Talk:List of massacres in Turkey

Ancient Anatolia? Byzantine empire? Not relevant to Turkey...

Ancient Anatolia is not Turkey. Neither is the Byzantine Empire. Turkey is a continuation of the Ottoman Empire and therefore those two may stay. I propose deleting anything before that. Proudbolsahye (talk) 03:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Byzantines were the predecessor of the Ottomans and so was Ancient Anatolia of Byzantines. But are you trying to say that only massacres comitted by Turks may stay and everything except Armenian Genocide should be deleted?DragonTiger23 (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Also, I would like this[1] to be added back to the article, since it occurred within the Ottoman Empire. The lead sentence needs to read, "The following is a list of massacres that have occurred in the Republic of Turkey and its predecessor, the Ottoman Empire.". --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

More nonsense. Dragon Tiger has now added a battle(Battle of Levounion) with a "source" from a Nigerian linguist, Dr. Chris Uchenna Agbedo[2], who has no qualifications as a historian. This article has become a coatrack for DragonTiger to label any conflict(anachronistically) as a massacre. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Removed Fall of Smyrna, since Phil Mundt is a retired geologist,[3] not a historian and the Byzantine Empire is not "Turkey". --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:05, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

The article states: "The following is a list of massacres that have occurred in Turkey and its predecessors (numbers may be approximate, as estimates vary greatly)".

It is really funny, how you are now discrediting the source, it is always the same behavior when WP:JDLI. That source is used in the Ethnic Cleansing article to "prove" [4]that Seljuk Turks ethnically cleansed Greeks. Are you now going to say the same things there and remove it, I don't think so. Besides you did not have to critisize the source, because more sources describe the massacre of Levounion. It is more detailed in its own article Battle of Levounion.

All these massacres happened in the area of modern Turkey, they are relevant why should it be removed? Lumping Ottoman massacres in the area of modern Turkey together with Modern Turkey is not necessary, than we should better create List of Massacres in the Ottoman Empire.DragonTiger23 (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Also I do not understand why you are insisting on adding a massacre in Bulgaria(different country) in the List of Massacres in Turkey article? And for some reason you are in this case not critical to the source at all.DragonTiger23 (talk) 18:52, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

1.As I have clearly shown, the two massacres(anachronistic) do not have reliable sources. Your pushing to include any and all "massacres" appear to be linked to Byzantines(ie.Greeks)(anachronistically), whereas you are quick to remove a well sourced massacre by the Ottoman Empire!??

2.If you can not seem to comprehend why the April Uprising should be listed for the Ottoman Empire, take your own advice(ie. Battle of Levounion) check the article which has 27 inline citations and the opening sentence, "The April Uprising was an insurrection organised by the Bulgarians in the Ottoman Empire from April to May 1876, which indirectly resulted in the re-establishment of Bulgaria in 1878." It would appear that 27 inline citations is not enough for your opinion. "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?".....

3.You again try to label another editor as biased, with your statement, "Besides you did not have to critisize the source, because more sources describe the massacre of Levounion. It is more detailed in its own article Battle of Levounion.". Yet your "source" is by a Nigerian linguist? I did check the Battle of Levounion, which has 2 inline sources, neither of which references a massacre. So again your statement is refuted.

4.If you believe a "List of massacres in the Ottoman Empire" then clearly "Ancient Anatolia" and "Byzantine Empire" should not be listed here! Odd how you are quick to remove what you don't like, but add anachronistic information!

5.And just what the hell does this mean? "It is really funny, how you are now discrediting the source, it is always the same behavior when WP:JDLI. That source is used in the Ethnic Cleansing article to "prove" [5]that Seljuk Turks ethnically cleansed Greeks." For one thing, you just added that source[6] today! Are you insinuating I'm a sock? Am I editing Ethnic cleansing on a daily/weekly basis? From what I can tell I have never edited Ethnic cleansing. It would appear either you are unjustly attacking another editor(not commenting on content) or you are accusing me of sockpuppetry. Continue to do so at your own risk. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Now you know about Ethnic Cleansing, are you going to remove the source in the ethnic cleansing article too?DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Due to your accusation that I have already edited there, no. I have no interest in that article. You can't make your own argument? Besides, for all the historians that have written about that time period, if such "ethnic cleansing" would have occurred surely a modern historian would have written about it! Correct? --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I did not accuse you of editing there, I wrote that the source you criticise is used in the Ethnic Cleansing article to prove(!) an ethnic cleansing(!), now if you were an honest person, you would remove it from there by using the same arguments, but you are not interested(?), is this a case of WP:LIKE(?). DragonTiger23 (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2013 (UTC) You could google search it instead of denying it instantly, here a source for Levounioun,[1]DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Wow more accusations. Now I'm not an honest person? You insinuate I am editing at Ethnic cleansing now I'm not honest. You need to stop with the personal attacks. "It is really funny, how you are now discrediting the source, it is always the same behavior when WP:JDLI. That source is used in the Ethnic Cleansing article to "prove" [7]that Seljuk Turks ethnically cleansed Greeks.". Final warning. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

