Talk:İzmit massacres: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Neutrality: enough with badfaith assumptions
Line 23: Line 23:


:{{ping|Ithinkicahn}} You have implied that I have been POV pushing in this article [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=618893901&oldid=618226848 here] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BlondhairGirl&diff=617789487&oldid=617109308 here]. If I may ask, under what basis to you regard any one of my 6 edits to this article as POV pushing? Here are the diffs: ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265658&oldid=617265297][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265683&oldid=617265658][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265766&oldid=617265683][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265810&oldid=617265766][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265986&oldid=617265810][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617266043&oldid=617265986]). Remember that these topics are under arbitration and accusations of POV pushing without any such basis is not [[WP:CIVIL]] practice as it ultimately highlights [[WP:BADFAITH]] assumptions towards your fellow Wikipedia editors. Also, please remember [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ithinkicahn&diff=596834241&oldid=595749424 this]. Thank you. [[User:EtienneDolet|Étienne Dolet]] ([[User talk:EtienneDolet|talk]]) 18:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Ithinkicahn}} You have implied that I have been POV pushing in this article [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=618893901&oldid=618226848 here] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BlondhairGirl&diff=617789487&oldid=617109308 here]. If I may ask, under what basis to you regard any one of my 6 edits to this article as POV pushing? Here are the diffs: ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265658&oldid=617265297][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265683&oldid=617265658][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265766&oldid=617265683][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265810&oldid=617265766][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617265986&oldid=617265810][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Izmit_massacre&diff=617266043&oldid=617265986]). Remember that these topics are under arbitration and accusations of POV pushing without any such basis is not [[WP:CIVIL]] practice as it ultimately highlights [[WP:BADFAITH]] assumptions towards your fellow Wikipedia editors. Also, please remember [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ithinkicahn&diff=596834241&oldid=595749424 this]. Thank you. [[User:EtienneDolet|Étienne Dolet]] ([[User talk:EtienneDolet|talk]]) 18:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
::This has nothing to do with the other user. Just because they have been blocked doesn't mean their points don't stand. Also, I have reason to assume bad faith on your part because of my experience with you in the past. Reports by World War I's Allied commission on something allegedly occurring against a member of the Allies by an enemy state don't suddenly have supreme priority over the facts reported in multiple sources disagreeing with the report.

::Also, please don't remove template messages until the issue is resolved, which it definitely isn't. [[User:Ithinkicahn|Ithinkicahn]] ([[User talk:Ithinkicahn|talk]]) 21:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:01, 29 July 2014

WikiProject iconArticles for creation Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Note icon
This article was accepted on 10 June 2014 by reviewer Timtrent (talk · contribs).
WikiProject iconTurkey Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconGreece Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


The previous version of the article was supposed to present the event as a massacre committed by the Greek army. However, it appears that under this name there were massacres committed by both sides, in the same district under the same time period.Alexikoua (talk) 20:37, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Widescale disruption

A decent explanation is needed for these edits [[1]], for example changing the conclusion of the Allied commission who accepted, as fundamentally true, the Greek claim of 12,000 civilians massacred [[2]] p. 11 "not withstanding a certain amount of exaggeration in the figures".

This part is also confirmed by [Shenk]. In general claiming that the specific sources are unreliable can be considered at least childish as an argument.Alexikoua (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

This article seems to have been completely written by two users who have written it blatantly from one POV in an anti-Turkish tone, in an attempt to talk past the other Greek massacres in the region (using less-than signs for numbers killed by the Greeks, etc. other forms of systemic bias). It also ignores clear sources such as this:

  • Toynbee, Arnold Joseph (1922). The Western question in Greece and Turkey. General Books LLC. p. 287–297–298–299. ISBN 9781152112612.

which put the blame on the Greek Army. The entire article was written very recently. Unfortunately, mine and another user's edits have been reverted and deleted by these two users. Ithinkicahn (talk) 00:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For certainty widescale disruption was caused by a blocked wp:spa & his sock accounts. Fortunately this is history. The pov issues have been fixed, and neutrality has been restored, per corespondent report submitted by an Allied commission (which puts the blame mainly to the Turkish side).Alexikoua (talk) 12:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ithinkicahn: You have implied that I have been POV pushing in this article here and here. If I may ask, under what basis to you regard any one of my 6 edits to this article as POV pushing? Here are the diffs: ([3][4][5][6][7][8]). Remember that these topics are under arbitration and accusations of POV pushing without any such basis is not WP:CIVIL practice as it ultimately highlights WP:BADFAITH assumptions towards your fellow Wikipedia editors. Also, please remember this. Thank you. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This has nothing to do with the other user. Just because they have been blocked doesn't mean their points don't stand. Also, I have reason to assume bad faith on your part because of my experience with you in the past. Reports by World War I's Allied commission on something allegedly occurring against a member of the Allies by an enemy state don't suddenly have supreme priority over the facts reported in multiple sources disagreeing with the report.
Also, please don't remove template messages until the issue is resolved, which it definitely isn't. Ithinkicahn (talk) 21:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]