas Bear (talk) 14:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sources ? You're asking me an impossible thing. There are hundreds of sources about Ottomans. One or two authors may assert that the Ottomans were Persinate. This assertion is not a scientifically proven fact; it is only an opinion of the author. But what about the others ? Usually people assert something but they don't assert something that doesn't exist. (You can read somewhere that Americas were discovered by Egyptians. But probably you can't find a source which disclaims this assertion) Unless the majority of the sources agree of Persianate Ottomans this asserion is only an opinion. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"You're asking me an impossible thing."
I have not asked for anything. Sources or otherwise.
"You can read somewhere that Americas were discovered by Egyptians."
Per Wikipedia:Reliable sources, "The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:1)The piece of work itself (the article, book),2)The creator of the work (the writer, journalist), 3)The publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press). Any of the three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both."
"and the attraction of this renaissance of Persian culture under Turkish political hegemony strongly influenced the Ottoman court, with echoes of that influence felt up to the 19th century. --The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. VIII, page 211.
"Throughout the 16th century, then, Ottoman literature and culture was still considerably influenced by the Turco-Persian literature flourishing in the courts of Khurasan and Samarkand, while themes from everyday life inevitably crept into them as well; furthermore, Ottoman society, was beginning to be influenced by the West, without being fully aware of it." -- The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol VIII, page 214, Gonul Alpay Tekin.
Please don't try to impose Persinate Ottomans. It is only an opinion. Unlike Seljuks, Ottomans were never Persianated. The people followed their traditional life styles which was clearly non Persian and most of the viziers who were from Balkan countries contributed only their own culture. In administration there were almost no Persian born people because of sharp sect differences. Persian language was only a foreign language and was taught in the schools (medrese) as a foreign language . But because of high illiteracy rate only few people knew Persian. Persian was used only as a lingua franca. Even in poetry which is influenced by the Persian literature, Persian was not used. (Instead Divan language, an artificial language created by the mixture of all languages was used. But as I wrote before, it was not used in speach) How can Ottomans be called Parsinate just because of poetry style (or maybe miniature tradition which had a negligible effect in an Islamic society) ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Difference between the Turkish H and the Arabic Kh in Ottoman officials name
I noticed while reading a book, the first governor of Podolia and former governor of Silistra's name is Khalil in one book and Halil in another book, I believe the name is pronounced Khalil coming from the meaning "Friend" also used towards Ibrahim as "Friend of Allah" the same thing occurs with Hayreddin Pasha, which is clearly Khayr ad-Din. Is the H pronounced as Kh Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The h in Halil is like h in hard or harbor. I think some people confuse the pronunciation of the same name in Turkish and in Arabic (which are not the same). Cheers. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:21, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late late reply, I will postpone this H and Kh discussion for another time, in the mean time, while studying Crimean Khanate and Ottoman Empire around the Moldavia, Wallachia, Cossack Ukriane and Russia (Interesting history, I'm doing some infoboxes) I would like to ask you some questions. If you don't mind, since of course you are the leading editor in Ottoman articles if I'm not mistaken, and I believe you maybe far more equipped with Turkish sources that may go the distance as oppose English sources. So bear with me Alexis Ivanov (talk) 20:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have solved this mystery. There is a book I can't wait to get my hands on that explains Ottoman Turkish, it is very reliable source published by routledge An Introduction to Literary Ottoman, it seems that the Arabic and Persian word Persian: خ is pronounced as "Kh" or as they say Voiceless velar fricative but in the Ottoman-Turkish language it is pronounced as simply as H. The Ottoman names of Halil and Hayreddin now makes sense. This book seems excellent in expanding the Ottoman Turkish article in the near future Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:52, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Questions from Alexis
While reading about the Russo-Turkish War (1676–81), I noticed Brian L. Davies (Professor of History, and author of Warfare, State and Society on the Black Sea Steppe, 1500-1700) calling Ibrahim "Shaitan" Pasha, muhafız pasha of Ochakiv c.1677 he was about to participate in the Russo-Turkish War (1676–81) , according to Encyclopedia of Ottoman, that is a secondary title meaning defender pasha instated after 1590s. I hope you can shed some light into it.