If a reliable source can be found, then it belongs under "List of massacres in the Byzantine Empire", not "Turkey" as you have so clearly pointed out(see below). --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I never said that you edited ethnic cleansing. I informed you that the book of the Nigerian linguist (which you criticised as unreliable) is used[8] by others on the Ethnic Cleansing article to prove an ethnic cleansing. So if the source is unreliable than it also should be removed from there. I do not personally attack you I am just amazed.DragonTiger23 (talk) 07:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm amazed you continue to add massacres to the article without sources[9][10]. I am equally amazed by your hypocrisy, since you were fine using that source here, yet you were adamant against someone else using the same source(at Ethnic cleansing) for their information. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I am amazed again, those massacres have their own wiki articles with sources so instead of calling them unreliable you could read them. The Nigerian linguist source was first used on the Ethnic Cleansing article, nobody called it unreliable then, but when I used the same source to add info about a massacre here, you anounced it was unreliable.DragonTiger23 (talk) 21:17, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Yet again, you completely ignore the fact that I have never edited on the Ethnic Cleansing article. I gave information showing that a Nigerian linguist has no qualifications as a historian for that time period. Where was your information showing otherwise?? Undoubtedly you were to "amazed" to do the proper work.

Instead of "being amazed" you should take the time to check your sources. Try focusing on content not the editor(s). Your continued rhetoric just proves how desperate you are to "run off" other editors. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

April Uprising is in Bulgaria, all the other massacres of the Ottoman Empire are in their relevant countries articles, check the article, list of massacres in Greece, in Ottoman syria and so on.DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Then this article needs to be renamed, "List of massacres in the Republic of Turkey". --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Maybe that is better, what do other users think?DragonTiger23 (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I would like to keep the name of the article as is since the general consensus in Wikipedia is that the Republic of Turkey is a successive state of the Ottoman Empire (see Turkey article). Therefore, massacres of both the Ottoman Empire and Republic of Turkey may be included into one article. I would also like to mention that the massacres done during the Greco-Turkish war should not be placed separately since the motivations and context of these massacres are all the same. For example, the Salihli and Usak massacres are under the same context, background and intent. Above all, these are villages that are very near each other. What's the point of expanding it as such? It is like placing the massacres that happened in Bingol and Mush separately even when it is under the broader context of the Armenian Genocide. I propose combining all those massacres under the Greco-Turkish war and list them under civilian casualties or mutual massacres of that sort. Proudbolsahye (talk) 05:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Most important the Salihli and the Usak massacres are not even sourced as massacres and they should go. If a part of the town's buildings faced destruction during warfare (that's what is sourced here) this isn't defined as massacre. Thus, wp:rs is needed.Alexikoua (talk) 07:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree per Proudbolsahye, all similar events should be combined in presented under a general event (Armenian Genocide, Massacres during Greek-Turkish War, Gree Geonice etc.). Details can be found in these article, without making it hard for the reader.Alexikoua (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Approximately 90 percent of the Armenians of Erzurum province were killed

This is not demographically possible according to the Ottoman population census. Those show the total Armenian population of Erzurum city and the province to have grown till 1914. They give 108k Armenian in 1893 and 135k in 1914. If there were 60k killed than that would mean that the Armenian population of the entire Erzurum Vilayet(Province) in 1894 was 168k and the loss would be 36% for the entire Vilayet. According to Ottoman sources the district (Kaza) of Erzurum city had 11k Armenians in 1882. [1] There still was an Armenian population in 1915 which was deported. Can someone check the source critically.DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:28, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

However the Ottoman census gives the Armenian population in Erzurum province as 116k in 1906, if these were the surviving 10% than the pre-massacre Armenian population of Erzurum should be 1,16 million and the death toll 1 million.DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Ottoman census is unreliable. The Ottoman government is notorious for skewing numbers. We need third party sources on the population. Proudbolsahye (talk) 05:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Your argument makes no sense, have you even read what I wrote? If the Ottoman census is wrong then there should be 1 million Armenians killed in Erzerum province alone in 1895. So instead of repeating your dogma ("Ottomans not reliable") please do a little bit thinking and research. Do not instantly accept the wildest numbers only because you wp:like it. We have to be neutral.

Furthermore Ottoman census are reliable, all other western sources and estimates are based upon them. The Ottomans were the only ones to have the means to count their own population. However there is some minor under counting of children and women. But generally they are reliable.DragonTiger23 (talk) 08:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)