Talk:Anatolia: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 53: Line 53:
*:As I explained above, neither are suitable as they don't delineate Anatolia. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 17:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
*:As I explained above, neither are suitable as they don't delineate Anatolia. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 17:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
*::See above. [[User:Bogazicili|Bogazicili]] ([[User talk:Bogazicili|talk]]) 17:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
*::See above. [[User:Bogazicili|Bogazicili]] ([[User talk:Bogazicili|talk]]) 17:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

:* '''Proposed solution is fine'''. Map that shows both definitions seems like a good way to present it, presuming the information can be put in an uncluttered manner. I don't think there has been [[WP:RFCBEFORE]] done to warrant a full RfC, though; doesn't seem to be too much contention here, unless there is previous political drama hidden from view? [[User:Fermiboson|Fermiboson]] ([[User talk:Fermiboson|talk]]) 10:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:22, 22 February 2024

Citations and Relevancy to the Article

Why are there an Entire section of Unsourced and uncited Section in this article that talk about major immigrations without a single source about it? I Also don't think Mentioning Armenian Genocide more than 5 times is Relevant to the Article at all, Sure the first one about Renaming of Armenian/Turkish Highlands to Eastern Anatolia Region and Kurdish Vilayets to South Eastern Anatolia Region can be Arguably Related but the other 4 times is just taking the piss out of it. there is Also no Mention of how Inner Anatolia was Populated after the Bronze age collapse and about the 6th century BCE Migrations of Armenians into Anatolia. Article should be Reviewed and Rewritten and actually put in an orderly conduct. MAngO K1nGo (talk) 16:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Should the map be changed?

I think just including all of Asian Turkey as Anatolia significantly decreases confusion, as there is no defined border of Anatolia. Besides, in Turkey, all of Asian Turkey is just referred to as simply Anatolia. Youprayteas (t c) 17:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose See Hopkins, Daniel J.; Staff, Merriam-Webster; 편집부 (2001). Merriam-Webster's Geographical Dictionary. Merriam-Webster. p. 46. ISBN 978-0-87779-546-9. Anatolia: The part of Turkey in Asia equivalent to the peninsula of Asia Minor up to indefinite line on E from Gulf of Iskenderun to Black Sea comprising about three fifths of Turkey's provinces, which is as represented in the map. DeCausa (talk) 18:14, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay. But, the Anatolian Peninsula, the area referred more commonly in anicent times, and the culturally designated Anatolia (Turkish: Anadolu), which is just Asian Turkey as used by Turks are different. The article seems to compose both. What about the usage of two maps? Youprayteas (t c) 18:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a difference between the generally accepted international geographical definition per the map and the political definition of the Turkish government. I think two maps would be excessive/too clunky. But what would be good is if we could have the two boundaries on the same map. Do you have the skills? (I don't) If not perhaps we could get someone at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop to make one. DeCausa (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I have experience creating maps on paint apps, I don’t have any information on specifically Wikipedia type of maps, so yes, I think getting someone to do that would be the best option. Youprayteas (t c) 18:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So I've put in the request here: Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop#Map of Anatolia. DeCausa (talk) 21:53, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Youprayteas and DeCausa, the current map should be changed while Graphics Lab request is ongoing, because the current map is biased and only uses one definition. We can just put an image without borders for now like this [1]. Bogazicili (talk) 18:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems like a good option at the time. Let's wait for DeCausa's opinion. Youprayteas (t c) 18:18, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think that works - it's too ambiguous - it gives the impression that Anatolia covers territory that no one calls Anatolia i.e a big chunk of the northern Levant. The current map isn't "biased", it's a long standing geographical definition per Merriam Webster. It's may be incomplete in that it doesn't show the other definition. But that's different. I would suggest the better short term approach is to add to the caption to refer to the other definition going to the eastern boundaries of Turkey - which are actually shown on the map. Otherwise, have patience and wait to see what comes out of the map lab. DeCausa (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipeda is a volunteer-based platform, your request may not be answered in Graphics Lab. And yes, it is definitely a biased map, favoring one definition while completely ignoring the other. Regarding your suggestion here [2], no it's not just the "Turkish Government definition" that Anatolia means Asian Turkey. And if you don't like that image, this image can be used [3]. I liked the NASA image because it's an actual image from space. And its caption could have read "Anatolia and surrounding areas". Bogazicili (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I said before (which you haven't answered) it's misleading because it doesn't show which part of it is Anatolia. The same is true of this other map you linked to. You didn't address my actual post (rather than the one I deleted): the current map could temporarily show both definitions since it shows the Turkish eastern boundary. It just requires amending the caption to explain it. DeCausa (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I did respond: 'And its caption could have read "Anatolia and surrounding areas"'. The coloring in current map is biased. It'd be non biased if it was an all grey map. Bogazicili (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Two color map for both definitions would make more sense than the current one. Bogazicili (talk) 19:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree too, as that is what we agreed on with @DeCausa. Youprayteas (t c) 19:05, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree to changing the map. Ideally a map that shows both definitions. But a general map such as [4] [5] until then, with appropriate captions. Bogazicili (talk) 17:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I explained above, neither are suitable as they don't delineate Anatolia. DeCausa (talk) 17:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See above. Bogazicili (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proposed solution is fine. Map that shows both definitions seems like a good way to present it, presuming the information can be put in an uncluttered manner. I don't think there has been WP:RFCBEFORE done to warrant a full RfC, though; doesn't seem to be too much contention here, unless there is previous political drama hidden from view? Fermiboson (talk) 10:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]