While researching and reading about Moldavia and it's relationship with Ottoman Empire, I realized one campaign of the Ottoman Empire was missing from Wikipedia, the Moldavian Expedition or Campaign of 1538, the Turkish Wikipedia has it, the Romanian Wikipedia doesn't. Boğdan Seferi. I will like to create the infobox (something I love to do) in the coming days. What do you think a Wikipedia page for it.
Right now I'm doing some infobox work on the Battle of Khotyn in 1621 between Poland and Ottoman Empire. I need some confirmation from you on the participants of the battle. Did the Grand Vizier Ohrili Hüseyin Pasha really die during the battle, Did Osman II really gave the Grand Viziership to Dilaver Pasha, Beylerbey of Diyarbekir who was a Vizier but never sat in the Imperial Council, Did Karakaş Mehmet PaşaBeylerbey of the the Buda Eyalet die during the battle? Did Hussein PashaBeylerbey of Silistra during the battle, who is Mustafa pashaBeylerbey of Baghdad Eyalet. Also what are the names of the Moldavian and Wallachian Voivodes who were ordered by the Padishah to come and participate in the battles, someone at the Ukranian Wikipedia has the "An Armeno-Kipchak Chronicle on the Polish-Turkish Wars in 1620-1621" an 1968 book, that I will try and get my hands on, very DETAILED participants of the battle. Just saying check on some Turkish sources for me, if these things are accurate, it will take days for me to get this book.
Most of the Ottoman articles were already created before I got interested in WP: But presently I am one of the few Turkish contributors of the project. I'll try to answer your questions.
İbrahim Pasha (nicknamed şeytan, the devil) was a governor of various forts during the piece times (Muhafız Pasha means defender of a fort) But he was appointed as the serdar (high commander of the army) during the unsuccessful siege of Chyhyryn. After the failure he returned to his former posts which were inferior to that of a serdar.
Grand vizier Ohrili Hüseyin Pasha was present during the campaign of 1621. However he was dismmissed from his post because of his reluctance to support another vizier during a clash. The next grand vizier was Dilaver Pasha But Hüseyin Pasha didn't die during the campaign. He was later killed in İstanbul by the revolters during the decrowning of Osman II in 1622. As for the others, I am afraid I don't have any source on them. To be sure there was a Hüseyin Pasha (beylerbey of Silistra) who fought in Khotin. But this event was in 1673. Probably other two names were also from 1673 event.
Nedim thank you for your response, I'm still evaluating your response, so I will be back again. In the mean time I am in a very unique position of acquiring certain books, as I asked you about "An Historical Geography of the Ottoman Empire: From Earliest Times to the End of the Sixteenth Century" I noticed you haven't read the book, I assume you have seen people reference it on Wikipedia. Especially in Ottoman eyalets page, well I have aquired this book and it is in my hand for some limited time, I will take some pictures in good condition because it is one of the greatest Atlases of the Ottoman Empire I have ever seen, you will love it, bad news this book ends in 16th century (1609 C.E. to be precise) and as you know Ottoman expanded upto the end of 17th century, the author of this book died (rest his soul) his wife published the book If I recall correctly in Brill. I will contact you again once I have acquired some pictures ( google books the maps are omitted), I think you will love it, also this book is out of print. You can only get your hands on a copy only from certain institution or a book owner. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 17:00, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For post 1609 Ottoman province, I will try and acquire Historical Atlas of Central Europe: Revised and Expanded Edition by Paul Robert Magocsi, an expert in this area of geography plus Ukraine. This book is published by University of Washington Press and they have other books of Eastern/some Central Europeans geographical books. The bad news about this atlas by Magosci is that you only have Europeans provinces of Ottoman Empire, not Asian, but it is still good. We also get the Sanjaks. I am also wondering what is the contribution of Turkish historians on Ottoman vassals, like the Republic of Ragusa, Cossack Hetmanate, Moldavia and the rest? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked for permission to order the book from someplace, they may say yes or no, I will be back once I have confrmation, it may take a while, but this Armenian-Kipchak Chronicle has all information on the war and who was there. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
New message
Sayın Nedim Ardoğa,
Bir konuda araştırma yaparken, bir şekilde bu sayfanıza kadar gelip katkılarınızı ve üzücü yorumunuzu biraz önce görmem üzere, WP’ye biraz önce üyelik yaptım ve size yazıyorum.
Özellikle Dil, Tarih, Coğrafya, Etnoloji, Entimoloji ve ilgili konular göz önüne alınırsa, WP, iki bin yıl önce, Roma İmparatorluğunun Avrupa ve istilasi altındaki diğer coğrafyaların toplumlarını romalılaştırmasının, bugün küresel olarak uygulaması gibi görünmekte. Zira WP’da verilen bir bilgi doğruluğundan ziyade, çoğunluğu sağladığı için rahatlıkla, çoğunluğun yalnış bilgisi veya tercihleri doğrultusunda gerçeğe aykırı olarak verilebilme durumunda. Bunun örneklerini özellikle Türk Dili ve Tarihi konuları ile ilgili bir takım verilen bilgilerde zaman zaman görüyoruz. Sonuç, mutlak doğrunun yerine çoğunluğun gücünün baskın olduğu bir “Roma arenası” düzeni ile işe gelinmeyenin sesinin küresel çapta susturulması olacaktır ve olmaktadır.
Yine de verdiğiniz emek ve Türk’ü savunduğunuz için sizi kutlarım.
Selamlarımla,
Ali Erden Sızgek
Sayın Sizgek, "yine de" girişi ile başlayan cümlenizde bir eleştiri var. Bu eleştirinin sebebini anlayamadım. WP de elimden geleni yapıyor ve maalesef hiç bir desatek bulamıyorum. Daha geçen hafta "Reforms in the Ottoman Empire" başlıklı çok emek verdiğim bir sayfa silindi. Daha önce Tenedos adası ismini Bozcaada yapmak için verdiğim mücadele desteksizlik yüzünden başarısızlığa uğradı. 1915 konusuna hiç girmeyelim. Ama kusuru kimsede aramayalım. WP demokratik bir ortam; tercihler katılımcıların tercihleri. İşin doğrusu bizim katılımcılarımız tartışmalara katılmıyor, katılanı da desteksiz bırakıyorlar. Dilerim sizin olumlu katkılarınız olur. (Şayet WP usullerine yabancı iseniz yardımcı olmağa çalışırım.)
Sorry to come in your discussion Nedim, but the reality is if 5 Greeks or Armenians can come in with lies it will trump 1 Turkish editor's truth. Wikipedia is number's game. You just have to try your best to follow the Guidelines, I see the Tendos article, and to be honest it is ridiculous how it has a Greek name. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Upon looking on the latest discussion of request to move, it seems there were so many supports overwhelming the Greek editors headed by (Athenean), on what basis can there be no-Consensus.??? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:43, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Murad II
Did Murad II had a campaign in 1438 against Transylvania, I can't find enough information, I know while reading that he had Vlad Tepes in his army. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that's true. In 1432, a group of Ottoman raiders were defeated by Maygars. Murat II after returning from his campaign in Anatolia commissioned Ali Of Evranos to make a scouting operation in Transilvania. Ali reported that it was possible to strike Timişoara country and consequantly Murat attacked Timişoara with the guidance of Vlad II Dracul. Durad Brankovic (of Serbia) was also with him. Although the army captured a number of forts the Maygars failed to show up in the battle front. Towards the winter Murat returned to Edirne. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info, there is something that is actually HURTING MY BRAIN, the Polish–Ottoman War (1485–1503), it makes no sense to me, Moldavians (supposedly Ottoman vassals) attacked Ottoman forces!!!!!!, then attacked Poland or should I say defended against Polish forces!!!! who were going to Kilia and Akkerman (Both Ottoman fortress from 1484). The Moldavians have some attitude to be honestly. They got straighten up in 1538 because of Suleyman. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 09:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Mehmed II ordered his Vassal Moldavia to lend in military support in 1462 (I have reliable source) also Romanian Wikipedia (English translation) gives the date June 22 1462 (no citation but I trust it, but will not use the date as a source), which is the siege of Chilia/Kilia/Killia that had Hungarian-Wallachian garrison, so how can there be war, I was wondering was Mehmed II there in the Danube river at that time?????? Can you check the date if it was indeed June 22 1462
Also the war didn't end in 1476, it actually ended in 1486 (I have reliable source stating that), how can a war end when there was clearly Ottoman-Moldavian battles and sieges like the famous 1484 Ottoman conquest of Kilia and Akkerman.?
The main problem is this in 1480-81 Moldavia signed a treaty and they have to pay the Harac DOUBLE!!!!! in 1479. This is after Mehmed II got tired of them and defeated them in 1476
I propose the date of Moldavian-Ottoman Wars as (1473-1479 and 1484-1486) or just 1473-1486 ?
Also can you look at the Campaignbox and tell me what you think, I feel like getting rid of Crusade of Varna, it was a Moldavian-Ottoman battle YES but Moldavia was lending support to the Christian powers at that time. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 03:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As you may have seen in the history, I haven't started or contributed to the article in question.As far as I can understand, the war had two phases. In 1476 Mehmet after storming Moldovia, returned home without any serious combat, because Michael hadn't shown up. Although there was no peace treaty the war effectively ended. The next phase was in 1484 when Mehmet [Bayezid II] captured Kiliya and Akkirman. Thus you can either call these events as "two different wars" or combine the two under a single heading. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think there was a peace treay but the correct word is ahdname, that Mehmed II granted Stephen in 1480-81, I can provide you with the source, if you want to take a look at it. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 04:14, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No article about
Johann Rudolf Rengger (1795-1832) on English Wikipedia... (but we see that article in German, Russian and in Spanish.) / No article about Ramona-Ann Gale / No article about Bertha Morris Parker (1890-1980) we see that article on Croatian Wikipedia. / No article about Vladimir Stchepinsky / No article about Ron Carter, the author of The Coming Of Civilization / To whom will I say these things? They are deleting! Please help me... Böri (talk) 10:02, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. They wrote books about history, geology, archaeology, paleontology, etc. I don't know much about their lives... For example, Croatian Wikipedia has an article about Bertha Morris Parker and the names of her books in English. Böri (talk) 19:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"It is currently agreed that the caliphate "disappeared" for two-and-a-half centuries, before being revived with the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca"
Actually it never disappeared, it was used and Grand Vizier Lutfi Pasha presented the argument in his book on why Suleyman the non-Qurashi was actually rightfully the Caliph, I will try to acquire this book, can you believe a book written by a Grand Vizier during Sulayman's time is being sold. The Caliphate claim was used as far as 18th century, even by Murad III. Do you think it is an under-statement to say disappeared? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well after the Abbasids, many Muslim countries claimed to house a caliph. When Selim I annexed Egypt he took over the title from a caliph living in Egypt. But he never used the title. Instead he used the title "protector of two holy cities" (Mecca and Medina). Probably it was Lütfi Pasha who proposed using the title caliph in 1550s. I don't think that the usage of the title had anything to do with the treaty of 1774.Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Those Muslim countries claim are very weak, I know the Moroccans are on top of the list especially Saadi dynasty, but Sulayman Qanuni trolled them by calling them head of Arab tribes and not Caliph in a letter. Also did the last Abbasid Caliph die in Istanbul? Was he in Prison? Selim made the right choice of eliminating him. Since Egypt started to experience a power vacuum. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 22:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No article about Sarcophagus of the Mourning Women
@Böri: Your edits are to a disambiguation page. A disambiguation page is a guide to articles in Wikipedia. If there is no article to link to, then an entry does not belong in a disambiguation page. If Strato I is mentioned in a Wikipedia article to which you can link, then you can add him to the disambiguation page. Doing so repeatedly without an article to link to is disruptive editing. PamD12:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In WP there are both the blue and the red links. Red links indicate that an article which is notable and linkable is still missing. In a way red link notifies other editors about a missing article. That's why WP uses the red link (see: WP:Red link) It reads "It is useful in editing article text to create a red link to indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable" I know this applies to normal pages. But what is wrong to use a red link in a disambiguation page ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of a disambiguation page is to help readers find pages, not to help editors get ideas for future pages (note that the quote above specifies "in article text" - so does not include disambiguation pages). So a redlink on its own shouldn't be in a dab page; a redlink with an associated blue link for an article where the topic is mentioned is fine under WP:DABMENTION. But what Böri is adding has no links at all. PamD18:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Because there were other kings whose names were also Strato. OK, now I put a redlink for Abdashtart. Abdashtart was the Phoenician name of the same king, Strato I of Sidon. Böri (talk) 08:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But there still needs to be a blue link to lead the reader to an existing article: that's the point of disambiguation pages. PamD08:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we are still deleting entries which have no place on the disambiguation page. Please create an article for this king, with proper sources, and then make a link to it from the dab page. PamD09:48, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Nedim, I asked to look at the article, because of the paragraph which reports an interview to an "alleged descendant" of Mahidevran. You are an experienced user, so you know about WP:RS. Now, an interview to someone who pretends to descend from someone who is dead since almost 500 years cannot be considered a priori as a reliable source. At its best, it is part of that discipline which is called memorialistic, which is present in each country, and whose products have to be handled with a lot of care. Usually professional historians are the ones who should study this material and decide whether it is worth of being considered as part of a historical research or not. Here on wp, in absence of historians, is the editor inserting that material that should explain to the others why this interview is reliable, not the others that - according to the ip who reinserted it - should show that it is "faked", above all if the edit has been already removed several times by more than one editor, as it was the case. I hope that now it is clear for you why I removed (again) the mention of this interview. If that material has to be reinserted, please explain its reliability. otherwise there is the reliable sources noticeboard where one can ask for an opinion. Best, Alex2006 (talk) 17:24, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The origins of the harem women are mostly obscure. There are conflicting claims. I don’t know which is correct. But all claims can be presented with the claimants. If there are five conflicting origins of course at least four of them must be wrong. It's up to reader to choose which seems to be more reliable. That is what I’m doing. This is perfectly admissible in WP. But Instead of discussing and seeking for a comprimise, you ask an admin to protect the article. (By the way you heve also complained of the soap opera Muhteşem Yüzyıl. But see the the history of the page; I started the article long before the soap opera and the article has nothing to dıo with the soap opera.) Your conduct is most disgraceful. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Nedim Ardoğa I agree. The interview is rather not cited as a reference, IN FACT, the interview is not cited AT ALL. None of the article's content has been changed as per the interview's content. Only the presence of that interview (it's existence) is mentioned in the article (at no point emphasizing that the information is correct) because there's no policy violation in that. @Alex2006 Just for your hideous accusation, I am from Iran and living in Japan as a lecturer since 7 years, I have nothing to do with Turkish soaps but Mughal Sultanate and Ottoman Sultanate and their women is my favorite subject; which bought me to Mahidevran Gulbahar. Worldandhistory (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In my sources I couldn't find anything about Suleyman's wife. To be sure there is a Seljuk Khatun in Seljuk history; but she lived about two centuries after Suleyman. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for dragging this out on Nedim's talk page. I do have that book and page 208 is not in Book VI, but Book VII and makes no mention of Suleyman, however, in Book VI on page 179 it states, "Toutouses was full of arrogance after the killing of Emir Solymas, his own son-in-law..."
There is no mention of Suleyman's wife. This is one of many issues I have with MedLands. If I were you Alexis, I would avoid MedLands like the plague. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi dear. I have realized that you moved Mahidevran's page. It would be good if you moved the talk page as well. Cause in my mobile I see that it's still titled Mahidevran Hatun. Also, why Mahidevran Gülbahar? Gülbahar was one of her nicknames that she was known by. I think only Mahidevran was enough. Don't you agree with me? Keivan.fTalk 22:20, 1 April 2016 (UTC) Keivan.fTalk22:20, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Too many changes in Mahidevran's page. Especially her origin and royal title are under heated discussion. The title has already been moved sevaral times. Thus let's wait till the discussion ends. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:34, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please move back Osman II's page to its previous title. A new comer has just changed the page's name to Osman the Young. We can't name all of Ottoman sultans' pages based on their nicknames like Ahmes Bahtı, Selim the Grim, Selim the Sot, etc. Suleiman the Magnificent and Mehmed the Conqueror are exceptions. Please move the page's name back to its previous title cause without a computer it seems that I'm unable to move it myself. Keivan.fTalk 00:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC) Keivan.fTalk00:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, thanks for your attention. About Mahidevran's page, I should say thag I'm tired of the discussions. But I just wanted to mention that the title of the talk page and article must be the same. Also, is it possible for you to move Mahfiruz to Mahfiruz Hatice Sultan? I don't know why some users just move the pages without any discussion. I would do it myself if I had access to a laptop but it seems that with a mobile I'm unable to move WP articles. Thanks a lot. Keivan.fTalk 10:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC) Keivan.fTalk10:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to [1], please use an edit summary when undoing an edit in the future, esp. an almost purely technical edit such as a disambiguation. It's hard for others to guess what exactly you found objectionable. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well when I ’d reverted your edit the title of the article was Ali Pasha. (14th of May). Thus it was a legtimate revert and you’re not in the position to criticize my action. It was then you moved the title to Ali Pasha of Ionia. (15th of May). Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:50, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I had already explained at the relevant Talk page what was going on. But regardless, it was still a tiny, good-faith change that had no obvious negative effect on readers. It's courteous to provide a modicum of an explanation for an undo, please remember to do so in the future. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
File:BC 339KingAteasScythiaAr.gif listed for discussion
Dear Nedim, I received this notification, and want to ask you to try to save this file, and possibly to move to Common. File is precious because of its legend Atails (for Greek Ateas), a father of the country. There were repeated catfights to delete it from the article Scythians and other Scythian Articles, and apparently it was finally deleted from the article. That is stupid, because the coin and its photos are widely available besides the WP. BTW, congrats on the latest genetic analysis of the Kurgan folks, and confirmation that they were R1b. It is a really big deal. Thank you, Barefact (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Nedim, I have added Turkic etymology to Coal, but have problems putting references in a right format. Would you please correct the formatting and anything else that you may see, or direct me to a proper editor for help. Barefact (talk) 18:16, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Nedim, That seems unconscionable, the etymology stayed put forever till it was IE, but adding Turkic etymology made it deletable. Are we going to delete all etymologies from the WP and relegate them to wiktionary? Starting with Coal? Seems like a culture war vandalism. BTW, I appreciate your help with formatting. Thank you, Barefact (talk) 00:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adnan_Menderes_Boulevard
Hey! Why did you revert my change to Adnan_Menderes_Boulevard? The coordinates were totally off - they point in the Mediterranean Sea! I added correct coordinates to Wikidata, which is correctly linked to Wikipedia. You can copy those from Wikidata to Wikipedia if you really want, but better not keep the wrong ones. IonutBizau (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see, so you undid my revision but also corrected the coordinates at the same time, awesome! I thought you just undid, sorry. IonutBizau (talk) 07:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
English Wikipedia of his article and and the List of Ottoman Grand Viziers puts him as an Albanian !!!!! The source of both of them are from a Turkish source I can't verify but I have confidence that he is in fact Bosnian and upon checking the Turkish Wikipedia, the information is actually correct and incredibly accurate. I got interested after reading about the Shah Quli rebellion, and early Safavid-Ottoman contacts. He died in the battle and checking him on a book called "The Nature of the Early Ottoman State" he is stated as in page 122 "Christian Eunuch: Bosnia: Family of Minor Nobility Ostoya from the village of Drozgometva" The word Ostoya is bothering me I can't pin it down I think it is also spelled as Ostoja. In page 127 he is stated as "Bosnian-born Hadım (eunuch) ʿAli Pasşa (son of Radošin Ostoya, who was a minor aristocrat from the village of Drozgometva)," The source of the author is 30. M. Tayyib Okiç, “Hadım (ʿAtik) Ali Paşa Kimdir?” in Necati Lugal Armaǧanı (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1968), pp. 501–515, see pp. 513–514). I would like your opinion on the matter. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me for the delay. I was engaged in a long discussion. The article Hadim Ali Pasha had been created by now-retired editor. You're probably right. I'll reply you soon. Cheers. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well I checked Islam Encyclopaedia. You're right. He's from Bosnia Herzegovina. I changed the first sentence in the section "Life". Cheers. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Another question, I got very interested in understanding early Ottoman sultans governorship, where Princes where assigned as prince-governor in certain anatolian regions. Here is the problem I am having, Selim wanted or forced his father to make him governor of Smederevo in the Europe in 1511, the problem is, this is a Sanjak not an Eyalet. So what exactly was he ? A Sanjakbey? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 21:00, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Up to Ahmet I, all princes were assigned as sanjak-bey.(Ahmet was too young when he was enthorned.) He ended the sanjak bey practice (along with brother executions.) As to eyalets, no; the princes were sanjak beys. The governors of the eyalets were beylerbeys. As for Selim, all he wanted was a sanjak closer to İstanbul. Actually the custom was limited to Anatolia and Selim hoped a closer sanjak in Anatolia. But Smederova was not in Anatolia and it was too far from the capital. So Selim was not satisfied with the offer. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:10, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So I have made a mistake, actually this makes more sense, because I was thinking how can young boy be beylerbey. So was Selim Sanjackbey of Trabzon???? Also another question how often do Christian Ottoman partake in Ottoman army from their own consent? I was reading about a story of a Christian who was part of Ottoman army from his own consent, I do not understand why he did that but he went to the market to fix his bow and had an argument with the bowmaker about Jesus Christ, of course the Muslim man says Jesus was not divine anyway a fight happened in the market after the Christian man insults Prophet Muhammad. The date here is during the reign of Koca Mehmed Nizamüddin Pasha (1429-1438), so why would a Christian man go and fight against other Christians, what troops did he station with in your opinion ? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 21:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Selim I and all other princes who were old enough (up to Ahmet I's reign) were sanjak beys. There were no beylerbey-princes. Even in sanjaks they were accompanied by elder statemen called lala. As for the Christians, yes for the sake of politics and loot there were interesting alliances . For example in the battle of Ankara (1402) Turkmen soldiers switched side and left the Ottoman sultan Bayezit I. But the Serbian king Stefan Lazarević was loyal to the sultan. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information now I understand better how Prince-Governors ruled, actually it makes sense now. So Selim 1 was Prince-Governor of Trebizond Sanjak. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Çilingoz Nature Park
Hi Nedim Ardoğa! I see that you've moved Çilingoz to Çilingöz. The version I've created is fully compatible with the sources in the reference list in the article. Even almost everything at Google search proves this. Where do you get your name "Çilingöz" from? CeeGee21:38, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me. I usuallly don't move the titles. But in this case I briefly serached several pages and I thought "O" was a mistake. (like [2])After your warning however, I extended research and I found sources equally in O and Ö. If you're certain in O please revert it Cheers. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:02, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Link to Çatalca Kaymakamlığı officially names it "Çilingoz". I'm very sure that the article's initial title was correct. I kindly request you to revert all the modifications you made in this regard. Cheers. CeeGee07:38, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again! I don't want to think that you ignore my above posting. You were so fast when changing it. Please do it soon because ı intend to expand it further for DYK purposes. CeeGee19:16, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well CeeGee I used to think that you are a cooperative Wiki pall. But I don't understand your conduct in this issue. What does kıvırtmak mean ? Please don't use slang and try to be a bit more polite. I already wrote that if you're certain in "o" you can move the title. Why are you asking me ? You don't have to be angry with me just because I made a change. Remember I very seldom make changes (except in cases of missspelling) But you always make changes without ever consulting me. So far I never complainted of your changes. I wish you a productive and peacefull editting. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 19:09, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I made very clear that it is an "o" and not an "ö". And, I kindly asked you to clean up your edits, because I feel myself not respınsible for that, and I'm very busy with other editings. What have you done was simply ignoring. I told you that I was about to expand that article. It is not about making a mistake. We all make mistakes. The issue is to comply with it. Yes, I copyedit everywhere when I see it is needed, and I will continue to do so. Concerning articles you created, I always improved them, and not downgraded. As soon as you create an article it is wiki common. CeeGee19:47, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Keresztes
Merhaba,sizi çok rahatsız ettim ama bu makale ile ilgili yardım isteyecektim.bir kullanıcı(bayramovic) haçlıların sayısını değiştirdi üstelik kaynagın hala aynı kalmasına rağmen daha sonra başka bir kullanıcı ppblocker ekledi.Normalde 140 ila 200 bin yazarken simdi neredeyse çeyreğe indirmişler,Yapabileceğiniz bir şey var mı? NoScopeRage (talk) 00:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am doing some research on early Safavid pre-Ismail I era, I noticed a mistake in the Azeri Wikipedia and Turkish Wikipedia article of Sultan Yaqub son of Uzun Hasan, that his mother is Despina Khatun, which I believe is wrong, no mention in the Persian Wikipedia or Russian Wikipedia, also note I speak none of the language. I would love to see what you think, Uzun Hasan 100% has another wife that bore him Uğurlu Məhəmməd bəy/Uğurlu Mehmet Bey, Sultan Yaqub/Sultan Yakup and Yusuf Bey Bayandur Alexis Ivanov (talk) 15:02, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a source on Sultan Yakup, but according general history of Turkey by Sevim and Yücel, Sultan Halil (Yakup's brother) sent his mother Selçuk Begüm to Yakup who was than the commander of Diyarbakır. Although this proves nothing, in the middle ages it was customary to send mothers to their own sons. Thus Yakup's mother was probably Selçuk Begüm.Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:27, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You have recently moved the Alpu railway station page to Alpu Railway Station. Most of Wikipedia's articles on railway stations have them written in the lower case, rather than the R and S in capital as you have done. I will request a move of the page name back to the original title in order to fit in with other Turkish railway station titles (all written in XXXX railway station format).
Well capital or small case is not really a big problem. But I checked other similar articles. Although there are examples of both small case and capital, most tend to be capital. That’s why I moved the title. But ıf you’re not satisfied you’re welcome to move it back. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
One editor who reviewed GAN of Skanderbeg stated that article on Skanderbeg is too long and that some of its "content should be moved to sub pages" (diff). Based on this recommendation I started two articles:
I stumbled upon a documentary done professionally by Al-Jazeera, about a Kofta named after Davud Pasha (governor of Egypt), there is no English page for that specific Kofta, but according to what they are saying (no historical sources), Davud Pasha was eating this every day. Also one of the persons in the interview is sitting next to the Camii/Jami Davud Pasha, only picture I can find which should be a good addition to his article is this pictureAlexis Ivanov (talk) 08:41, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Zamanında aynı sorunu ben de yaşadım. (mesela Talk:Seljuk_Empire/Archive_1#Turkish origin) Selçuklular kısa zamanda İran kültürüne adapte olmuşlardı. Bu yüzden İranlılar Büyük Selçuklu devletini bir İran devleti sayarlar. Tabii bizim de görüşümüzü anlatmamız gerek ama Wikipedia'da bu konularla ilgili pek az Türk yazar var. Anlaşmazlıklar oylama ile çözüldüğünden, genellikle görüşümüz kabul edilmiyor. Çözüm Türk editör sayısını artırmakta.Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:50, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Above discussion in Turkish is about the article titles involving the Great Seljuk Empire.
Evet dediğiniz doğru selçuklular pers kültürüne adopte olmuşlardır.ama onlar asimile olmamışlardır.Osmanlılar-Selçuklular-Timurlular-ilhanlılar-gazneliler bu devletlerin hepsinde aynı olay olmuştur.pers kültürü çok zengin olduğu ve onların kültürü zayıf olduğu için etkilenmişlerdir.ama onların hiçbir asimile olmamışlardır.asimile olmak ile adapte olmak arasında dağlar kadar fark var.şöyle deseler doğru-bu devletler pers kültürüne ve diline adapte oldular.bu doğrudur.ama direk olarak persleştiğini söylüyorlar.bunu söyleyince çok çok yanlış bir
anlam çıkıyor ortaya.Onlar irana hakim olmuş bütün devletleri pers devleti olarak görüyorlar.ben iki haftadır. selçuklu devleti-hanedanı-sultanları konusuyla uğraşıyorum.fasça adı silmiyorum.tek yaptığım şey Türkçe adı eklemek.ama engelliyorlar.Oğuz Türkçesinin ölü bir dil olduğunu modern Türkçenin bu dille alakası olmadığı gibi saçma sapan şeyler söylüyorlar.bu konuda elimizden bir şey gelmezmi.göz göre göre fars milliyetçiliği yapıyorlar.Türkleri yok sayaraktan buda insanın zoruna gidiyor.modern Türkçenin Selçukluyla alakası olmadığını söylüyor.gerçekten gülünç bir durum.
.JPG){kind=link}